COASTAL ZONE SENSITIVITY - ucc.ie · PDF filecoastal zone sensitivity workpackage six final report of risk assessment and collaborative emergency response in the irish sea racer maritime

COASTAL ZONE SENSITIVITY

WORKPACKAGE SIX FINAL REPORT

OF

RISK ASSESSMENT AND COLLABORATIVE EMERGENCY

RESPONSE IN THE IRISH SEA

RACER

Maritime INTERREG (Ireland/Wales) 1994 – 1999 Measure 1.3 Protection of the Marine and Coastal Environment

May 2000

Produced By Mary O’ Connell, Dr Niamh Connolly and Deirdre Tobin

Coastal Resources Centre Old Presentation Buildings

UCC Cork

3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................................................. 6

PREFACE ......................................................................................................................................................................... 7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............................................................................................................................................. 8

1.0 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES .................................................................................................................................... 9

2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL OVERVIEW..................................................................................................................... 10

2.1 GEOGRAPHICAL BOUNDARY OF STUDY SITE ....................................................................................................... 10 2.2 GENERAL INFORMATION ON THE IRISH SEA ........................................................................................................ 10 2.3 OVERVIEW OF THE INTERREG REGION............................................................................................................. 10

3.0 COASTAL ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION AND POLICY ................................................................. 12

3.1 DEFINITIONS OF THE COASTAL ZONE................................................................................................................... 12 3.2 INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS OF RELEVANCE TO THE COASTAL ZONE IN IRELAND AND WALES (SEE CONNOLLY ET AL., 1999)................................................................................................................................................................. 12 3.3 EU DIRECTIVES OF RELEVANCE TO COASTAL AREAS OF IRELAND AND WALES (SEE CONNOLLY ET AL., 1999) . 13

3.3.1 Habitats and the Environment .................................................................................................................. 13 3.3.2 Shipping .................................................................................................................................................... 13 3.3.3 Water Quality and Management ............................................................................................................... 13

3.4 DESIGNATIONS OF RELEVANCE TO THE IRISH COASTAL ZONE............................................................................ 13 3.5 DESIGNATIONS OF RELEVANCE TO THE WELSH COASTAL ZONE......................................................................... 14

3.5.1 Designations Under International Conventions and Directives (see Barne et al., 1995)......................... 15 3.5.2 Designations From National Statutes ....................................................................................................... 15 3.5.3 Sites Identified by Statutory Agencies ....................................................................................................... 15 3.5.4 Other Types of Protected Sites.................................................................................................................. 15

4.0 COASTAL SENSITIVITY REVIEW ................................................................................................................. 17

4.1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................... 17 4.2 PREVIOUS AND CURRENT MAPPING WORK OF THE COASTAL ZONE ................................................................... 17 4.3 SENSITIVITY CRITERIA FOR MARINE SPECIES ..................................................................................................... 18 4.4 SENSITIVITY CRITERIA FOR COASTAL ENVIRONMENTS....................................................................................... 21 4.5 SENSITIVITY OF SEA BIRDS ................................................................................................................................. 29 4.6 SEABIRD & CETACEAN DISTRIBUTION................................................................................................................ 32 4.7 EAST AND SOUTHEAST IRISH COASTLINE............................................................................................................ 34

4.7.1 Environmental Review of the East and South East coasts of Ireland by County ...................................... 36 Co. Louth................................................................................................................................................................. 36 Co. Meath................................................................................................................................................................ 37 Co. Dublin............................................................................................................................................................... 38 Co. Wicklow ............................................................................................................................................................ 40 County Wexford....................................................................................................................................................... 41 Co. Waterford.......................................................................................................................................................... 43 Co. Cork .................................................................................................................................................................. 44

4.8 WELSH COASTLINE.............................................................................................................................................. 46 4.8.1 Environmental Review of the Welsh Coastline ......................................................................................... 48 Anglesey .................................................................................................................................................................. 48 Lleyn Peninsula....................................................................................................................................................... 50 Tremadog Bay ......................................................................................................................................................... 52 Barmouth................................................................................................................................................................. 53 Aberdyfi................................................................................................................................................................... 54 Borth to New Quay.................................................................................................................................................. 54 New Quay to St. David’s Head................................................................................................................................ 55 St. David’s Head to Milford Haven......................................................................................................................... 56 Milford Haven ......................................................................................................................................................... 57 South Pembrokeshire (Castlemartin peninsula)...................................................................................................... 58 Carmarthen Bay and Burry Inlet............................................................................................................................. 59 Gower Peninsula..................................................................................................................................................... 60

5.0 METHODS OF DATA CAPTURE AND PROCESSING FOR THE SENSITIVITY GIS............................ 63

5.1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................... 63 5.2 DATA SOURCING AND PROCESSING..................................................................................................................... 63

4

5.3 SENSITIVITY RANKING OF COASTLINE ................................................................................................................ 66 5.4 GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION SYSTEM ............................................................................................................. 66

6.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................................. 70

6.1 CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................................................... 70 6.2 ISSUES................................................................................................................................................................. 70 6.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 71

7.0 REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................................... 72

APPENDIX I ................................................................................................................................................................... 77

MAPS DIGITISED - GIS COMPONENT OF WORKPACKAGE SIX ......................................................................................... 77 Irish ......................................................................................................................................................................... 77 Welsh....................................................................................................................................................................... 77

OIL INCIDENTS AFFECTING THE IRISH SEA SINCE THE 60S ............................................................................................ 77 WELSH AQUACULTURE ................................................................................................................................................ 78

APPENDIX II ................................................................................................................................................................. 79

BIOLOGICAL SENSITIVITY TO OIL POLLUTION (NOAA, 1992) ..................................................................................... 79 MARINE BIRDS ............................................................................................................................................................. 79 FOULING OF PLUMMAGE............................................................................................................................................... 79 GULLS & TERNS............................................................................................................................................................ 79 BIRD SPECIES................................................................................................................................................................ 79 CHARACTERISTICS INDUCING VULNERABILITY ............................................................................................................. 79 EFFECTS........................................................................................................................................................................ 79 MARINE MAMMALS...................................................................................................................................................... 83

APPENDIX III ................................................................................................................................................................ 84

EU NATIONAL IMPLEMENTING MEASURES RELATED TO THE COASTAL AND MARINE ENVIRONMENT....................... 84 [From - http://europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/m15000.htm].................................................................................... 84

PENDING LEGISLATION IN IRELAND.............................................................................................................................. 86

APPENDIX IV ................................................................................................................................................................ 88

WORLD WILDLIFE FUND GLOSSARY ............................................................................................................................ 88 [http://www.wwf-uk.org/countryside/glossary.htm]................................................................................................ 88

DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNATIONS USED IN GIS................................................................................. 88 International............................................................................................................................................................ 88 UK Designations ..................................................................................................................................................... 89 Irish Designations ................................................................................................................................................... 89

APPENDIX V.................................................................................................................................................................. 91

TRAINING GUIDE FOR WORKSHOP..................................................................................................................... 92

APPENDIX VI .............................................................................................................................................................. 109

IRISH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 110 Environmental Designations for Co.Louth ........................................................................................................... 110 Environmental Designations for Co. Dublin......................................................................................................... 110 Environmental Designations for Co.Wicklow ....................................................................................................... 111 Environmental Designations for Co.Wexford ....................................................................................................... 112 Environmental Designations for Co.Waterford .................................................................................................... 113

APPENDIX VII............................................................................................................................................................. 115

METADATA TABLE ............................................................................................................................................... 116

5

Acknowledgements This report was compiled with the help and assistance of many sources, all of which were sincerely appreciated. Thank you to all the agencies, government departments, organisations and groups who so generously provided the relevant datasets and information. Sincere thank you also to the many individuals whose personal consultation and communication on various issues was invaluable. Finally, thank you to the steering committee and partners of the RACER project for their continued support and assistance throughout the duration of the project.

6

Preface This report provides a detailed account of coastal sensitivity issues of relevance to habitats and species in the coastal INTERREG region of the east coast of Ireland and west coast of Wales. Various methods for assessing coastal sensitivity are described, with emphasis on the accepted methods of American and UK experts. The main format of the report is as follows:

�� An Executive Summary. �� Aims and Objectives, a brief description of the aims of the workpackage. �� A brief overview of EU legislation of relevance to the coastal environment. �� Description of past studies on the relevant areas of coastal sensitivity monitoring, including

sensitivity definitions, criteria, and formation of sensitivity maps and indices. This section concludes with a detailed account of the environmental characteristics of the Irish and Welsh coastlines, mainly based on shoreline substrate composition and importance of such to marine flora and fauna. Some information is also provided on economic significance of the regions.

�� An account of the methods and sources of data used to compile the coastal sensitivity Geographical Information System (GIS).

�� A conclusion/recommendations section, exploring the practicality of the GIS developed as well as the importance and future potential of such an application.

�� The report concludes with references used. There is also a series of appendices providing further details, including biological information, relevant environmental legislation amongst other sources of practical information.

In conjunction with the production of this report, a training manual was developed on the basic operations of the GIS platform (MapInfo Professional) on which the coastal zone sensitivity assessment is housed. This manual was issued at a training workshop on the electronic component of the sensitivity workpackage, which was held in the Irish Coast Guard offices in Dublin on the 12th April 2000 (Appendix V).

7

Executive Summary Workpackage six of the RACER project is entitled Coastal Zone Sensitivity. The primary aims of the workpackage were as detailed in the original proposal with subsequent changes agreed by the steering committee. Initially, relevant literature and documentation on environmental sensitivity was collected; this was then assembled into a review of coastal sensitivity related studies. Relevant data sets were then acquired covering coastal issues and resources which may be sensitive to disturbance and which are important to consider when responding to a pollution incident, primarily an oil spill. Data sets were collected and appropriately formatted to feed into an electronic display of environmentally sensitive areas. It was decided that the most efficient means of displaying the data would be on a GIS. The data was then placed on a GIS (MapInfo Professional) and the GIS customised to display the sensitive resources which were accounted for. The GIS display provides a user friendly, fast and efficient means of viewing the sensitive resources of the area. The GIS was further customised with a sensitivity index tool. This index was specifically developed for the RACER project; it allows the user to assign their own weightings of importance (in relation to the sensitivity of the resources to an oil spill) to the various data sets which are accounted for in the sensitivity index calculation. Then, once the resources are given their weightings, the index can be calculated according to user specific input parameters. The sensitivity indices are initially set at default settings, which have been decided upon based on researched judgement and agreed by the project members. Some of the information displayed in the GIS does not feed into the sensitivity index calculations; it is presented as additional environmental information but is not incorporated into the index.

8

1.0 Aims and Objectives The principal aim of workpackage six, Coastal Zone Sensitivity, was to produce an environmental appraisal designed to be of direct relevance to marine emergency response decision makers and operators. It was envisaged that the results would assist decision makers in their development of emergency response strategies, and operators in their practical response to a pollution incident at sea. The original aim was modified and elaborated on, as the project progressed, resulting in an extensive appraisal of the environmental characteristics of the coastline of the INTERREG area, using a GIS (Geographical Information System) as a working platform. The GIS was customised with an application which details sensitive habitats and recreational areas, among other parameters. In the event of an oil spill, the GIS allows the user to determine which area of coastline is most vulnerable, once projection of the oil spill is established. Thus, the GIS will contribute towards response capabilities in the event of pollution incidents. Ultimately, the flexibility and user friendly format of the GIS application allows fast and effective training of emergency personnel. The system allows a clear and quick assessment of the main sensitivity issues and resources occurring within any given area. The terms sensitivity and vulnerability are used frequently in this study. Although they might appear to have a similar meaning, it is important to distinguish between the two. According to Holt et al. (1995), sensitivity and vulnerability are defined as follows: Sensitivity The innate capacity of an organism to suffer damage or death from

an external factor beyond the range of environmental parameters normally experienced.

Vulnerability The exposure of an organism to an external factor to which it is sensitive.

An area or given resource may be classified as sensitive, but would not be considered vulnerable until an actual hazard or threat arises.

9

2.0 Environmental Overview

2.1 Geographical boundary of Study Site The study was carried out on the Irish Sea INTERREG region. The western boundary of the study area extends from the north Dublin county boundary along the east Irish coast as far as the western extremity of Co. Waterford (Youghal Bay) along the south coast of Ireland. The eastern boundary of the study area extends from Bangor on the north Welsh coastline to Swansea in the south of Wales.

2.2 General Information on the Irish Sea The seabed of the Irish Sea generally slopes from northeast to southwest, where it falls to a depth of 100m in St. George’s Channel. There is quite a varied bathymetry and a rather complex tidal flow through the area. From the Irish coast to the Welsh coast the seabed varies from depths of �25m by the coasts to �100m in the centre of the channel. The main flow of water in the Irish Sea is from south to north (Orford, 1989). For a more detailed account of the oceanographic features of the Irish Sea, refer to workpackage three, Sea State Review.

2.3 Overview of the INTERREG Region Within the relatively small INTERREG region, a large section of coastline bounds the site. Much of the adjacent coastline is protected under state designations; where not protected it is important for tourism, marine leisure and fishing. Thus, there is a requirement for extensive knowledge of the region to assist emergency response planning in the case of a pollution incident. The magnitude of an adverse environmental impact in this region could be considerable, as seen from past experiences such as the Sea Empress disaster in 1996 and the Torrey Canyon disaster in 1967. The Irish coastline is a very important environment for a variety of marine and coastal species and habitats. These habitats distributed along the coastline are significant for a number of reasons, including their role as both seasonal and permanent breeding sites, as resting sites along migratory routes, and as important nursery grounds. The coastline, with its many islands and bays, provides suitable habitats for a diverse group of species. Expansive saltmarsh regions are common in the larger estuaries. Intertidal flats with abundant invertebrate life serve as crucial feeding grounds for wildfowl and waders during the winter. The coastline is also botanically rich; Zostera (eelgrass beds) is found in some of the sand flat localities and Spartina (perennial glasswort) is present on some sheltered mud flats. Sand dunes also provide important habitats for a diverse range of both invertebrate and plant life. Sandy beaches are important feeding areas for waders as they also contain an abundant supply of invertebrate populations. Common seals and harbour seals occasionally use remote sandy beaches as haul out sites. Shingle beaches are not very common along the Irish coastline, however, they can be found in some localities along the Irish boundary of the study area. These habitats support abundant invertebrate species. Terns are common inhabitants of shingle beaches.

(Convention on Biodiversity; Irish National Report, 1998).

The UK coastline has an approximate length of about 18,000km. The Welsh coastline is approximately 1,600km. Sand dunes are widely distributed along the coastline and saltmarsh environments, common along estuaries, are very productive habitats. These saltmarshes possess a diverse range of flora and provide suitable habitats for wintering and passage waterfowl such as the barnacle goose (Branta leucopsis). About 30% of the coastline of England and Wales is shingle providing a popular habitat for breeding bird species such as Arctic tern. The many marine inlets dotted along the Welsh coastline possess a wide range of marine biological communities. The reefs

10

and islands off the open coast also support important marine communities. The adjacent waters possess extensive sediment flats, which provide spawning grounds for a variety of shellfish (crab, scampi) and finned fish (plaice, herring, cod and whiting). The UK alone supports almost 45% of the worlds grey seal population and almost 40% of Europe’s common seals. About 45 species of cetaceans have been recorded around the UK coastline.

(UK National Report for the Convention on Biodiversity; cited at: http://www.biodiv.org/natrep/index.html site active in 1999).

11

http://www.biodiv.org/natrep/index.html

3.0 Coastal Environmental Legislation and Policy

3.1 Definitions of the coastal zone There is no rigid definition of the coastal zone. However, many varied interpretations exist; some of which are detailed below:

In the United Kingdom, the foreshore is defined as the intertidal area between high and low water marks. The separate status of the intertidal foreshore from other coastal land is a relic of the common law, and is due to the historical property rights of the Crown. However, the low water limit of the foreshore has also been adopted as the boundary of local government areas, and is consequently the normal seaward limit of planning control (EC, 1999). The coastal zone encompasses the coastline, together with adjacent areas (maritime fringe, foreshore and inshore water). In other words, the coastal zone is the space in which terrestrial environments influence and are influenced by marine environments (Sheehan, 1994). The coastal zone is the interface where the land meets the ocean, encompassing shoreline environments as well as adjacent coastal waters. … For planning purposes the coastal zone is a special area, endowed with special characteristics of which the boundaries are often determined by the specific problems to be tackled (World Bank, 1993). …the interface between the land and the sea and extending inwards and seaward to a variable extent, depending upon the objectives and needs of the particular programme (Clark, 1992; cited by the European Environment Agency, 1995). A strip of land and sea territory of varying width depending on the nature of the environment and management needs. It seldom corresponds to existing administrative or planning units (Brady et al., 1997).

Ireland and the UK abide by a number of environmental policies and directives as members of the European Union. Legislation controlling pollution and quality of air and water resources has facilitated the improvement of the quality of the coastal environment. The legislation covers all aspects of environmental quality, protection and conservation. To provide an insight into the extent of this policy, the various legislation relevant to this study are outlined below.

3.2 International Conventions of relevance to the coastal zone in Ireland and Wales (see Connolly et al., 1999)

�� Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance (1984); �� Convention on Biological Diversity (1992); �� UN Convention on the Law of the Sea UNCLOS (1994); �� Washington Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from

Land-based Activities (UNEP, 1995); �� UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation) World Heritage

Convention; �� Bonn Convention (1979); �� Bern Convention (1979); �� UN agreement on Straddling and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (1995); �� FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (1995);

12

�� Convention for the protection of the Marine Environment of the Northeast Atlantic (OSPAR Convention, 1997).

3.3 EU Directives of relevance to Coastal Areas of Ireland and Wales (see Connolly et al., 1999) 3.3.1 Habitats and the Environment

�� Directive on the Conservation of Wild birds (97/49/EEC) – Special Protection Areas (SPAs); �� Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) – Special Areas of Conservation (SACs); �� Directive on Other Substances: Protection of the Aquatic Environment of the Community

(76/464/EEC); �� Directive on Waste Disposal (75/442/EEC); �� Directive on Disposal of Waste Oil (87/101/EEC); �� Directive on Disposal of Polychlorinated Biphenyls and Polychlorinated Terphenyls

(96/59/EEC); �� Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive (pending); �� Water Framework Directive (pending).

3.3.2 Shipping

�� Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9th December 1996, on the Control of Major Accident Hazards Involving Dangerous Substances (COMAH);

�� Council Directive 93/75/EEC minimum requirements for vessels bound for or leaving community ports and carrying dangerous or polluting goods.

3.3.3 Water Quality and Management

�� Directive on Urban Waste Water Treatment (91/271/EEC); �� Directive on the Quality of Shellfish Waters (79/923/EEC); �� Directive on the Quality of Bathing Waters (76/160/EEC); �� Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) (96/61/EC); �� Directive on Quality of Water for Human Consumption (91/692/EEC); �� Directive on Water suitable for fish-breeding (78/659/EEC); �� Directive on Surface fresh water: methods of measurement and analysis (79/869/EEC); �� Directive on Surface freshwater: quality and control requirements (75/440/EEC).

(For further information: Appendix III)

3.4 Designations of Relevance to the Irish Coastal Zone The east and southeast Irish coastline are protected under international, national as well as local environmental designations. In Ireland, responsibility for environmental designations lies with local authorities and/or government departments. Three of the Irish government departments are primarily responsible for the Irish coastal zone and its resources:

�� Department of the Environment and Local Government – landward planning; �� Department of the Marine and Natural Resources – seaward planning; �� Department of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands – nature conservation.

The European Union oversees the implementation of EU designations by Member States. International bodies oversee a number of designations made as a result of inter-governmental agreements, such as the United Nations, the Council of Europe and the Ramsar Secretariat (Hickie, 1997).

13

The following environmental designations, available in digital format, were loaded into the GIS to display protected and conserved sites along the Irish coastline of the study area:

�� Special Areas of Conservation (SAC); �� Special Protection Areas (SPA); �� Statutory Nature Reserves (SNR); �� Natural Heritage Areas (NHA).

Other environmental designations exist in this area also; however these were not available in electronic format. The Irish coast of the study area contains ten Ramsar sites from a total of 47 for the entire country. These sites include:

�� Rogerstown Estuary, Co. Dublin; �� Broadmeadow Estuary, Co. Dublin; �� Baldoyle Estuary, Co. Dublin; �� North bull Island, Co. Dublin; �� Wexford Wildfowl Reserve, Co. Wexford; �� The Raven, Co. Wexford; �� Bannow Bay, Co. Wexford; �� Tramore Backstrand, Co. Waterford; �� Dungarvan Harbour, Co. Waterford.

Wexford Wildfowl Reserve and Ballyteige Burrow, Co. Wexford are both Biogenetic Reserves. This is an international designation whose function is to identify and protect natural habitats, which are especially valuable for nature conservation in Europe. North Bull Island in Co. Dublin is also designated as an UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. The main function of this designation is to facilitate sustainable development, within certain zones defined as ‘core areas’, for nature conservation. Rockabill Island, Co. Dublin and Lady’s Island, Co. Wexford are Refuges for Fauna designated by Ministerial Order under the Wildlife Act. This designation ensures the protection of a named species of wild animal (vertebrate or invertebrate). Both areas are protected for breeding species of tern. An amendment to the Wildlife Act (1976) was proposed in 1999. This Wildlife Amendment Bill is currently with the Oireachtas, the Upper House of the Government (see Appendix III).

3.5 Designations of Relevance to the Welsh Coastal Zone The following Welsh designations were available in digital format and were thus displayed electronically in the GIS:

�� Candidate and Proposed Special Areas of Conservation (SAC); �� Special Protection Areas (SPA); �� National Nature Reserves (NNR); �� Marine Nature Reserves (MNR); �� Ramsar Sites (R); �� Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

14

Various environmental designations apply to the Welsh coastal zone. These are briefly listed in the following sections: 3.5.1 Designations Under International Conventions and Directives (see Barne et al., 1995) These are designations under international conventions to which the UK is a contracting party and designations under UK statute to implement EC Directives concerning wildlife and landscape. (See table 3.5.1 and 3.5.2).

�� Special Protection Areas (SPA); �� Special Areas of Conservation (SAC); �� Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA).

3.5.2 Designations From National Statutes These designations are made by the statutory conservation agencies, local authorities or the government acting on advice from these bodies. For the Welsh region the Countryside Council for Wales is the statutory conservation agency.

�� National Nature Reserves (NNR); �� Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI); �� Local Nature Reserves (LNR); �� Marine Nature Reserves (MNR); �� Areas of Special Protection (AoSP); �� Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB); �� National Parks (NP); �� Country Parks (CP).

3.5.3 Sites Identified by Statutory Agencies These sites are identified by statutory agencies as being of nature conservation or landscape importance, however they are not protected by statute.

�� Nature Conservation Review Sites (NCR); �� Geological Conservation Review Sites (GCR); �� Heritage coasts.

3.5.4 Other Types of Protected Sites

�� National Trust (NT); �� Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB); �� Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust (WWT); �� County Wildlife Trusts (WT); �� The Woodland Trust (WT 2); �� The Ministry of Defence (MOD).

15

Table 3.5.1: Main Internationally Important sites along the RACER region of the Welsh Coast (Barne et al., 1995)

Designation Site Name Site County Grid Ref. Area (ha) Biosphere Reserve Dyfi Estuary Dyfed/Gwynedd/P

owys SN630910 2097

Ramsar Crymlyn Bog (including Pant-y-Sais Fen)

W. Glamorgan SS695945 267

Ramsar Burry Inlet Dyfed/W. Glamorgan

SS500970 6654

Ramsar Cors Fochno and Dyfi

Dyfed/Gwynedd/Powys

SN6595 2497

SPA Burry Inlet Dyfed/W. Glamorgan

SS500970 6654

SPA Skokholm and Skomer

Dyfed SM725095 422

SPA Grassholm Dyfed SM598093 9 SPA Glannau Aberdaron

and Ynys Enlli Gwynedd SH120220 513

SPA Holy Island Coast Gwynedd SH210820 351 SPA Cemlyn Bay and

Skerries Gwynedd SH2694 87

SPA Traeth Lafan (Conwy Bay)

Gwynedd SH630750 2700

ESA Preseli Dyfed - 120900 ESA Lleyn Peninsula Gwynedd - 45400 ESA Ynys Mon Gwynedd - 72000 Table 3.5.2 European Marine Sites In RACER region of Wales (see CCW map, 1999)

Candidate Special Areas of Conservation (cSAC)

Special Protection Areas (SPAs)

H

oly Island Coast.

A

nglesey Coast.

Morfa Harlech a Morfa Dyffryn. Lleyn Peninsula and the Sarnau. C

ardigan Bay.

Pembrokeshire Islands. Limestone Seacliffs of South West Wales two sites). (

R

iver Teifi.

R

iver Towy.

B

urry Inlet: Saltmarsh & Estuary.

Burry Inlet: Dunes.

T

raeth Lafan, Conway Bay.

Ynys Feurig, Cemlyn Bay & The Skerries (two sites). Holy Island Coast. A

berdaron Coast & Bardsey Island.

R

amsey & St. David’s Peninsula Coast.

G

rassholm.

S

koholm & Skomer.

C

astlemartin Coast.

C

armarthen Bay (potential SPA).

Burry Inlet.

16

4.0 Coastal Sensitivity Review

4.1 Introduction Mapping the coastline on the basis of prioritising sensitive areas has been an important part of oil spill contingency planning since the late 1970s. Much work has been carried out on the actual methodology of ranking sensitivity, which can vary amongst scientists. The sensitivity ranking can be based on various individual factors or on a combination of such; for example, biological (ecological) attributes, wave exposure and geomorphological features. The following sections provide outlines of various methods used to either create sensitivity indices or simply describe how to identify sensitive resources along the coastline.

4.2 Previous and Current Mapping Work of the Coastal Zone A MAFF (Ministry for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, UK) sponsored workshop held in Lowestoft in June 1999 provided an insight into the various coastal zone mapping projects that have been carried out and are still running in the UK. The workshop dealt primarily with the theme of integrating marine and coastal zone information; its main aim was to help determine a future direction for marine and coastal zone mapping in the UK. Some of the projects that were discussed included:

�� The Coastal and Regional Seas Directories Project: consists of publications collating information on national and regional overviews of the natural resources and human activities of the North Sea coastal margin, the UK and the Isle of Man coastal zones and also software providing a map-based interface into the coastal directories through which dot maps, contextual data and the full text of the directories can be accessed;

�� UKDMAP (United Kingdom Digital Marine Atlas Project) which aims at providing a wide-ranging and easily updated reference work on the marine environment around the UK, of use to the scientific, educational and commercial sectors and to assist in determining data availability;

�� MarLIN (Marine Life Information Network), a system which provides comprehensive information about marine habitats, communities and species around Britain and Ireland.

Additional mapping projects covering the Irish coastal zone as well as the UK include:

�� SensMap (Sensitivity Mapping of the Coastal Marine Environment in the Southern Irish Sea), was funded under the European Regional Development Fund - INTERREG II programme 1994-1999. This is a sensitivity mapping project providing information on the sensitivity of marine communities and identifying the main marine (biotopes) in the southern Irish Sea with the aim of developing a model for assessing and mapping the sensitivity of marine life to maritime activities (Cooke et al., 1998);

�� BioMar was funded by the Commission of European Communities under the LIFE programme. BioMar involved surveys of marine habitats and communities (biotopes) in Britain and the Republic of Ireland and the subsequent development of a marine biotope classification. Computerised systems for data storage, analysis, presentation and dissemination were also developed. The project also put forward suggestions for candidate sites for nature conservation. (http://www.ecoserve.ie/biomar/biomar.html).

Another Maritime INTERREG (Ireland/Wales) project, under measure 1.3; the protection of the marine and coastal environment, is:

17

http://www.ecoserve.ie/biomar/biomar.html)

�� Marine Information System (Phase II); A Demonstration System. This project is working towards highlighting awareness and utilisation of existing databases for marine and coastal management in the Irish Sea (Marine Institute, 1999). Essentially it will aim to provide a one-stop-shop service for information on the coastal zone and adjacent marine areas of Pembrokeshire and Wexford. The website will be launched at the end of May, 2000 (www.irishsea-mis.org). This project will be an essential tool in accessing information for the INTERREG area and improving INTERREG collaboration.

4.3 Sensitivity Criteria for Marine Species The following section provides summary accounts of various reports and work carried out on biological sensitivity and sensitivity assessment methodologies. In all areas of industry, decision makers have to be fully aware of the effects and impacts that their operation will have on the environment and its inhabitants. For example the UK oil and gas industry has established appropriate methodologies to identify areas unsuitable for licensing oil and gas developments. Where licensing does take place, suitable licensing conditions in relation to marine wildlife have to be applied. Davies and Wilson (1995), in a report entitled Wildlife sensitivity criteria for oil and gas developments in Great Britain consider sensitivity criteria for marine wildlife. The authors exclude seabirds in this category as they state that criteria already exists for this wildlife species. The licensing methodology was achieved by considering the following:

(i) Defining habitats to be considered; (ii) Reviewing conservation designations that exist; (iii) Describing the nature of the associated operations and impacts of the oil and gas industry; (iv) Identifying possible interactions between oil and gas activities and wildlife conservation

issues that would justify potential licence controls. (Davies and Wilson, 1995)

Biological sensitivities of various marine communities are further described in reports such as Holt et al. (1995) in the Sensitivity of Marine Communities to Man-Induced Change. The authors distinguish between two terms used frequently and whose meanings are often confused: sensitivity and vulnerability, defined as: Sensitivity: The innate capacity of an organism to suffer damage or death, from an external factor beyond the range of environmental parameters normally experienced. Vulnerability: The exposure of an organism to an external factor to which it is sensitive. Holt et al. (1995), detail descriptive accounts of various marine communities and their characteristics and sensitivities. Sensitivity scales and scoring systems were also discussed. Three sensitivity scale methods were outlined, only one of which was deemed useful by the authors. The three methods of producing the sensitivity scale were called:

(i) Direct adaptation of Mike Little’s fishing version; (ii) Sensitivity Scale Version 2; (iii) Sensitivity Scale Version 3.

The first method was an adaptation designed with bottom fishing in mind and contained no information on the nature or extent of man induced changes which affect populations. This method did not adhere to the relative sensitivity definitions used, and therefore did not process the

18

information appropriately. The scale went from 1-5; 1 being little or no affect, and 5 being very seriously affected. There was also a sixth level to the scale denoted by the letter P, which implied that the population was positively affected. The second method of Holt et al. (1995) was a similar adaptation, but did not fit with the definitions of sensitivity and vulnerability; it did not interpret the available information adequately and was thus not used. The third method was the main focus of effort of the report. This method incorporated the following factors into a table: longevity, fragility, stability, resilience, intolerance to environmental stresses or changes and recoverability. Each of these factors was inserted into a table of sensitivity ranking from 1 to 5 (increasing sensitivity with increasing number) and within each rank each factor was individually described. For example, at a ranking of 3, fragility was considered to be moderately fragile, and longevity had a lifespan value of 3 to 5 years. In conclusion, Holt et al. (1995), found that a lot of information on various biological species was simply not available. Therefore the aim of the methods described to specify sensitivity of marine life forms may not have been the most successful or accurate, due to the limited knowledge of human effects on larval, juvenile and young stages etc. on these various life forms within the marine environment (Holt et al., 1995).

MacDonald et al. (1996) outline the importance of developing criteria that can be used to assess the sensitivity of species to physical disturbance from fishing activities and to apply these criteria within a framework that indicates particularly sensitive species and the levels of disturbance experienced for defined fishing practises. The framework would highlight areas necessary for further study, in which to improve assessment of the extent and importance of sensitive species in an area, and improve management efficiency in areas of marine conservation importance. To define a sensitivity index according to MacDonald et al. (1996), components of sensitivity have first to be understood; these are fragility and recovery. A sensitivity index derived by the authors, from these factors, is displayed in the equation below. Recovery is considered to be the most important factor and should be weighted.

S = (FxI) eR R: recovery, on a scale of 1 to 4, representing short, moderate, long and very long recovery period or no recovery is likely. F: fragility, on a scale of 1 to 3, representing not very fragile, moderately fragile and very fragile. I: intensity of the impact, on an arbitrary scale of 1 to 3, representing low moderate and high intensity. MacDonald et al. (1996) also point out that an advanced means of assessing biotope sensitivity was not yet available as bias are inevitably introduced. For example, if a biotope contains species with high recruitment rates the sensitivity may be underestimated; on the other hand if a biotope is known to possess some sensitive species, the sensitivity analysis may be skewed. An alternative option in assessing sensitivity is to focus on key or indicator species. Key species are those that structure the community, the loss of such would seriously alter the nature of the community and possibly its existence. Indicator species can be those, that if present, indicate certain environmental conditions, or if absent, may indicate early warning signs to the system. Their physical or physiological characteristics may respond in a specific manner to a pollution incident and therefore, they can indicate the presence of contamination. Some indicator species are indicative of certain substrate types. In the context of fishing effects on species, the indicator species are those whose abundance may provide an indication as to the level of fishing occurring in an area and therefore, may indicate whether communities in a particular area are natural or effected by the fishing activity.

19

One of the main reasons, according to MacDonald et al. (1996), for the difficulty in assigning sensitivity scores to benthic species is that, as of yet, there is insufficient information available on their reproductive mechanisms, longevity, growth rates and generally insufficient information on the effects of fishing on these species. Therefore sensitivity scores can be calculated for only a small percentage of the species. It was concluded that more research is needed in this area to understand the interactions between fishing activities and benthos. As defined by Hiscock (1997), sensitivity is the intolerance of a habitat, community or individual (or individual colony) of a species to damage or death, from an external factor. Hiscock states that a habitat, community or species become vulnerable to adverse effect when the external factor is likely to happen. Hiscock (1997) describes that identifying sensitivity of habitats and communities is usually determined by assessing sensitivity of component species as adults. However, the likelihood of recovery of the community or component species following perturbation is also important and to assess this, the life cycles of those species must be considered. According to Hiscock (1997), the maintenance of sustainable diversity of ecosystems in the environment is achieved by providing scientific information on these habitats to relevant authorities, which enables them to regulate activities or to carry out the appropriate response to any incident, which may endanger these ecosystems. Hiscock (1997), describes the type of information required as follows:

�� Occurrence and distribution of habitats; �� Overall distribution of these habitats (acts as an indicator of their rarity or diversity in any

given area); �� The biology of the component species; �� Normal range of the communities and species (and any relevant reasons for change); �� Potential long-term effects from either human or natural events.

Taking these points into consideration when addressing the potential effects of a severe impact, ensures positive protective action on those ecosystems most likely to be affected.

Hiscock (1997) mentions the vulnerability index derived by Gundlach and Hayes (1978) as being based more on the potential persistence of oil than on the possible effects on sensitivity and recoverability. The main emphasis in this report (Hiscock, 1997) is on recoverability. This aspect was explored as it allowed much more scope in its application, meaning that partial or complete recoverability could be addressed. If a species, habitat or community damaged by an event were unlikely to recover, great concern would be expressed. If it were important from a conservation, economic or aesthetic point of view, then great effort would be necessary to prevent or minimise inimical effects occurring. Exploring recoverability Hiscock (1997) highlights the importance of life histories of species and addresses some factors associating to such:

�� Longevity of adults; �� Time to reach maturity; �� Frequency of reproduction; �� Developmental biology; �� Ability to recolonise; �� Time of critical life cycle phases (in relation to time of the event).

The understanding of life cycles in determining ultimate recoverability is very important, as is the necessity of incorporating this knowledge methodically into emergency response strategies.

20

Hiscock suggests the idea of setting up an electronic system, whereby a query with respect to identifying sensitive habitats or species, for any given stretch of coastline, can be processed by a search engine (feeding from a pre-existing database), providing a detailed result; additional biological details would be provided, depending on the requirements. Once the computer would provide the response, the operator would then require an expert to analyse it and estimate the potential effects on the area. However, more raw-data and research would be necessary to compile a comprehensive directory to work in a system as described above.

The Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN), was established by the Marine Biological Association of the UK in collaboration with the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) and major holders and users of marine biological data and information in Britain and Ireland. MarLIN was set up to provide a network structure for linking marine-life data around Britain and Ireland. It also aims at improving access to and understanding of information in support of environmental management, protection and education. It aims to be the most comprehensive and user friendly source of marine habitat, community and species information, and to provide the sensitivity of these resources to natural and anthropogenic events (http://www.marlin.ac.uk/). The main objective of the biology and sensitivity programme of MarLIN is to:

�� Identify key information on the biology and sensitivity of seabed habitats, biotopes and species that can be applied in a practical way to environmental protection and management.

�� Biotopes and species pages will be 'tagged' with information about their biology, environmental preferences and information that will assist in identifying sensitivity and recoverability in relation to natural events and human activities.

�� A graphical user interface will be produced so that the enquirer can identify areas of interest and ask whether any species known to be sensitive, of marine natural heritage importance etc. are present.

�� Hypertext links will access information describing statutes, directives and conventions and key literature sources.

(Hiscock et al., 1999).

4.4 Sensitivity Criteria for Coastal Environments As well as criteria for marine species, sensitivity of the actual physical environment has to be considered. The following section covers various methods and work carried out to define the level of sensitivity of the coastline. The different substrate types are classified according to levels of sensitivity generally based on the recoverability of that substrate. This depends on its oil retention factor and therefore its susceptibility to contamination over prolonged periods.

The USA agency NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), derived a coastal sensitivity index of shoreline type based on a gradient from 1 to 10 of sensitivity as follows: Shoreline Type Sensitivity Gradient Exposed rock cliff 1 Rock platform 2 Fine sand beach 3 Coarse sand beach 4 Sand & gravel beach 5 Gravel beach 6 Exposed mud flat 7 Sheltered rock cliff & rock platform 8 Sheltered mud flat 9 Marsh/lagoon 10

21

(http://www.chart.nf.net/oilspill.htm) The Canadian association of Coastal Habitat Assessment Research and Technology, known as CHART, developed this index a step further, by adding on an index for habitats based on sensitivity of biota together with recovery time. This was carried out for the Placentia Bay region (tables obtained from: http://www.chart.nf.net/oilspill.htm). Habitat Sensitivity Gradient Sensitivity Rank Fucus anceps surf zone 1 Low Rockweed platform 2 Low Ascophyllum/Fucus shore 3 Low Low biomass shore 4 Moderate Ascophyllum rockweed shore 5 Moderate Capelin spawning beach 6 High Eelgrass community 7 High For details on methods see: DeBlois et al 1997. Placentia Bay Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) review of applicable methodologies and allocation of resource sensitivity ranks. Internal report, Department of Fisheries and Oceans, St. John's, Newfoundland.

Sanderson (1996) described methodologies to compile an analysis of rare coastal marine species for marine conservation purposes. Increasingly, these rare assemblages are seen to be important in the role of coastal zone management and development; the aim of the report was to provide a standardised approach to this aspect of conservation management. The main approach in the development of Sanderson’s (1996) assessment criteria was to determine population sizes for a range of species and to make affirmative judgements as to their rarity based on their relative population size. Sites of occurrence and units of area occupancy were the measures used to manipulate population size (due to the fact that information on actual specific population sizes of many species was not available). Nationally rare marine benthic species were defined as those occurring in 8 or fewer of the 1546 10km x 10km squares (of the UK National grid), containing sea within 3-mile territorial limit. Nationally scarce marine benthic species were defined as those occurring in 9 to 55 10km x 10km squares, containing sea, within the 3-mile territorial limit. Jensen et al. (1990) summarise the development of an improved oil spill environmental sensitivity index (ESI) mapping system used before and during oil-spill responses. The results are based on a project initiated in 1988 by the Earth Observation Commercialisation Application Program (EOCAP), jointly sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Office of Commercial Programs and the Office of Space and Science Applications in the US. The system was developed to help decision makers and operators become more aware of the potential environmental hazards associated with spills and to enable oil-spill control operations to be organised and carried out efficiently and effectively. The system was developed by incorporating remotely sensed data from satellites and GIS technology to enhance the storage and handling abilities of the data. There are four types of information associated with each ESI map sheet, including:

��Planimetric Basemap; ��Shoreline Sensitivity Index; ��Oil-Sensitive Wildlife; ��Access-Protection Features.

(Jensen et al., 1990)

22

http://www.chart.nf.net/oilspill.htm

The planimetric basemap described by Jensen et al. (1990) is usually a US geological survey topographic rectangle, photographically reproduced once the other types of data have been drawn manually upon it. The sensitivity index is divided into ten or more types of coastal environment, each with different levels of sensitivity to pollutants and also each with specific response and clean-up plans. This index may exhibit a slight degree of simplicity but it is ultimately the quickest and most efficient method for decision making in response to a spill. Other data sets which are used on these maps include: distribution of oil-sensitive wildlife, access features, recreation features and the road network. This database layering further facilitates the rapid response time in precautionary measures as well as clean-up measures. Future areas of research, according to the authors, would include the creation of an expert system to distinguish between exposed and sheltered areas of coastline. The authors also hope to broaden the use of the ESI concept past the oil spill scenario, and to be able to make it applicable to other hazardous wastes or spills in the non-coastal environment as well as coastal. Various specification demands on sensitivity maps arise depending on the category of oil spill being dealt with. Baker et al. (1995) described a number of factors that have to be considered when delivering a sensitivity map. The various user groups have to be distinguished together with their user requirements. The tiered response approach is described by Baker et al. (1995) to distinguish between the different levels of spill:

�� Tier 1: represents small spills, possibly contained within the terminal (10-20 metric tons); �� Tier 2: represents medium sized spills, e.g. minor collisions of up to 400 metric tons spillage; �� Tier 3: represents major accidents, collisions, explosions, or blowouts involving thousands of

tons and with the risk of spreading over a large area causing considerable damage.

These different levels of spill therefore result in the requirement of different map scales. The types of information that can be explored on the map were discussed, some of which include shoreline type, subtidal habitats, wildlife and protected areas, fishing and aquaculture etc. Standardisation of symbols used to identify various features was also discussed and agreed by the authors, that this is a better option than trying to discover a detailed system of symbols, which would cover every possible resource worldwide. The growing use of GIS based packages to display this information was outlined and the advantages of such given.

A useful manual, the Introduction to Coastal Habitats and Biological Resources for Spill Response was produced by NOAA in the USA (see NOAA, 1992). This is a training manual in the subject of oil spill response and cleanup. The manual covers various geological, physical and biological features, which have to be taken into account when responding to a spill. Chapter 8 discusses a type of sensitivity index, which is used in conjunction with the practical information provided in the rest of the manual. The main aim of the sensitivity index section, is to describe components of a sensitivity mapping system and to explain how these maps are used during spill response. The coverage of the maps described, extends from the coastal zone to the furthest inland extent of tidal influence. The composition of ESI maps was described, comprising three units:

��Habitats: intertidal shoreline habitats; subtidal habitats; ��Biological Resources; ��Human-Use Resources.

A summary table of the various ESI ranking scales used in the USA is provided. The sensitivity-ranking scheme is derived from the combination of:

��Shoreline type;

23

��Exposure to wave and tidal energy; ��Analysis of the natural persistence of oil on the shoreline; ��Biological productivity and sensitivity; ��Ease of cleanup without causing more harm.

An understanding of the physical processes and interactions between these factors is an integral part of the ranking system. Ten of the most common shoreline rankings are listed, with those closer to 1 being the least sensitive and those closer to 10 being most sensitive:

1. Exposed vertical rocky shores and seawalls; 2. Wave-cut rocky platforms, scarps in clay and exposed sedimentary bluffs; 3. Fine grained sand beaches; 4. Coarse grained sand beaches; 5. Mixed sand and gravel beaches; 6. Gravel beaches and rip-rap (man-made equivalent i.e. clasts etc…); 7. Exposed tidal flats; 8. Sheltered rocky shores and seawalls; 9. Sheltered tidal flats; 10. Vegetated wetlands.

The possibility of introducing additional parameters into the sensitivity classification is also explored with respect to GIS adaptations. Parameters such as: substrate, sediment size, elevation, width and slope etc. Working with these parameters, could make it possible to calculate exposure of shoreline to wave and tide energy for each segment of the shoreline and therefore ascribe a sensitivity score. Almost all ESI maps follow the basic 1-10 classification scheme. The ESI numbers do not always necessarily correspond to a specific shoreline type, but rather to the relative sensitivity of the shoreline to impacts of the spill. The onset of uniformity in classification of colour coding and symbology is thought to be a welcome advancement in sensitivity mapping, as the same system may eventually be applied for most of the USA. Many marine and coastal species are wide ranging and can be present over quite a large area at any given time. Sensitivity maps therefore show where the most sensitive species, their life stages and areas, are located, and not just a view of the entire area over which the species are known to occur. On the ESI maps the biological information is presented in the form of coloured circles, with different colours representing different species (e.g. yellow represents marine mammal while green represents a bird). Within the circle, the biological group is displayed by a graphic symbol of the relative species in question, (e.g. a bird, fish, seal etc.). Other attributes on or within the circle provide additional information (e.g. seasonality, rarity of the species, location and range). The main aim of GIS in the future of sensitivity mapping is that it will “facilitate the generation of thematic maps for specialised planning requirements and preparation of maps at various scales” (taken from chapter 8 of Introduction to Coastal Habitats and Biological Resources for Spill Response). However, the primary analytical products of an oil spill GIS are still maps and the final decisions still have to be made in situations where dynamic conditions prevail and some systems may not be able to keep up with these changes.

(http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/oilaids/monterey/monterey.html) Gundlach and Hayes (1978) described a classification of different coastal environments concerning their sensitivity to oil spills. They propose suitable response actions for the cleanup of these environments. The suggested classification is again based on a scale from 1 to 10, indicating potential vulnerability to oil. The vulnerability is described as being “based on shoreline interaction with the physical processes controlling oil deposition, observed persistence or longevity of the oil in that environment and the extent of biological damage” (Gundlach and Hayes, 1978). The actual

24

effect that the oil will have on the biological environment is very difficult to estimate as it depends on a number of factors (e.g. what oil type has spilled, what quantity of oil, the level of maturity of the organism affected; larval, juvenile, mature and the length of time the organism is exposed to the oil). Therefore on-site field data, should also be collected and combined with the background information already in store to make a more accurate prediction of effect. To apply the vulnerability index, it is first necessary to establish what types of coastal environments exist in the study area. Hayes et al. (1973) developed a technique known as the Zonal Method (this was described in Gundlach and Hayes, 1978). The purpose of the Zonal Method is to speed up the process of coast type identification before the index was assigned. This method is a relatively inexpensive means of classifying the coastline, and is an effective preparatory plan for spill responders. The steps involved include:

1. Reviews of literature, aerial photos, and maps of the study area; 2. Aerial familiarisation of the area, generally at low tide to examine the full extent of the

intertidal zone. Observations of such then taken verbally with a dictaphone and also photographically;

3. Ground sampling of the areas of interest from the aerial view and areas of extra interest examined if required e.g. an area of ecological importance;

4. Short-term mapping projects of the most prominent features in the area may be carried out if desired;

5. Analysis of sediment samples (i.e. grain size analysis to determine composition); 6. Compilation of the data, and geomorphological classification and mapping of the coastline; 7. Finally the vulnerability index is assigned. The relative proportion of each coastal type to

the total amount of coastline is determined. This is a commodious method of exhibiting the data, which permits a general overview of the vulnerability of the area thereby allowing responders to take the appropriate action and prioritise without delay (for example if 60% of an area had an index of >6, protection would therefore be given immediately to that area).

Harper et al. (1991) describe the background to a shore mapping system, brought into action because of the immense necessity for oil spill emergency response measures in British Columbia. In 1991 the British Columbian Province began several projects to deal with the responsive action in place for oil spill disasters in the area. It had been identified as a high-risk area for oil spill potential and thus contingency plans had to be reviewed and improved. The main objectives of the Harper et al. (1991) study, were as follows:

1. Development of a GIS compatible database for recording shore-zone information; 2. Standardisation of the various mapping and coding systems that have been used within the

proposed project area; 3. Provision of a quality assurance review, to bring all existing data to a common standard; 4. Categorisation of the shore-zone character and oil residence indices for future use in oil spill

planning and response. There were four main aspects to the mapping system:

a. Mapping (involved reviewing of shore-zone data, organisation for storage of data and development of classification models to summarise data for end use products);

b. Wave exposure evaluation (which determines potential oil residence); c. Oil residence index (which is derived from the mapping and wave exposure data); d. Shoreline treatment options (in the form of a manual).

25

It was found that the potential residence of oil in the area could extend to over a few weeks. The substrate type was mostly gravel or sand and gravel shoreline and relatively unexposed, therefore most of the study area would require cleanup response in the event of a spill.

Jacqueline Michel and Jeffrey Dahlin of NOAA (1993) developed a baseline from which to approach sensitivity mapping in a consistent manner. They investigated data needs and means of displaying and organising data in electronic format. The application of GIS as a tool for oil spill contingency planning was strongly promoted.

Most sensitivity maps in the USA are available at a scale of 1:24,000 using USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles as the base map. Alaska uses 15 minute USGS topographic quadrangles at a scale of 1:63,360 and Canada uses maps at a scale of 1:50,000. The ESI (Environmental Sensitivity Index) maps comprised of three main data assemblages; habitats, subtidal biological resources and human-use resources. A detailed account of each of the ten ESI ranking types was provided in their report, and listed here:

1. Exposed, impermeable vertical substrates; 2. Exposed, impermeable substrates, non-vertical; 3. Semi-permeable substrate, low potential for oil penetration and burial; infauna present but

not usually abundant; 4. Medium permeability, moderate potential for oil penetration and burial; infauna present but

not usually abundant; 5. Medium-to-high permeability, high potential for oil penetration and burial; infauna present

but not usually abundant; 6. High permeability, high potential for oil penetration and burial; 7. Exposed, flat, permeable substrate; infauna usually abundant; 8. Sheltered impermeable substrate, hard; epibiota usually abundant; 9. Sheltered, flat, semi-permeable substrate, soft; infauna usually abundant; 10. Vegetated wetlands.

The colour coding of the ESI maps was standardised to range in a gradient from cool to hot colours (from shades of dark purple through to brown), as there had been variations from one sensitivity atlas to another.

The various needs and unique requirements of different user communities and qualities of coastal sensitivity maps/atlases was discussed by Tortell (1992). These requirements were discussed under the following headings:

��General Design and Layout: discusses general size, type, style of map and overall presentation;

��Cartography, Symbols and Legend: encouraging maximisation of user-friendly applicability and producing maps in the clearest and most easily understandable manner;

��Classification of the Coast (Sensitivity/Vulnerability Index): refers to the original classification by Gundlach and Hayes (1978), also to the importance of using symbols as well as colour to indicate various types of key due to the fact that colour alone can be complicated and of little use if photocopied in black and white;

��Text: raises the fact that an improved method of presenting textural information with maps is required and highlights the need to overcome problems with size, shape and design of the text.

26

Computer technology can efficiently assist in the production of atlases. The ability to digitise pre-existing maps is also a great advantage, allowing the data to be displayed electronically and easily manipulated to the user’s requirements. An investigation by NERC (Natural Environment Research Council), showed that many people wanted a bound hard copy of the atlas rather than something digital, however NERC argued that this was probably due to computer-illiteracy and that with time, this would be resolved. However, there is a large component of the population who do not have access to the most up-to-date computer technology, therefore, there is still a need for hardcopy paper formats of these atlases; for coastal zone managers in developing areas, as well as for the general public. To conclude, the successful production of a coastal sensitivity atlas depends largely on efficient and competent project management and planning (Tortell, 1992).

In 1991 the Iraqi Army spilled four million gallons of crude oil into the Persian Gulf as an expression of environmental terrorism. The Persian Gulf is one of the busiest oil shipping lanes in the world. The immediate need for fast and efficient oil spill contingency planning was recognised. Narumalani et al. (1992) describe the application of an ESI for the United Arab Emirates, using remote sensing and GIS techniques. Narumalani et al. (1992) apply a similar structure to the ESI database system as Jensen et al. (1990). Two of the four types of information used by Jensen to describe the ESI map sheets are discussed in this paper. These are the planimetric basemap and the shoreline sensitivity index.

��Creation of planimetric basemap from Landsat Imagery: it is possible to produce a relatively accurate planimetric basemap, which abides by most national geometric standards of map accuracy from satellite images. The Landsat images had to be converted to a standard map projection (Universal Transverse Mercator).

��Creation of the Shoreline Sensitivity Index: eleven different types of coastal environment were mapped. These shorelines were derived from past work in the area of shoreline sensitivity specifically Gundlach and Hayes (1978), and Murday et al. (1988). The thematic map data was an effective method of mapping the aerial and spatial extent of the most sensitive coastline types (i.e. mangroves, algal mats and tidal flats), something which was not easily carried out where traditional ESI mapping was concerned. The index was as follows:

ESI Shoreline Sensitivity Information ESI code Near vertical structures, natural beach rock 1 Exposed wave-cut platform 2 Fine grain beach or dredged bank 3 Medium/coarse grain, mixed sand/gravel beach 4 Gravel beaches, riprap, tetrapods 5 Mixed sediment tidal flats 6 Mud covered beach rock 7 Beach rock, reef, coral reef (unclassified) 8 Sheltered tidal flats 9 Sheltered Algal mats 10 Mangrove (in situ) 11a Mangrove (thematic mapper data) 11b United Arab Emirate Shoreline Sensitivity Index Codes (Narumalani, 1992) Information on other ESI coastline codes was gathered while taking an aerial tour of the coast by helicopter and taking note of the features onto 1:50,000 scale maps in situ. These coastline codes were then digitised into the database by the following procedure:

(a) A land-water mask was created using the TM infrared band (7);

27

(b) A 3 pixel (120m) buffer search was applied to all upland and island areas of the Abu Dhabi Emirate, creating a “ribbon” along the entire coastline;

(c) Every 30 x 30m pixel of this ribbon was assigned an ESI code by in situ methods of identification.

The resultant sensitivity map displayed the spatial extent and distribution of the most sensitive areas of coastline along the United Arab Emirates coast. This sensitivity index was overlaid onto the near-infrared image producing a shoreline ESI map merged with an up-to-date planimetric map. Once this was completed, the in situ sensitivity codes were combined, resulting in an ESI coastline derived from in situ plus remotely sensed data overlaid onto a near infrared planimetric map of the study area. This information has been inputted to a digital database which allows users to query aerial extent of shoreline effected, affected biota, minimisation and protection options, access routes to the incident and ultimately where the oil will actually spill (due to the presence of an oil spill trajectory model).

A review by Harper et al. (1992), of mapping studies carried out along the British Columbian coast, has shown that British Columbia has a greater proportion of beach coastline than estimated by previous surveys. This review was carried out with oil spill emergency response measures in mind. Through field observations, the studies revealed that surface texture of shore type was not always an accurate interpretation of permeability to oil. Beach and sediment shorelines have a greater oil residence period than rock and coarse sediment shorelines. It was found however that many high-energy sites along the coastline possessed a thin sand layer overlying (impermeable) bedrock. Low energy shore sections tended to have a surface (permeable) gravel layer overlying sand. Pebble/cobble beaches, which are very permeable, were quite scarce. These observations posed some problems. Firstly, the greater extent of beach coastline in British Columbia, than was previously thought to exist, meant a larger surface area sensitive to the impacts of oil and the development of a more complicated clean up plan. Secondly, interpretation of permeability level by observation of surface sediment texture was not always a good representation of permeability, as explained previously by the fact that underlying the thin surface layer was commonly very different substrate type. This in turn effects calculations of oil residence time, and therefore has to be accounted for.

The British Columbian coastline is predominantly important for recreational activities. Tourism and fishing are major industries in the area. The Nestucca oil spill in 1988, although not that large (5,500 bbl of fuel oil spilled about 3Km off the coastline of Washington, NOAA/HMRAD 92-11/1992), has reinforced public concern for the environmental quality of the coastline. Harper et al. (1992), in a study of mapping projects and their relevance to oil spill response in British Columbia examined the distribution of major coastal morphologies, which would be sensitive to oil persistence along this coastline. Works of other scientists on coastal mapping projects were also discussed. Some of these involved regional descriptions of the British Columbian coastline providing an overall view of the main shore types of the area. These previous studies provided additional information on the texture of the shore-type, divided into the broad categories of gravel, sand & gravel, and sand. Stretches of the coastline with gravel composition, highlighted concern with respect to oil residence time and coastal clean up, as gravel being most permeable had been the main shore-type of concern during the clean up plan for the Exxon Valdez spill (1989). Over-flight observations as well as these ground studies confirmed the estimation that greater than 50% of the coastline was a combination of rock & sediment and coarse sediment shorelines. The permeability factor was also shown to be rather low, as most of the subsurface substrate consisted of low permeable fine sands or impermeable bedrock. The coastline would therefore not be a major oil reservoir and so would not pose as large a clean-up problem as was previously thought. It was concluded that sub-surface sampling surveys would be a much more useful exercise to determine

28

the ultimate permeability of the coastline and would thus increase accuracy in potential oil residence times (Harper et al., 1992.). A report produced by the UK, Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions in 1999, detailed the study of identifying potential Marine Environmental High Risk Areas (MEHRAs) in UK waters (MacDonald et al., 1999). The MEHRAs concept developed following the Braer oil tanker incident (off the Shetland Islands UK, 1993). The concept is to identify areas of high environmental sensitivity that are also at risk from pollution that may originate from shipping. Once these areas are identified and noted, ship owners can plan shipping traffic to avoid these sites and thus limit the risk of pollution. By combining the environmental sensitivity data on the UK coastline and surrounding waters with the pollution risk data (from the most up-to-date shipping traffic data), contour maps could be plotted, which formed the basis for identifying MEHRAs. The results of the study were placed in a GIS, and the two sets of data were combined to rank the coastline and sea areas of the UK; this would then identify potential MEHRAs.

4.5 Sensitivity of Sea Birds Bird life is an extremely fragile resource and needs particular attention in the context of potential impacts of oil spills. Bird species and their numbers, also provide ecologists with an indication of the ecological status of a habitat. It is important to assess vulnerability of seabirds to improve our understanding of the consequences of oil spills on these species. Wiens et al. (1984) provided an account of the approach taken to develop a model, which can predict the potential effects of an oil spill on colonially breeding seabirds. To make this possible some information is first required on both the oil spill and the types of birds involved. The surface area of ocean affected by the spill and the duration of the spill depend on the quantity and type of oil which has been spilled as well as the oceanographic characteristics of the area in question. In ideal conditions the distribution of feeding birds at sea is a function of the distribution of their food resources and the distance of feeding areas from the colony. However, when an oil spill occurs however, in areas where birds commonly feed, serious impacts can result. Firstly, birds that fail to avoid the spill and are exposed to the toxic conditions can die. Secondly, those who manage to avoid the spill may travel further to obtain food for their young; in doing so their trip time for foraging is extended and can have serious effects on their young. Wiens et al. (1984) define trip-time to include the time taken by a foraging adult to travel from the colony to a foraging location, the time spent in searching for and capturing prey sufficient to meet its own demands and to obtain a load for the return trip, and the time taken to return to the colony. If the duration of the spill is prolonged and the extended foraging procedure repeated over long periods, the long term growth rate and survival of the young can be jeopardised. This in turn, can have adverse long-term impacts on the entire population of the colony. Mortality rates can be predicted from a model and then used as values for simple population dynamics calculations to project the length of time required for a population to return to an equilibrium age structure and size following a spill event, or the magnitude of perturbation beyond which the population is unlikely to be able to recover and will suffer local extinction.

A list of parameter priorities was created which would assist in model assimilation. It is important to be as accurate as possible in evaluating these parameters so that a model can be formulated with credibility, that can generate predictions of oil spill impacts on marine birds. Some of the priorities were as follows: Intermediate

1. Distributional dynamics of oil spills; 2. Age structure of population (not required in great specificity, but necessary);

29

3. Proportion of at sea birds (i.e. that are not breeding or part of a colony, necessary for overall reproductive parameters of a colony);

4. Reproductive success of individuals in specific colonies should be known; 5. Foraging patterns should be known (and metabolic costs associated with such); 6. The effects of trip time on chick growth rates and survival probabilities.

High

1. Size of breeding populations at specific colonies (critical importance); 2. Patterns of at sea distributions of birds associated with a given colony under normal

conditions and estimates of their spatial and temporal variability on a colony specific basis; 3. Probability of mortality once an adult encounters an oil spill; 4. Age-specific survivorship characteristic of a population and similar populations; 5. Distribution of trip times of adults for specific populations under examination; 6. The lag time in population response to a spill and the frequency with which individuals

switch their foraging area; 7. Relationship of foraging rate and behaviour to prey resource levels under normal conditions

(a species-specific trait); 8. The effects the spill has on resource availability (i.e. potential prey).

To acquire or possess information on all of the above listed priorities would be a great achievement. However, this is not very realistic, as many of the parameters are quite difficult to assess or estimate, and there will inevitably be gaps in the information. The above list provides a guideline for researchers to consider when working on these topics and related issues of oil spill events.

Williams et al. (1995) describe the evolution of an Oil Vulnerability Index (OVI) which was designed to assess and map seabird vulnerability in the North Sea and further alleviates the problem of interpreting large quantities of seabird database records. Methods: the OVI comprises of the following factors:

(a) The oiled proportion of each species found dead (or moribund) on the shoreline and proportion of time spent on the surface of the sea by that species. This was included to indicate the risk to an individual seabird (in a population), of being killed by oil pollution. It was given a score factor of between 1 and 5. The higher the score, the more oiled and in contact with the sea surface the bird is likely to be;

(b) Biogeographical population size of the species. Species with small populations were considered more at risk than those with large populations. The biogeographical population factor was scored between 1 and 5 also;

(c) Potential recovery rate. Species that have the ability to produce many young in one year were regarded as having a high recovery rate. The scoring system of 1-5 implies higher scores mean lowest reproduction rate and thus slowest recovery rate;

(d) Dependency of species on marine environment. The maximum score of 5 was given to species such as manx shearwater, common scoter and arctic tern. These species spend most of their lives at sea and only some ashore to breed. Species who are not totally dependent on the marine environment were given the lowest score, such as great crested grebe and black-headed gull. These species could more than likely survive the impact of a spill as they can use alternative feeding and breeding sites at any time of year).

Factors (a) and (b) were considered to be the most important and were thus given twice the weighting of factors (c) and (d). The following equation was formulated to provide the OVI index:

OVI = 2a + 2b + c + d

30

The maximum OVI score is 30. However, it is possible to alter the individual scores for each factor for different areas being assessed or according to the revision and updating of methodologies. The index showed that within the North Sea the most vulnerable species of birds were divers, skuas, grebes and auks. The index can be used to calculate the overall area vulnerability by combining the area density with the OVI score for that species in the area. The density was calculated for each species for every 15 minutes latitude by 30 minutes of longitude rectangle for which data was available. The area vulnerability was expressed by: Area vulnerability score = �species ln(�+1)*OVI

(where � is the density of the species in a given area). Vulnerability maps produced from this information displayed distributions of vulnerable birds. Dark shading displayed areas of high densities of the most vulnerable species and a progressive lightening of shading displayed areas less vulnerable. The size of the symbol displayed on the map also gave some indication of the importance of the concentration of sea birds in that area.

The area vulnerability index attempts to balance the impact of the death of a large number of species over a small area against fewer species over a larger area. It is difficult to decide which is more important. The index does not account for the distribution or range of each species. Thus, though one result may be, that very few mortalities occurred by a small incident, these birds could form part of, if not the whole extent of a local population. The index however was designed to cover importance over large areas and so individual loss is considered against the size of the total population of a species. The techniques described above have been useful in making area vulnerability investigations more quantitative and consistent. Furthermore, the techniques have improved the quality of information and advise provided during emergency events, or for consultative purposes. The JNCC produced a report entitled Vulnerable Concentrations of Seabirds South and West of Britain (Webb et al., 1995). The report provides an overall assessment of the distribution and population sizes of seabirds in the offshore waters around Britain, primarily to the west of Britain. The information is displayed in a clear and easy to use manner. The European Seabirds at Sea database was established by the JNCC in 1992. Information on sampling surveys of seabirds and cetaceans in north-west European waters from a range of research facilities was gathered and fed into the database. The main area of examination is in the North Sea.

The birds described in the JNCC (1995) report are divided into three categories; offshore, inshore and coastal. Offshore birds include species such as petrels, shearwaters, gannets gulls and auks. These birds are known to have breeding sites on the coasts of western Britain, Ireland, the Faroes and France but frequently feed far offshore. Thus, in winter, when they have less dependency on their breeding sites, these birds can travel great distances to forage. The area described in this report, actually represents significant proportions of world populations for some birds. The inshore category of birds includes species such as divers, grebes, seaduck, terns, cormorants and the black guillemot. Some gull species are also defined under this category. Gulls are normally found close to the shore but have been known to roam further offshore. The coastal category includes shorebirds and ducks. The main habitats of coastal species are mudflats, sandflats and intertidal regions. The coastal sections of the Irish Sea and the western coast of Scotland rarely freeze during winter periods due to the warming influence of the Atlantic. Therefore, these areas thus become

31

attractive sites for migrating birds who normally breed in the Arctic or sub-Arctic regions and who are known to forage in intertidal sections for food. The JNCC (1995) report provides maps with monthly displays of seabird distribution and vulnerability categories, and an accompanying account of the three categories of bird (i.e. offshore, inshore and coastal) for each monthly map. The map display is based on the procedure described by Williams et al. (1995). When consulting this document in the event of oil spill emergency response it is advised to take into account the preceding as well as the proceeding month after which the oil spill has occurred, giving a more comprehensive and realistic scenario of bird concentrations. The vulnerability maps are based on an average of values for a period of over fifteen years; thus, the information is not truly exact but only representative. For more accurate present day data an aerial survey is advised to be the best option. Knut et al. (1991) describe the use of a model to predict the number of seabirds killed during and after an oil spill incident and to predict their recoverability rate after the spill has occurred. Factors which are crucial in determining seabird susceptibility to oil are considered, including: the number of birds present in the area that the slick has affected, species ability to avoid oil, species dependency on water, seasonality in bird behaviour, susceptibility due to age of species, recoverability rate due to fast recruiting or immigrating populations. The model was developed to predict expected and worst case damages from oil drilling off the coast of northern Norway. Populations of kittiwake (gull), common guillemot (auk) and common eider (duck) are the most significant colonies along the northern coast of Norway and were therefore used as sample populations when simulating the model. From the results, the model and vulnerability indices indicate guillemots as the most vulnerable species followed by common eider. The indices show kittiwakes as the least vulnerable, however the model shows that kittiwakes and common eiders exhibit almost equal vulnerability. Knut et al. (1991) conclude that to improve the accuracy of the indices system and simulation model, an urgent need for more seabird population data was required. Seabird migrational data for the study was limited. The authors also conclude that even with more data available, more emphasis should be placed on the choice of factors determining seabird susceptibility to oil.

4.6 Seabird & Cetacean Distribution Seabird and cetacean distribution can vary between differing water masses. Their distribution is highly dependent on the scale of oceanographic characteristics of the oceans, such as circulatory patterns, temperature, salinity, and water depth. Prey distribution is also a prime factor in determining the distribution of these species (Pollack et al., 1997). The mean annual salinity of the southern Irish sea can vary from 34.9‰ to 34.1‰ (Bowden, 1980). In winter surface water offshore is generally warmer than that inshore. Coastal waters are generally cooler due to increased river runoff. Where two differing densities of water mass meet a front is set up. The Irish Sea front is a seasonal front that persists from April to September or October each year. Fronts can be areas of high productivity and therefore an important prey zone for seabirds and cetaceans. In the Irish Sea, manx shearwater, guillemot and razorbill distribution have been associated with this front (Beigg & Reid, 1997 in Pollack et al., 1997). Seabirds and cetaceans are often found together when feeding. The cetaceans force fish to the surface, making it easier for seabirds to catch. Distribution patterns of seabirds may change throughout the year as many species are migratory. During the breeding season, the birds reside closer to the colonies and are therefore distributed more

32

abundantly in inshore waters. After breeding some species undergo a moulting process (e.g. guillemots and razorbills). During which the birds are flightless and extremely vulnerable. Cetacean distribution can vary annually also. Certain dolphin species are more common closer to coastal regions in the summer months; this may coincide with calving and inshore movement of prey. Harbour porpoises are widespread in the Irish Sea throughout the year (Pollack et al., 1997). There is a paucity of information on cetacean distribution in the Irish Sea; this is improving in quantity and quality with increased observer numbers and general interest and awareness in this group of animals. A comprehensive review of stranding records from the beginning of the century to 1995 was carried out by Berrow and Rogan (1997) in an attempt to assess possible trends in Irish waters. Stranding records have shown a significant increase since the 1960s. This is thought to be mainly due to increased observations and observers since that time. Most Irish strandings have occurred along the south coast of Ireland and along the west coast, but no seasonal trend was recognised by Berrow and Rogan (1997). The harbour porpoise was the most commonly stranded species, followed by common dolphins and pilot whales. There had been increased levels of strandings of striped dolphins since the 1980s. This is believed to represent a possible increase in water temperature. These stranding records and collected observations are not a definitive representation of cetacean status in Irish waters. However, they are considered a very useful method of long-term monitoring that we have to date. More observer coverage is necessary to carry out accurate monitoring of cetacean status around Ireland. Stranding reports are published annually in The Irish Naturalists’ Journal.

Berrow and Rogan (1997) from their review of past strandings, report that twenty-one species of cetacea have been reported stranded on the Irish coast. Occasional strandings of young and pregnant females around the coast have given a rough indication of the calving season for some species. It has been noticed that there has been an increase in the number of strandings of both white sided dolphin and sperm whales along the Irish coast, the latter since the 1960s. Strandings and sightings are often the only source of information on cetaceans in the wild. They can provide valuable information on trends in distribution or status of living animals. The most important factor in these records is the effort put into their sourcing. Berrow and Rogan (1997), report that the common dolphin was the most frequently recorded dolphin species throughout most of the present century, but the incidence of white-sided dolphin and striped dolphins has been increasing in recent decades. Striped dolphins were mainly stranded along the west and southwest coasts of Ireland. These species are described as warm temperate, tropical species usually found in deep water (Evans, 1980) and an increase in strandings along the Irish coastline may reflect an increase in the mean seawater temperature or the number of warm water incursions; there has also been an increase in the occurrence of some warm temperate fish species off the Irish coast (Quigley et al., 1991). There are not enough records of larger species of cetacean to discern any particular pattern or trend (Berrow & Rogan, 1997).

O’ Brien et al. (In prep.) carried out an examination to investigate the relationship between the distribution of harbour porpoises and the Irish Sea front. Higher numbers of porpoises were found in the frontal region than in non-frontal mixed waters of the Irish Sea. It was thought that the oceanographic characteristics and conditions of the frontal region may be favourable for proliferation of the preferred prey species of the porpoises. O’ Brien et al. (In prep.) describe frontal systems as regions in which there are larger than average horizontal gradients in the physical properties of a water column (as in Le F�vre, 1986). The water to the west of the Irish Sea is stratified; to the east it is mixed and at the interface of the two water-masses, the Irish Sea front exists. The front develops seasonally due to thermal stratification in the Summer and then decomposes from September onwards. Temperature and chlorophyll concentrations are used as indicators to the location of the front. Increased primary productivity is evident at the front, and

33

with this abundant food supply larger links of the food chain are also found: large fish catches, seabird distribution on the surface increases and an increased number of cetaceans are observed. The results from the O’ Brien et al. (In prep.) study showed that the largest proportion of animals were observed in the immediate area of the front, while moderate concentrations occurred on either side. The porpoises were more abundant in the mixed water to the east of the front than in the thermally stratified water to the west of the front. 19.5% of the porpoises recorded in the frontal region during the August 1998 survey were calves. This suggested that a significant proportion of the adults observed in the area may have been lactating females. Higher energy requirements of lactating females can result in increased food consumption. Harbour porpoises have been observed to aggregate after calving during the summer months, when there is a significant rise in the energy requirements of the group. Distribution data on the protected roseate terns has been obtained for the RACER project from the INTERREG Roseate Tern project. The project on roseate terns aims to enhance the conservation of the roseate tern population in the Irish Sea through improved management and by developing an upgraded research and monitoring programme. The roseate tern is protected by the Wildlife Act of 1976. The data was obtained through Birdwatch Ireland for the Irish coast of the RACER area. Effects of Oil on Cetaceans Whales, dolphins and porpoises are generally thought to have the ability to detect and avoid petroleum hydrocarbons. However, there have been cases where these mammals have come in direct contact with oil slicks and have not detected them in time. Direct consumption of contaminated products is quite unlikely except for predatory species; there may be a temporary effect on the feeding efficiency of baleen whales due to the filtering process of food through their baleen plates (these may become temporarily clogged with oil). However, with regard to oil spills, cetaceans are generally classified as low vulnerability species (NOAA, 1992). Effects of Oil on Seabirds See Appendix II for further details of oil impacts on seabirds.

4.7 East and Southeast Irish Coastline The east and southeast coasts have been profiled in the next section (i.e. section 4.7.1). The following text includes summarised information from Boelens et al., 1999. The morphology of the eastern Irish coastline from Drogheda (Co. Dublin) to Carnsore Point (Co. Wexford), is much less indented than that of the southern Irish coastline (see Figure 1). The east coast includes a number of inlets and estuaries of importance to birds, marine life, recreation and shipping. Sandy beaches occupy a large portion of the east coastline, supporting an important tourism industry. Numerous small bays and estuaries are scattered along the south coast, which is moderately sheltered from the prevailing west to southwest winds. On the east coast of Wexford, more than half the length of the coastline is sandy shoreline, the rest is comprised of rock and muddy shores. The south facing coast becomes more rocky and indented with less sandy beaches and more intermittent sections of mud.

34

Figure 1. GIS screenshot of Irish RACER area, displaying some shoreline attributes.

Proximity of the east coast to Britain and Europe has been a major influence in the development of the ports in Dublin and Rosslare harbour. Today, much of the east coast and its hinterland is used intensively for residential, recreational, agricultural and commercial purposes; there are also extensive and important habitats for flora and fauna located along this coastline (Boelens et al., 1999). Over four and a half million tourists visited Ireland from overseas in 1996. It was estimated that in Ireland in 1969, approximately 70% of all tourism activity took place in the coastal zone. In the mid 1990s, it is estimated that more than 260,000 overseas visitors participated annually in water-based activities, representing 29% of the total outdoor activity market. An additional 1.5 million Irish adults participated in water-based activities, giving rise to 29 million day trips and over 1.3 million overnight stays (ESRI, 1996 in Boelens et al., 1999). Given the continued increase in tourism and demographic trends since that time, the coastal zone has become an invaluable resource and a prime centre of attraction to all members of the public. The following account on coastal tourism and recreation in Ireland is extracted from Boelens et al. (1999). There is a shortage of quantitative information on trends in tourism and recreational activities in the coastal areas of Ireland. Insufficient factual information exists on the effects of current levels of tourism and recreation on the coastal environment, including landscapes, habitats, beaches, nearshore waters, resort towns and associated infrastructures. These deficiencies hinder a proper assessment of the existing and future impacts of these activities on the coastal zone. At present, evidence of environmental problems due to coastal recreation is restricted to a few isolated incidents and localities. Nevertheless, there is increasing pressure on coastal areas for recreation purposes. This raises the possibility that, in the absence of assessments of the carrying capacity of particular sites and attractions, and of mechanisms to limit activities where this is clearly warranted, further environmental damage may result. The geographical basis of records maintained by local

35

authorities, the tourism industry and its supporting agencies, is unsuited to the analysis of patterns in tourism and recreation specific to coastal areas. There is considerable scope for the use of Geographical Information Systems (GIS) to provide a means of collating information on coastal amenities, habitats and resources as well as existing developments and current uses. This would provide local authorities with a more holistic view of the coastal zone and facilitate more integrated planning and management, a necessary basis for environmentally sustainable tourism in coastal areas.

Boelens et al. (1999)

4.7.1 Environmental Review of the East and South East coasts of Ireland by County Information for the following descriptive analysis of the environmental characteristics of the Irish coast of the RACER area was taken from the following reports: Nairn et al. (1995), Boelens et al. (1999), Hickie (1997), Hutchinson (1994), and La Tene Maps (1999). The environmental characteristics of the coastline are provided on a county by county basis, with a breakdown of local descriptions provided for the larger stretches of coastline. Emphasis is placed on bird populations, as both diversity and abundance of bird species are regularly used by ecologists as bio-indicators when establishing the ecological profile of areas (also see Appendix VI). Co. Louth The coastline from the boundary at Carlingford Lough to Drogheda is approximately 90km long (Ecopro, 1996). The coastal area will be described from Ballagan Point to Baltray. Within this coastal area, there are five Proposed National Heritage Areas (NHAs) (La Tene Maps, 1999). The coastline is predominantly sandy shore; some of the headlands are composed of rocky substrate (see Figure 2). Dundalk Bay is home to thousands of waders from September to April every year. Dundalk Harbour has a more muddy shoreline with saltmarsh areas also, and is thus an important habitat for wildfowl. Dundalk Port is in constant use by commercial shipping vehicles. The main fishing ports in Co. Louth include Clogherhead, Carlingford, Drogheda and Rathcor/Gyles Quay. The coastal population is 77,930 (Boelens et al., 1999).

36

Figure 2. GIS screenshot of county Louth coastal region, Ballagan Point (in the north) to

Baltray (in the south). Co. Meath This coastline extends from Drogheda to Gormanstown and is a distance of 21km (see Figure 3). Within this coastal zone, there are three proposed NHAs. These areas are important sites for the successful existence of waders and wildfowl. The Boyne Estuary is made up of mudflats and saltmarshes and is of great importance to the traditional mussel fishery, which is harvested during the winter. It provides habitats for wildfowl including: shelduck, wigeon, teal, mallard and brent geese, and for waders including black-tailed godwits and spotted redshank. Large numbers of common scoters are recorded at Laytown and Gormanstown in some years. The Laytown Dunes, a conserved sand dune system, and the Nanny Estuary are designated together as an NHA.

37

Figure 3. GIS screenshot of county Meath coastline, Boyne estuary, Drogheda (in the north) to Gormonston (in the south).

Herring spawning grounds are also found in off the Meath coast in winter. Lobster potting operates from May to September and plaice nursery grounds are present from March to June. Mornington is the main fishing port in the area. The Nanny Estuary is also composed of a smaller area of mudflats; these provide a habitat mainly for the common scoter (sea duck), found feeding there between October and April. This stretch of coastline is not categorised as of Blue Flag importance. Drogheda Port is occupied by commercial shipping throughout the year. The coastal population is 9,437 (Boelens et al., 1999). Co. Dublin The Dublin coastline is approximately 99km long. The coastline from Balbriggan to Bray (Co.Wicklow) is a mixture of rocky, sandy and muddy shore (see Figure 4). The headlands possess a rocky exposure while the more sheltered sections of coastline are sandy with occasional shingle beaches. The estuarine areas are composed of mudflats and saltmarshes. There are seven islands associated with the Dublin coastline, including the North Bull Island in Dublin Bay:

�� Skerries Islands - two (St Patrick’s and Shenick’s);

�� Rockabill; �� Lambay Island;

�� Ireland’s Eye; �� The North Bull Island; �� Dalkey Island.

All of these islands are conserved sites as they are home to numerous sea birds and cliff nesting birds and represent just some of the sixteen proposed NHAs in the Dublin coastal region. Dublin Bay is one of the most important estuaries on the east and southeast coasts of Ireland. It hosts the largest population of breeding seabirds and the largest flock of brent geese on the east and southeast coasts, including very large numbers of waders (27,000). One quarter of the Irish overwintering population of pintails occur here. Skerries Islands support hundreds of sea duck (common scoter) from October to April each year. Rockabill island (off Skerries) often has the largest single breeding

38

colony of roseate terns in north west Europe between May and September. The roseate tern is globally threatened, and is listed in the EU Birds Directive as an Annex I species. Rockabill is an SPA (Special Protection Area) and an RF (Refuge for Fauna). Lambay Island (approximately 5km east of Portraine) and Ireland’s Eye (off Howth Head), with their cliff-faced perimeters, accommodate thousands of species of cliff nesting birds between April and August each year. Lambay Island has the single most important colony of cormorants in Britain and Ireland, and hosts 28% of the Irish population of guillemots. Ireland’s Eye has one of only five gannet colonies in Ireland. The North Bull Island has sites of international importance for wintering waterfowl and as such, is designated as a Ramsar Site, a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve and an SNR (Statutory Nature Reserve). Together with Sandymount Strand and part of the Tolka Estuary, most of Dublin Bay is covered by SPA protection. Dalkey Island is an important roosting site for terns in August and September. Apart from these islands acting as reservoirs for bird life, thousands of seabirds moult and feed in the coastal waters of Dublin and Wicklow every year. Extensive seabird feeding grounds occur off the Kish Bank, extending southwards along the sand banks, which parallel the coasts of Wicklow and Wexford. This area is a major moulting ground for flightless razorbills and guillemots from colonies around the Irish Sea (from July to September). These birds are extremely vulnerable to oil spillage because of their inability to fly, compounded by their poor body condition during the moult. These shallow sandy areas from Dublin to Wexford are important internationally for feeding terns, especially from August to September.

Figure 4. GIS screenshot of county Dublin coastline and islands, from Balbriggan (in the

north) to Bray (at county Wicklow boundary). The Dublin coastline is also an important area for seal populations. The main haul-out locations are at Rockabill Island, St. Patrick’s, Shenick and Colt Islands, and lambay Island and Ireland’s Eye. Lambay Island and Ireland’s Eye are also important pupping sites along the east coast.

39

Dublin has three designated Blue Flag beaches: Portrane, Seapoint and Killiney (as of 1999), designated as such because of their competency in environmental and safety criteria approved by a national jury. The criteria covers the following aspects of management: environmental education and information, environmental management, water quality and safety and services.

Dublin Port is a major commercial and ferry port, and thus has heavy shipping traffic throughout the year. Howth is recognised as a national fishery harbour centre (Brady et al., 1997) and has a large yachting marina. These regions are of significant national economic value. The coastal region is densely populated (population of 798,989; Boelens et al., 1999). The main fishing ports of Dublin and county are Dublin, Howth, Skerries, Dunlaoghaire and Loughshinny. Co. Wicklow The Wicklow coastline from Bray to Arklow Head covers a distance of approximately 61km. Within this short distance, there are nine proposed NHAs (see Figure 5). Wicklow is host to the smallest numbers of breeding seabird colonies on the east coast.

Figure 5. GIS screenshot of county Wicklow coastal region, Bray (in the north) to

Kilmichael Point (in the south). The predominant coastline type is shingle shoreline with sections of rock and sandy shore present in between. Co. Wicklow has two assigned Blue Flag beaches: Greystones (Greystones South) and Arklow (Brittas Bay north and south). Bray Head is a protected area of botanical interest, as well as a suitable site for nesting sea birds between April and August. The Murragh, which consists of almost 15km coastline between Bray Head and Wicklow Head, is home to a variety of wildfowl and waders. The variable substrate composition present there, including sandhills, shingle shoreline, wetland and grassland, makes it a common ground for a large range of species. An important colony of little terns feed in water close to the coast from May to August, around the Kilcoole Newcastle area. Between Wicklow Head and Arklow Head, the NHAs are mainly sand dune systems; these are of botanical interest as well as important nesting sites for bird species such as terns. The Wicklow coastal area is also an important location for plaice nursery grounds, seed

40

mussel fishing, as well as lobster potting between May and September. The coastal population is 76,191 (Boelens et al., 1999). The main fishing ports in the area are Arklow and Greystones. County Wexford The Wexford coastline covers a distance of greater than 264km from Kilmichael Point to the east coast of Waterford Harbour (see Figure 6). The coastal population is 61,892 (Boelens et al., 1999). Within this area there are twenty one proposed NHAs. Estuarine areas of Wexford are important for cormorants in the winter months. Grey seal populations can be found at many locations along the Wexford coastline, primarily at the Saltee Islands, Coningmore Rocks, Blackrock, Carnsore Point and The Raven. The Saltees are important as pupping sites as well as haul-out sites for grey seals. Wexford has four designated Blue Flag beaches: Courtown, Curracloe, Rosslare and Duncannon.

Figure 6. GIS screenshot of county Wexford coastline, from Kilmichael Point (north) to

Waterford Harbour (southwest); Waterford Harbour acts as the divide between Co. Wexford and Co. Waterford.

From Kilmichael Point to Blackwater Head (both situated on the east facing coasts of Wexford; T2566 and T1432 respectively), the coastline is predominantly sandy; sandhills and sand dune systems are the chief criteria of the NHAs designations in this area. Thousands of guillemots and razorbills moult and feed in the inshore waters along this coastal stretch from July to September each year. Wildfowl and sea duck are important between October and April. The wildfowl feed on the coastal grasslands of the Cahore Polders, while the sea duck (common scoter) feed in the inshore waters along the coast. Seed mussel fishing, together with some lobster and whelk potting comprises the inshore fishing activities of the area. All this stretch of Wexford coastline is quite busy during the summer months due to various tourist activities including sailing, angling and the attraction of a clean and scenic coastline. All of the Wexford Harbour area is conserved (SNR and SPA). The harbour is bordered by protected sand dune systems and includes vast areas of conserved saltmarsh. Tens of thousands of

41

birds (predominantly wildfowl and waders) use the sandflats and reclaimed grasslands at the North and South Slobs as feeding grounds, between October and April. The harbour and slobs host the largest single wintering flock of Greenland whitefronted geese in the world, and the reserve also has internationally important numbers for brent geese and a sizeable flock of Bewick’s swan. The Raven is an important sand dune system and a vital roosting area for migratory waterfowl. Raven Point is also an important little tern colony from May to August. The Wexford Wildfowl Reserve (part of the North Slob) and the Raven Point (part of Wexford Harbour) are both designated as SNRs, SPAs and Ramsar sites. The Wexford coastline in general, is an important area for breeding seabirds. Wexford Harbour is very sensitive in terms of amenity. The presence of clean beaches plus the added attraction of water sports (including sailing and windsurfing etc.) mean that from an economic point of view, it is an important area from as early as April through to October. The ferry port at Rosslare Harbour remains active throughout the year. Shellfish cultivation is practised throughout the year on a small scale (i.e. bottom cultivation of mussels, and lobster and whelk potting). Further south around Carnsore Point (the southeastern extremity of Ireland), the coastline becomes more variable from sandy beach, to rocky shore along the headlands, to saltmarsh and estuarine mudflats in the small inlets along the south. The main areas of environmental importance along the south Wexford coastline are Lady’s Island Lake and Tacumshin Lake; both are coastal lagoons and are designated as SPAs. These areas support an extensive bird population, mainly concentrated between September and March. Islands in the coastal lagoon of Lady’s Island Lake hold the largest single breeding colony of terns in Ireland (from May to September). Shore angling at Lady’s Island Lake is common all year. The surrounding coastal waters are important winter spawning grounds for herring. The holiday beaches in the area are occupied from June to September. Boat angling around Tuskar Rock also occurs during this season (Tuskar Rock is situated approximately 10km east north east of Carnsore Point). The Saltee Islands (south of Kilmore Quay) and the Keeragh Islands (Ballyteige Bay) are important NHAs as they are host to both bird and grey seal breeding colonies. The Saltee Islands with their cliff and rocky coastlines are important for cliff nesting birds and are also the location of a grey seal breeding colony (whose numbers are at their highest in September and October). The Great Saltee has one of the largest seabird colonies in Ireland and is of international importance. It hosts a large colony of guillemots and the third largest colony of gannets in Ireland. The Great and Little Saltees are designated as SPAs. Dolphins are also regularly spotted around the Saltees in summer. The Keeragh Islands are an important breeding colony for cormorants and other cliff nesting birds. The greatest number of waders and wildfowl occur between September and March at Bannow Bay and around Ballyteige Bay. Ballyteige Burrow includes an extensive dune system containing a number of rare plants. The saltmarsh in Bannow Bay, further west, is sensitive throughout the year. The area is quite sensitive both in terms of its ecology as well as its economic worth. Kilmore Quay is an important fishing port, as well as providing leisure boat trips to and from the Saltee Islands during the summer months. Kilmore Quay has also earned the name of a Blue Flag Marina, which reiterates the sensitivity value of the area. Rough seabed present around the Keeragh Islands provides good spawning ground for herring during the winter. Oyster trestles in The Cull (Ballyteige Bay) together with clam cultivation and a public cockle fishery in Bannow Bay support the aquaculture industry of the area. Some lobster, crawfish and whelk potting is common from May to September. Hook Head is an important site for shore angling throughout the year.

42

The main fishing ports in the area are: Kilmore Quay; Wexford; Duncannon/St Helens; Courtown; Fethard & Slade; Rosslare, and Ardmore. Co. Waterford The Waterford coastline covers a distance of over 170km from Waterford Harbour to Youghal Harbour (see Figure 7). The coastal population is 76,501 (Boelens et al., 1999). Within this area, there are eight proposed NHAs. Waterford is important for breeding seabirds and large concentrations occur at Dunmore East, Helvick Head, and Ram Head. The area has four estuaries, of importance for wildfowl and waders: Waterford Harbour, Dungarvan, Tramore and Youghal (partly in Cork; dealt with in section on Co. Cork). Estuarine areas are important for cormorants in the winter months.

Figure 7. GIS screenshot of county Waterford coastline, from Ram Head (in the west) to

Waterford Harbour (in the east). Waterford Harbour, with its inter-tidal mudflats, is home to several thousand waders every winter, and is largely protected due to its wildfowl and wader population. Species found include oystercatchers, ringed plovers, curlews, bar-tailed godwits, redshanks, turnstones and common gulls. Small numbers of great crested grebes, brent geese, wigeon and red-breasted mergansers also occur. Dunmore east is conserved due to its cliff nesting population of birds (kittiwake colonies), present there from November to August. The inner harbour is mainly mudflats and saltmarshes, with the exception of a sandy section on the east coastline of the harbour (i.e. on the Wexford side at Duncannon). The outer harbour displays a rocky coastline around Hook Head (Co. Wexford) to the east, and to the west on the Waterford side, where Swines Head and Brownstown Head also exhibit a mainly rock and cliff coastline. These shorelines to the west of the harbour are important sites for cliff nesting birds. Waterford Harbour is an active area throughout the year, with commercial shipping at Waterford Port, a car ferry from Ballyhack to Passage East, sailing and wind surfing between April and

43

October. Dunmore East is the most important fishing port in the south east of the country (based on 1998 fish landing figures supplied by DOMNR its tonnage value was over 11,000 tonnes with a monetary value of close to 7 million Irish punts). The other main fishing ports in the county are Dungarvan, Helvick, Waterford and Stradbally. Herring spawn in the harbour during the winter and bottom cultivation of mussels is also carried out. Tramore Bay and Back Strand are composed of a sandy outer bay and a muddy estuarine system. The Back Strand area is a protected sand dune system. The bay has estuarine mudflats and saltmarshes (with Spartina), important for waders and wildfowl, especially brent geese as well as eelgrass (Zostera) beds. Some shelduck, mallard, wigeon and teal also feed in the area. Oystercatchers, grey plovers, black-tailed godwits, bar-tailed godwits, redshanks, greenshanks and dunlin all feed in the mudflat areas. These waders and wildfowl are particularly vulnerable from August to November. The shoreline from Tramore Strand to Youghal Harbour is mostly rocky, with some occasional small sandy beaches located along the coast; the exception being Dungarvan Harbour, which has a large sandy foreshore and mudflats in the backshore. The rocky section of the coastline is suitable for cliff nesting birds such as gulls, fulmars, auks and shags from May to August and choughs are present here throughout the year. Clonea Bay and Ballyvoyle Head just to the east of Dungarvan are suitable habitats for brent geese from February to April, seaduck during winter, and diving birds in spring. Dungarvan Bay, with its wide expanses of mudflats and Zostera beds, is of international importance as it supports the largest flocks (~20,000) of wintering waders (from September to April) in the county. Species found include wigeon, shelduck, oystercatchers, curlews, black-tailed godwits, redshanks and dunlin. Great crested grebes, cormorants, shags, goldeneyes and red breasted mergansers are present in the Channel. Dungarvan Harbour is internationally important for brent goose, black tailed and bar tailed godwit, and the largest flock of shelduck in Ireland. The stretches of cliff in between the estuarine areas provide habitats for breeding seabirds and choughs. Co. Waterford has three Blue Flag beaches: Dunmore East (Counsellor’s Strand), Bonmahon and Clonea. Killer whale and porpoise are frequently observed in waters close to Helvick Head. Ardmore Bay and Whiting Bay to the east of Youghal are important sites for diving birds (Ardmore Bay in winter and Whiting Bay in spring). Ram Head, between these two bays, is an important location for seal pups in September and October. Dungarvan is also a busy commercial port, a popular sailing area and oyster trestles are cultivated there throughout the year. Co. Cork Cork, the largest county in Ireland, has a coastline that extends for 1,118km along the south coast (see Figure 8). The Cork coastal region has a dense population of 271,649 (Boelens et al., 1999). Cork county possesses forty-two proposed NHAs, the highest number for any of the coastal counties in Ireland. The coastline type is enormously variable, and therefore becomes a highly sensitive section of the country in terms of oil impacts. Cork has six designated Blue Flag beach locations, two of which are in the RACER area: Youghal (Front Strand, Claycastle) and Shanagarry (Garryvoe). Cork is an important area for breeding seabirds. Estuarine areas are important for cormorants in the winter months.

44

Figure 8. GIS screenshot of county Cork; the limit of the RACER area is at Youghal, on the

east of the screenshot, where the RACER boundary (blue line) intersects the Irish coast.

The shoreline is mainly rocky between Youghal and Cork Harbour, apart from the two Blue Flag beaches previously mentioned. Large numbers of waders and wildfowl reside at Youghal Harbour (9,000). Ballymacoda, which is mainly sandy and shingle shoreline with some grassland and mudflats, is an important site for wintering waders and wildfowl, including: golden plover (15,000), lapwing (8,000), black tailed godwit (2,800) and dunlin (4,200). Migrating terns are also found off Ballymacoda from August to September. Knockadoon Head, southwest of Youghal Harbour, is a site of regional importance for its geological interest. Capel Island and Knockadoon are both designated as SNRs. Both Ballymacoda Estuary and Balycotton Bay are designated SPAs and Ramsar sites. Ballycotton Bay is a shallow, sandy, eastwards facing bay with three shallow lagoons separated from the sea behind sand bars and a gravel bank. The largest of these lagoons, Ballycotton Lake, was formerly completely open to the sea. The area is extremely attractive to wading birds, both for feeding and roosting. Species of waders found in the lagoons and inter-tidal sands include: black-tailed godwits, bar-tailed godwits, redshanks, greenshanks, ringed plover, sanderling; smaller numbers of spotted redshanks, ruffs, curlew sandpipers, little stints and wood and green sandpipers also occur. Wildfowl species include: whooper swan, Bewick’s swan, mute swan, wigeon, teal, gadwall, mallard, shoveler, tufted duck, pochard, red-breasted merganser, with smaller numbers of pintail, goldeneye, American wigeon and green-winged teal. Sandy sections are also present at Ballybranigan, but apart from this, the shoreline remains rocky with a lot of cliff line exposure as far as Cork Harbour, where the coastal land type is mainly conserved saltmarsh and mudflat. Cork Harbour, one of the finest natural harbours in the world, consists of deep outer channels, with extensive areas of mudflats around Lough Mahon, the Douglas Estuary and the North Channel, Lough Beg, Saleen, Rostellan and Whitegate. The entire Cork Harbour area is of major international importance with respect to waders (20,000) and wildfowl numbers (5,000), mainly present between September and April, and supported by these mudflat areas. Cork Harbour hosts

45

the largest number of wintering birds of any area on the east and south east coasts of Ireland. Cork Harbour is designated as both an SPA and a Ramsar site. Great crested grebes are found off Lough Mahon and Aghada in the winter. Little grebes occur at Douglas Estuary, Rostellan Lake and Cuskinny. Shelduck, wigeon, teal and mallard are found throughout, while tufted duck, goldeneye and red-breasted merganser also occur. Cork Harbour is particularly important for waders such as black-tailed godwit and redshank. Flocks of up to 5,000 golden plover, 2,000-5,000 lapwings, 1,000-2,500 dunlins and 500-1,500 black-tailed godwits can be found at Douglas, Lough Mahon, Glounthaune and the North Channel in the winter. During the spring migration of whimbrel, when they return to the harbour, over 2,000 fly over Cobh, from mid-April to early May. Great crested grebe occur in nationally important numbers in Cork Harbour in winter. Great Island Channel within Cork Harbour is a conserved mudflat and saltmarsh site and is also very important for wildfowl and wintering shelduck (in quite significant numbers 1,500; one of the largest flocks of shelduck in the country). Adult grey seals are occasionally spotted between Ballycotton and Power Head to the east of Cork Harbour. Common seals and bottlenose dolphins are frequently sighted in the harbour. Aquaculture is practised at Youghal i.e. extensive mussels and an oyster farm (La Tene, 1998). Important herring spawning grounds are located along the south coast and are generally active during the Autumn, off Ballycotton Island. The main fishing ports in the RACER section of the Cork coastline are Ballycotton and Youghal. Cork Harbour has great significance in the water based tourism industry, with sailing, windsurfing, shore angling and water skiing occurring practically throughout the year.

4.8 Welsh coastline Situated on the western British coastline, Wales has a maximum north/south length of approximately 140 miles. Its 1,600km coastline is interesting and varied (see Figure 9). Many inlets, beaches, peninsulas and cliffs are scattered along its shores. Cardigan Bay is the biggest bay in the region and Anglesy in the north, is the largest island but by no means detached, it is connected to the mainland by road and rail bridges, (http://tourism.wales.gov.uk/index2.html). Dune systems are more capacious along the northern shores of Cardigan Bay than on the southern shores, especially predominant around Anglesey.

46

Figure 9. GIS screenshot of Welsh RACER coastal area, with some coastal attributes. The Welsh coastline is meeting point for many estuaries connecting with the Irish Sea; these estuaries are ecologically diverse and are important breeding and nesting sites for many marine and coastal wildlife species. The estuaries are also important habitats for both migrating and over-wintering birds. The cliff sections are very important habitats for seabirds, some which are of the very few remaining colonies in Britain. The cliff coastline also possesses diverse maritime vegetation which is classified botanically as being among the most species rich cliff sites in Britain. Cardigan Bay has some of the least polluted coastal waters of the Welsh coastline, and is home to a resident population of bottlenose dolphins (Barne et al., 1995). The southern Welsh coastline is an important habitat for seals. The most important seal breeding areas are on the north Pembrokeshire coast between Strumble and St. David’s Head and the islands of Skomer and Ramsey (Kiely et al., 1999). Tourism and leisure are important contributors to the Welsh economy and are a major source of employment. The following section on tourism and leisure has been extracted from the Coastal Directories Series on Region 12; Margam to Little Orme (Barne et al., 1995). More than seven million residential holidaymakers visit Wales annually with an extra one million day visitors during the summer months. More than 60% of this seven million go to the coastal environments of Wales. A variety of leisure activities take place along the Welsh coastline including: walking, birdwatching, golfing, camping and climbing. The Gower Peninsula is important for tourism in the southeast of Wales, having a high concentration of caravan/camping sites and rural car parks, and many visitors as a result of its proximity to the main urban centres of south Wales and the M4. Rhosilly Down on the peninsula is a popular area for hang gliding and paragliding. Further west, a major concentration of leisure activities is located around the tourist centres of Tenby and Saundersfoot. This high density of leisure land-use decreases slightly around the Pembrokeshire National Park coastline and into the southern section of Cardigan Bay; but the National Park coastline is popular with visitors for

47

walking and beach recreation. The Pembrokeshire Coast Path is the only National Trail in the region and extends from Amroth to Cardigan. Much of the west Wales coast of Dyfed and Gwynedd is rugged and undeveloped, but there are significant tourist areas. These include (in Cardigan Bay): Aberporth, New Quay, Aberaeron, Aberystwyth, Borth, Tywyn, Barmouth, Harlech, Porthmadog, Criccieth, Pwllheli and Abersoch. There is a large holiday camp (Starcoast World) between Pwllheli and Criccieth, major new tourism centres are planned for Harlech, Barmouth and Tywyn, and Barmouth has a new leisure centre. Walking and camping are popular activities on the Lleyn peninsula, where remote lengths of coast remain free of leisure infrastructure. The beaches of Caernarfon Bay and Anglesey have all attracted leisure developments. A major and regionally important tourist area is located at Llandudno on Conwy Bay, in the north-east corner of the region. This resort, along with Colwyn Bay to the east, serves many visitors from the industrial towns of north-west England, and is a significant traditional seaside recreational area. Great Orme is a popular Country Park and attracts many visitors, particularly for walking. The sea cliffs of Gower, Pembrokeshire, Lleyn, Holy Island and the Great Orme are popular climbing areas, but codes of conduct generally restrict this activity to outside the bird breeding season. Many marinas are under construction or planned in this region. Sixty-three affiliated sailing or yacht clubs are listed for the region by the Royal Yachting Association and there are numerous other water-sports clubs, particularly along the sheltered coastal areas such as Swansea Bay, Milford Haven, Carmarthen Bay, Tremadoc Bay, Abersoch to Pwllheli and the Menai Strait, where the Welsh National Water Sports Centre is based. Several other informal sailing groups use ad hoc beach hut facilities during the summer months. Casual surfing, canoeing and wind-surfing take place from many of the region’s beaches and there has been a dramatic increase in jet-skiing, particularly in the Swansea Bay/Mumbles area and off the Pembrokeshire coast. Scuba diving is a widespread activity on the west coast, particularly off the Gower Peninsula, Pembrokeshire and the shores of the Lleyn peninsula and Anglesey. Angling takes place from the shore and at sea. 4.8.1 Environmental Review of the Welsh Coastline A detailed account of the Welsh coastline is provided in the following section (summarised from Smith et al., 1995; Barne et al., 1995; CCW, 1999; and partly from an interpretation of sensitivity maps of the Welsh coastline JNCC, 1990). The coastline is divided into twelve separate areas and an individual environmental description provided for each area. Anglesey The general coastal character from Bangor to Holyhead is rocky with a lot of cliff shoreline (see Figure 10). Sandy sections of shoreline are found in more sheltered bays and inlets with more muddy and silty environments in the very sheltered conduits between islands (i.e. between Anglesey and the mainland and between Anglesey and Holyhead). This area provides suitable habitats for wader and wildfowl populations and the cliff sections support breeding seabirds. Occasional saltmarsh environments occur in these sheltered areas. All of the following localities mentioned are designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and some have additional designations.

48

Figure 10. GIS screenshot of Anglesey and Holyhead coastline. The Arfon and Aberconwy region is a vast intertidal area with a large range of habitats, from exposed sands to sheltered mudflats. Freshwater streams flow over the region adding to its diversity. This region is very important for wintering waders and wintering duck. The sands are nationally important for moulting great crested grebes and red breasted mergansers and regionally important for shelduck. Fryars Road shore in the Menai Strait, has interesting interstitial fauna and is a classic site for a range of marine fauna. This site is frequently used for teaching and research purposes. Fedw Fawr on the north facing shores of Anglesey, close to Penmon Point, has an unusual maritime heathland with interesting associated flora. Breeding seabirds found here include black guillemots. Puffin Island, less than a kilometer off Penmon Point (on the eastern side of Anglesey), is noted for its breeding seabird population. Nesting birds are found both on the sea cliffs and on the open grassland areas. Seabirds here include: auks, puffins, guillemots, razorbill, cormorant, shag, fulmar and gulls. The breeding puffin numbers have suffered serious decline. This island is also used as a haul-out site for grey seals. Much of the north coast of Anglesey is part of the National Trust and parts are designated as Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). There are many coastal sections of geological importance also. Cemlyn Bay, on the north western coast of Anglesey has a tidal lagoon on the inner part of the bay, enclosed by a ridge of shingle, forming a ‘bay head barrier’ of storm beach shingle. A saltmarsh environment is present around the lagoon. This interesting site supports rare plant species including sea kale (Crambe maritima), sea radish (Raphanus maritimus), brackish water-crowfoot (Ranunculus baudotii) and Ruppia maritima. Colonies of common, arctic and sandwich terns breed on low-lying islands in the main lagoon. The number of breeding pairs vary annually, however, the site is particularly important for sandwich tern and it often supports greater than 1% of the British breeding population. This site is also important for wintering wildfowl.

49

The Skerries Islands situated a couple of kilometers northwest of Carmel Head, north of Holyhead Bay, are important sites for seabirds and grey seals. The northern regions of Porth Swtan (or Church Bay) is designated for its botanical interest, with rare and nationally important plant species occurring. The Beddmanarch-Cymyran region between Holyhead and Anglesey possesses a diverse range of habitats including: sandbanks, mudflat and saltmarsh. Many passage and wintering waterfowl are attracted to this site and a number of seabirds breed in the area. Eelgrass beds are present on the mudflats and the area is noted for its botanical and marine biological interest. Holy Island coast is designated for its botanical, ornithological and geological interest. The coastline possesses interesting coastal cliff flora and some rare plant species. A large population of nationally rare annual rockrose (Tuberaria guttata) occurs along this section of coastline (at Pant-Yr-Hyman), and this is one of nine British localities for the species. Seven of its other recorded localities are found on Anglesey and the remaining one on the Lleyn Peninsula. Chough breed on the sea cliffs of the area and the cliffs are known to support the largest auk breeding communities in north Wales, with colonies of guillemot, razorbill and puffin. The Rhoscolyn coast is of marine biological importance and represents a classic area for the study of marine algae. Ynys Feirig (near Rhosneigr) has the largest breeding tern colony in Wales. Rhosneigr reefs have a unique tidal lagoon with a rich flora and fauna assemblage. Tywyn Aberffraw is a large and intact calcareous dune system. It has rich associated vegetation communities and many rare plant species occur. Llyn Coron landward of Tywyn Aberffraw has an interesting aquatic community and several rare plant species as well as a diverse invertebrate fauna. Much of the designated coastline in this region of Anglesey is selected for its marine biological importance. Variable exposed and sheltered rocky and sandy shoreline provide many suitable habitats for a rich and diverse biological community. Cetaceans and seals have also been sighted off the western and north western shores of Anglesey. Extensive sand dune systems occur in this region located at the back of the larger sandy shoreline segments. Primarily to the southwest, on the Isle of Anglesey, several sand dune systems exist, of which Newborough Warren is the largest (an NNR) with more than 1,000ha of wind-blown sand (Barne et al., 1995). This site is noted for its biological (including: botanical, invertebrate and ornithological), geological and geomorphological interest. The intertidal areas on both sides of the Menai Strait possess diverse marine biology. Ynys Gorad Goch, a small island located between the Menai suspension bridge and the Britannia bridge, supports a large colony of breeding terns. Foryd Bay, situated at the southern end of the Menai Strait on the Welsh coastline is a large intertidal mudflat and saltmarsh region and with its diverse biological assemblage, is locally important for waders and wildfowl. Dwarf eelgrass (Zostera noltii) is present near the mouth of the bay. There are four blue flag awards given to the Isle of Anglesey, namely Newborough Llandwyn Trearddur Bay and Porth Dafarch (Tidy Britain Group, 1999 awards). These beaches attract significant numbers of tourists each year and are popular at off peak season also, making them vulnerable all year round. Lleyn Peninsula Much of the shoreline of the Lleyn Peninsula is rocky, with some long stretches of mud and shingle shoreline further north along the promontory and some sandy bays in the south (see Figure 11). The cliff sections of the peninsula are important habitats for seabirds.

50

Figure 11. GIS screenshot of Lleyn Peninsula coastline including Tremadog Bay. Morfa Dinlle on the west coast of the Lleyn Peninsula has rich sand dune and shingle plant communities. It is of geomorphological interest as it is one of the last active drift-alligned gravel ridge systems in western Britain. The shingle beach supports one of the largest populations of breeding ringed plover in Gwynedd, and chough feed on the dune grasslands. Dinas Dinlle just south of Morfa Dinlle, is of geomorphological interest with its Late Pleistocene glacial deposits. The Penrhyn Glas coastline (specifically Carreg Y Llam) is the most important seabird nesting site in north Wales. The northwest facing cliffs are up to 100m high and support nesting auks, guillemots in particular. Razorbills and kittwakes nest in large numbers also. Other breeding seabirds found here include: fulmar, shag, cormorant, herring gull and chough. Grey seals frequent this site also. Porth Dinllaen, located almost midway along the western coastline of the Lleyn Peninsula, has a wide range of marine intertidal habitats including: exposed and sheltered rocky shore, large rock pools, beds of eelgrass (Zostera marina), sand and cliff shoreline. At the head of the peninsula, rocky shores predominate, well weathered from wind and wave action however some smaller sandy inlets do exist where shelter is provided. The Glannau Aberdaron region of coastline (occupying the south-western tip of the peninsula) is of national importance due to its botanical, ornithological and geological interests. Breeding choughs are especially important in the area. The coastal heath supports the scarce annual rock rose (Tuberaria guttata). This is the only occurrence of the species on mainland Britain; all of the other occurrences of this plant are on Anglesey as mentioned earlier. Bardsey Island is a nationally important site, with interesting maritime vegetation. The island is situated on a migratory route and a bird observatory has been in operation here for many years. The main breeding species is manx shearwater. Other species include: guillemot, razorbill and some storm petrel, kittiwake and chough. This island is also a popular site for grey seals. The Gwylan Islands on the south-eastern end of Aberdaron Bay (at the south-western tip of the peninsula) are important sites for breeding puffins, breeding populations of cormorant have also

51

been significant; razorbills and guillemots nest in small numbers. These islands are a regular haul out site for grey seals. The coastal cliff-line of Myndd Penarfynydd supports breeding chough, these birds feed on the surrounding maritime heathlands. Porth Neigwl or Hell’s Mouth is an area important for its geological and geomorphological interest. Porth Ceiriad on the south eastern tip of the peninsula is selected as an SSSI for its botanical, ornithological and geological interest. A lot of species of heather and gorse and heath vegetation are present here. The area is important for breeding and feeding chough. A large auk colony of guillemots and razorbills is present on the cliffs. This is the largest auk colony in north Wales. Tremadog Bay This area is quite sheltered from direct exposure to predominant weather (see Figure 12). The coastline is composed of unconsolidated material mainly shingle and sand and some small estuarine areas with muddy/silty environments. There is some cliff exposure present on the southern facing shores however on the western facing shore in the Porthmadog region a predominance of sandy shoreline and saltmarsh environments is observed. Sand dune systems become extensive along the west facing shores of Tremadog Bay in the Harlech region. The eastern region of Tremadog Bay is an important habitat for bird species. Pwellheli Yacht Haven on the west of the bay is a blue flag marina (1999 awards).

Figure 12. GIS screenshot of Tremadog Bay. Pen Benar situated in St Tudwal’s Road bay in the west of Tremadog Bay, is a site of vertical cliff sections and foreshore exposures of geological interest. Most of Tremadog Bay is designated under SSSIs, selected for geological or geomorphological interest (e.g. Glanllynnau, with Late Devensian glacial deposits and Criccieth with Pleistocene deposits). Some of the coastal sections are suitable breeding grounds for seabirds and duck species. Morfa Bychan, Morfa Harlech and Morfa Dyffryn are vast estuarine environments with large sand dune systems, saltmarshes and mudflats. Morfa Bychan is biologically diverse. There is a dune

52

system present here with a rich dune vegetation including: sand couch (Elymus farctus), prickly saltwort (Salsola kali), marram grass (Ammophila arenaria) and burnet rose (Rosa pimpinellifolia). Morfa Harlech is an extensive area of estuary, mudflat, saltmarsh, sand dunes and dune grassland of considerable biological value. The southern sections of Traeth Bach support large flocks of wintering duck including: mallard, teal, wigeon, pintail and shelduck and wildfowl. The area has a rich invertebrate fauna. At Morfa Dyffryn a similar environment exists, i.e. that of sand dune, saltmarsh and estuary. This area has interesting flora and is a popular site for waders and some wintering duck. Barmouth The estuary of the Afon Mawddach river meets Cardigan Bay at Barmouth (see Figure 13). It has an extensive saltmarsh environment which provides suitable habitat for important bird species. This saltmarsh environment is also supported by large expanses of sand flats. The estuary is protected on the south by Fairbourne Spit, a sand and shingle spit. Barmouth, a popular seaside town with a sheltered boat harbour, lies on the north side of the estuary. Although the Mawddach is predominantly a sandy estuary, it has extensive areas of muddy shore with a rich infaunal assemblage. The saltmarsh and reedbed areas of the estuary attract many bird species. Between this and the Dyfi estuary the main composition is shingle shore with some cliff face.

Figure 13. GIS screenshot of Barmouth coastal region with Aberdyfi to the south. The Tonfanau to Friog coast is north-west facing and moderately exposed to wave action. The mixed sediment shore of boulder, cobble, gravel and sand is typical of this part of Cardigan Bay. This coastline possesses a diversity of marine flora and fauna as well as its coastal area supporting otter, grey seal, harbour porpoise, common dolphin and bottlenose dolphin species. Broadwater north of Aberdovey/Aberdyfi, is a tidal lagoon habitat of considerable biological interest. Saltmarsh, shingle spit, mudflats, pools, reedbeds etc.. all contribute to its biological diversity and interest. The shingle spit supports breeding terns. Common reed (Phragmites communis) occur on the river islands within Broadwater and on the shore of the lagoon; these

53

environments attract breeding birds such as coot and sedge warbler. The mudflats support large numbers of wintering duck, waders and gulls. Aberdyfi This small inlet, situated on the shores of Cardigan Bay and a short distance north of Aberstwyth, is home to a wide variety of estuarine wildlife including many bird species (see Figure 14). The river Dyfi meets Cardigan Bay here at Aberdyfi. Its sand and mud flats support an abundance of invertebrate life, which acts as a basis for its rich range of marine species. The Aberdyfi coastline is backed up by dune systems which are believed to be progressing northwards. A storm beach is present composed mainly of boulders and other materials such as eroded glacial deposits washed up by long shore drift. Cardigan Bay is an important marine environment and has some of the least polluted coastal waters in Wales (Barne et al., 1995). The Dyfi area is an SSSI, a National Nature Reserve (NNR), a Ramsar site (Wetland of International Importance) and a UNESCO (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation) Biosphere reserve. Part of the Dyfi estuary (Ynys-hir) is a RSPB (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds) reserve, one of three located along the Welsh coast. The other two are located on Grassholm and Ramsey Islands. The Holocene bog (Cors Fochno) is an important environment for bird, plant and insect life and is a coastal NNR. Hen Afon Leri is also an SSSI; a complex of important habitats around the old river mouth of the Afon Leri river, supporting rich flora and insect fauna.

Figure 14. GIS screenshot of Aberdyfi. Borth to New Quay This stretch of coastline alternates between rock, shingle and sandy shore (see Figure 15). It is very exposed and has a dynamic character with sediment constantly being moved and replaced by strong winds and wave activity. There is a rather low diversity of species along this section of coastline due to the harsh changing nature of the environment. However one species which is prevalent here is a reef building polychaete worm Sabellaria alveolata (Cunningham et al., 1984, in Smith et al., 1995). Along this section of coastline there are nine SSSIs; an important section of coastline due to

54

its varied plants and invertebrate species as well as its ecological importance (seabirds and grey seals) and interesting geology. New Quay is also designated as a Blue Flag beach (1999 awards).

Figure 15. GIS screenshot of Borth (in the north) to New Quay (in the south). New Quay to St. David’s Head This coastline is predominantly rocky with extensive cliff exposure, with few intermittent sandy shores (see Figure 16). It is quite exposed to the Atlantic/Celtic Sea influence justifying its substrate type. Two rivers running off into south Cardigan Bay from the coastline at Cardigan and New Port (the Teifi and Nyfer rivers respectively) form biologically important shorelines. The rocky shoreline and extensive cliff exposure support rich maritime vegetation and provide important habitats for large populations of seabirds. The small islands just off the coast at St. David’s Head, namely Ramsey Island and the Bishops and Clerks Islands are composed of igneous rock and are well exposed to wind and wave action. These islands are designated as SSSIs. The Bishops and Clerks Islands are designated SSSIs due to their diverse marine biological and ornithological interests and also the foreshore and sublittoral habitats are subject to the most wave and tidal action of the south west coast of Britain. Ramsay Island is important for its seabird populations (RSPB reserve), sea-cliff vegetation and its grey seal numbers (the grey seal population being the largest breeding colony in south west Britain). Many rare plant species and some rare terrestrial invertebrates (including two rare species of moth) are found on Ramsay. St. David’s Whitesands beach is a Blue Flag beach and Newgale beach in St. Bride’s Bay is also designated.

55

Figure 16. GIS screenshot of New Quay to St. David’s Head, including St. Bride’s Bay to the

southwest. St. David’s Head to Milford Haven St. David’s peninsula coast is an SSSI. It has a rich and diverse vegetation and numerous rare species. The caves scattered along the coastline are home to many breeding grey seals and the cliffs home to several pairs of breeding choughs. Between St. David’s Head and Milford Haven is St. Bride’s Bay (see Figure 17). The shorelines of this bay are mainly rocky with occasional stretches of sand beach on the western facing shore. These beaches are bounded on each end by rock or cliff segments of coastline. There is a diverse range of habitats along in this region as a result of its varied coastline composition, together with an interesting array of marine wildlife and vegetation. The gold and scarlet coral (Balanophyllia regia) is found in this region and the area actually denotes the northern limit of this invertebrate species. Skomer Island a kilometer or so off St. Bride’s peninsula is a designated marine nature reserve (also an NNR and an SPA) for its unique marine species and habitats. Skomer contains the largest concentration of breeding seabirds in England and Wales (approximately 250,000; including greater than 160,000 pairs of Manx Shearwater). Large numbers of grey seals breed here also. The island has many rare floral and faunal species. Grassholm is another important bird habitat (an RSPB reserve and an SPA). It supports the largest colony of North Atlantic gannets in England and Wales, and is one of the four largest in the world (approximately 8% of the world population breed here). The Marloes Sands and Gateholm are situated on the south-west facing shores of the St. Bride’s peninsula. High south facing cliffs here support a well developed region of coastal scrub and its associated invertebrates. Breeding birds such as chough, raven and kestrel are present here. The island of Skokholm situated a couple of kilometers south-west of St Bride’s peninsula is also an SSSI and an SPA. It holds internationally important numbers of seabirds. The island has been recorded as having twenty five nationally rare insect species. It also possesses a rich maritime vegetation and shores of marine biological interest. From Nolton Haven (St Bride’s Bay) to St Ann’s Head (at the mouth of Milford Haven) there are ten SSSIs. Much of this region is designated (as SSSI) due to geological importance.

56

Figure 17. GIS screenshot of coastline from St. David’s Head to Milford Haven. Milford Haven From Dale Point to West Angle Bay (inclusive of the Milford Haven inlet), there are fifteen SSSIs. This estuarine system is classified as one of the best ria systems in Great Britain. Even though it is the site of a major oil terminal, it still retains much of its natural beauty and wildlife importance (Barne et al., 1995). The mouth of the estuary has mostly a rocky shoreline with some shingle interfaces. Progressing deeper into the waterway, the coastline becomes more muddy and silty in character, with many saltmarshes backing the numerous inlets that exist within the estuary (see Figure 18). This coastline type is very suitable for marine life, and Milford Haven is known to support large seabird colonies.

57

Figure 18. GIS screenshot of Milford Haven coastline with the Pembrokeshire coastline in

the south. The Gann estuary, a small estuary near Dale (on the northern shore close to the mouth of the Haven), contains nationally scarce southern glasswort (Salicornia pusilla). A diverse invertebrate assemblage present here, supports a wide variety of wading birds. The uppermost reaches of the Haven (Western and Eastern Cleddau rivers region) possess extensive saltmarsh and mudflat environments which support thousands of wintering wildfowl and waders. These rivers flowing into the Haven possess very important biological shorelines. Nationally scarce glasswort is also found in the saltmarsh regions at the junction of the Cresswell and Carew rivers. Fourteen percent of the Haven’s wintering waterfowl population feed on the invertebrates and plants of this region. A vast proportion of the southern shores of Milford Haven are important habitats for passage and wintering waders and wildfowl. There are two beds of nationally scarce eelgrass (Zostera angustifolia) present in Angle Bay, close to the mouth of the Haven (on the southern shore). West Angle Bay, situated on the southern shore of the Haven (at the mouth), is one of the richest sites for marine flora and fauna in south and west Wales. Two Mediterranean species: the starfish (Asterina phylactica) and the ostracod (Aurila arborescens, microscopic bivalve, subclass of class Crustacea) are found here, at their northern limits. Neyland Yacht Harbour is a Blue Flag marina (1999 awards). An aquaculture site is present at Pembroke dock for the purpose of salmon fish farming. The lease is for 20 years from 9th February 1996 (Appendix I). South Pembrokeshire (Castlemartin peninsula) There are four SSSIs along the coastline from Sheep Island (at the mouth of Milford Haven) to Lydstep (near the western approaches to Carmarthen Bay). The south Pembrokeshire coastline is quite undulatory with many small sandy bays and inlets. The promontories between are mainly exposed rocky shoreline. There are long stretches of cliff along the coast, with sand dunes backing the sandy sections of shore (see Figure 19). This area exhibits rich marine community diversity and supports abundant birdlife. Broomhill Burrows exhibit the largest sand dune system in

58

Pembrokeshire. Castlemartin limestone cliffs support a diverse rare plant assemblage and this is a very important section of coastline for coastal birds, possessing the largest concentrations of breeding seabirds on the Pembrokeshire mainland. The insect assemblage is also abundant, including the presence of the carabid beetle (Nebria complanata). A wide range of nationally and internationally important habitats and species are present at Stackpole (a designated NNR). The coastal environment of the region is varied, with numerous caves and arches, limestone cliffs, crevices, blow holes, sandy bays, grass and heathland and a freshwater lake system; each of these environments possessing a diverse marine flora and fauna. Lydstep is designated as a Blue Flag beach (Blue Flag awards, 1999).

Figure 19. GIS screenshot of south Pembrokeshire coastline. Carmarthen Bay and Burry Inlet Caldy Island marks a clear boundary between the southern Pembrokshire coastline and Carmarthen Bay. This coastal island is predominated by a rocky exposed coast and cliff faces. St Margaret’s Island is an important site for birds. It contains 3% of the total British cormorant population. Other breeding seabirds found on the island include: razorbill, black-headed gull, kittiwake and shag. The Carmarthen Bay region is mainly composed of vast sandy beaches to the north and north east, with the exception of the muddy/silty estuaries running into it. These include the Carmarthen estuary (a three river system fed by the Taf, Tywi and Gwendraeth rivers) and the Burry Inlet; to the west the shoreline is more consolidated with mainly rocky shoreline and occasional sandy stretches (see Figure 20). The Tenby and Saundersfoot cliffs in west Carmarthen Bay, support diverse sea-cliff vegetation and some rare plant species. A rare species of snail is found on the Tenby cliffs (Theba pisana). Much of Carmarthen Bay is environmentally designated due to geological importance. The Pendine and Laugharne Burrows constitute the largest spit and sand dune system in west Wales. This region contains rare plant and invertebrate species and supports a variety of birds, including over-wintering and breeding waterfowl and warblers. A well established heronry is present around the Craig Ddu and Wharley Point region (situated within the three river estuary which feeds into the bay); two rare snail species also exist here. The Pembrey coast possesses a rich plant community, including the rare fen orchid. A rare strandline beetle is also found here.

59

The Carmarthen and Burry inlets provide vast areas of suitable habitat (sand dunes and extensive saltmarsh in both regions) for large populations of waders and wildfowl. The Burry Inlet is protected by Ramsar status and is also an SPA. One of the ten largest sand dune systems in Great Britain exist at the Pembrey Burrows within Carmarthen Bay, covering approximately 1600ha (Barne et al., 1995). The sand/mud flats and saltmarshes of the Burry Inlet support diverse infaunal communities. Its importance for birds is of international significance and the inlet also supports a rich assemblage of vegetation. The Whiteford Burrows region (an NNR) at the mouth of the Burry Inlet, is important for large numbers of over-wintering waders and wildfowl; the sand dunes here support a rich flora and fauna including rare plant species.

Figure 20. GIS screenshot of Carmarthen Bay and Burry Inlet. The third largest cockle fishery in Britain is located in the Burry Inlet. Within Carmarthen Bay, Tenby, Saundersfoot and Amroth are designated as Blue Flag beaches (1999 Blue Flag awards). Gower Peninsula The west facing coast of the Gower Peninsula is composed of large expanses of sandy beach, backed with extensive sand dune systems. Further south along the peninsula, the coastline becomes more rocky again with steep cliff exposure and occasional sandy beach inlets (see Figure 21). The main sandy sections along the Gower coastline are those of Broughton Bay, Rhossiti Bay and Oxwich Bay. The Gower peninsula has a mixed coastline type (i.e. sandy beaches, dunes, rocky shores, cliffs, causeway at Worm’s Head (an NNR) uncovered at low tide etc.) and thus supports a rich variety of flora and fauna. The region is important for nationally rare and regionally important plant species and seabird colonies.

60

Figure 21. GIS screenshot of Gower Peninsula (Burry Inlet in top half of picture). The Gower peninsula is a popular tourist destination. Swansea Bay has two blue flag designations: a Blue Flag beach at Port Eynon, and Swansea marina is a Blue Flag marina. Welsh Fishing Ports The main fishing ports along the Welsh coastline within the study area are listed as follows, with the smaller ports grouped together:

1. Swansea 2. Port Talbot, Ynyglas, Penclawdd, Llanelli & Three Rivers Area 3. Milford Haven 4. St David’s, Solva, Fishguard, New Quay, Aberaeron & Cardigan 5. Aberstwyth, Aberdovey, Barmouth, Portmadoc, Pwllheli & Aberdaran 6. Holyhead 7. Cemaes Bay

The above fishing ports are in the order, as provided by MAFF for landings figures (MAFF statistics publications), with the landings for the smaller ports added together and joined into groups as above. This is also the format of the fish landings values for the Welsh coast in the GIS, i.e. divided into seven main locations along the coastline. Occurrence of Mammals around the Welsh coast Evidence gathered from surveys of bottlenose dolphins in Cardigan Bay suggests that between New Quay and the Teifi estuary, the coast is an important area for dolphins whether passing through on route to elsewhere, or staying there permanently. Seals are more abundant along the west Welsh coastline than anywhere else in southern Britain (Smith et al., 1995). The southern Welsh coastline is an important habitat for seals. The most important seal breeding areas are on the north Pembrokeshire coast between Strumble and St. David’s Head and the islands of Skomer and

61

Ramsey (Kiely et al., 1999). The pups are generally born in the autumn (mid September to mid October). The west coast of Ramsey has been known to produce the largest number of pups for any single pupping site in Wales. Seals have also been observed along the southern Pembrokeshire coast; however, they are not known to breed along here mainly due to its extremely exposed nature (Smith et al., 1995). Seabirds Seabird distribution along the Welsh coastline has been discussed in the regional description. Many seabirds undergo a moulting process at certain times of the year. During this time they shed their flight feathers and are therefore extremely vulnerable (for more effects of oil on seabirds see Appendix II).

62

5.0 Methods of Data Capture and Processing for the Sensitivity GIS

5.1 Introduction As an initial step, a list of the necessary types of datasets detailing those coastal resources which could be sensitive to disturbances or changes was compiled. Datasets relating to ecological sensitivity and vulnerability were accessed from a variety of government departments, national agencies and research groups. The aim was to construct an assemblage of information on priority parameters which would be most vulnerable to the effects of a marine incident, primarily an oil spill. Parameters included: areas designated for ecological protection, ecological characteristics, substrate type, aquaculture installations and fisheries information. The basic shoreline was characterised and the exact substrate identified (rock, sand, mud, etc). Subsequently, various attributes and designations were included, such as marinas, Blue Flag beaches, areas of scientific interest. Obtaining the data was not straight forward; providing data was not a priority for many organisations, resulting in delays in their replies to our requests. In some instances organisations did not reply at all. A comparison of datasets used in the GIS is provided in the following table: Table 5.1 Summary of Datasets in GIS

SOURCED DATA SETS

IRISH WELSH

Sensitivity Maps �OPRU �JNCC Access � � Sediment � � Shoretype � � Amenity � � Ecology � �(no supporting text) Clean-Up Guidelines � � Designations � � Ramsars � � PSACs � � SPAs � � NNRs � � MNRs � � NHAs (Irish)/ SSSIs (UK) � � Fisheries (Pelagic, Demersal and Shellfish landings)

� �

Aquaculture Sites � � Bird Data � � Aerial Photography � � Cetacean Standings � � Seal Survey � � General Clean-Up Guidelines (NOAA, 1992. Ritchie, 1995, Michel et al., 1998)

� �

Blue flag Awards � � Digital Coastline � �

5.2 Data Sourcing and Processing Following acquisition of datasets, they had to be reformatted into a manner compatible with the GIS. Each formatted data entry had to be suitably coded to be recognised by and keyed into the

63

GIS. The initial step in setting up the GIS application was to digitise the OPRU (Oil Pollution Research Unit) and JNCC (Joint Nature Conservation Committee) sensitivity maps, for the Irish and Welsh coastlines respectively. Then the available information was added to the GIS. The datasets were sourced as follows: �� Site designations for Ireland were obtained from Dúchas, The Heritage Service in electronic

format. The electronic files provided digital geographical boundaries of SPA (Special Protection Areas), SAC (Special Areas of Conservation), NHA (Natural Heritage Areas) and Nature Reserve coverages. Text files were provided for SACs and NHAs, describing the main characteristics of the designated sites.

�� Site designations for the Welsh coast were provided by the CCW (Countryside Council for

Wales). These included digital geographical boundaries of coastal SACs, marine SACs, coastal SPAs, coastal SSSIs, coastal NNRs, Skomer MNR, Menai Strait pMNR and coastal Ramsar sites.

�� Information on shoreline substrate and character type was obtained from the OPRU oil spill

sensitivity maps for the south and east coasts of Ireland. These were prepared for Marathon Oil UK Ltd., and Marathon Petroleum Ireland Ltd., by the Field Studies Council Research Centre and Natural Environment Consultants Ltd (March 1995 FSC/RC/14/94). The information from the maps was digitised, detailing substrate information and additional features including:

(i) Shoreline type (i.e. cliff, dune, marsh); (ii) Ecological information (distributions of various waders and wildfowl, seabirds, seal

breeding sites etc); (iii) Amenity information indicating location of harbours and marinas, watersport locations, and

holiday beaches.

Text information was also obtained from these maps and input into Microsoft Excel. This spreadsheet was then attached electronically to the previously mentioned attributes, providing additional detail in the GIS.

�� Information on shoreline data and coastline character type was also obtained for the Welsh coast

(Countryside Council for Wales, Dr Maggie Hill). This information was in the form of maps profiling coastal sites that are sensitive to oil pollution. These maps were prepared by the Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, (© NCC 1990) for the Marine Pollution Control Unit, Department of Transport, with support from the British Petroleum Company plc. Some of the information on the Welsh spill maps was already out of date. Representative and accurate data that was digitised included: habitats, sediment type (sand, mud, shingle, rock), shoreline character (cliffs, saltmarsh, sand dunes), areas important for waders and wildfowl, and areas for seals and cetaceans.

�� Seabird distribution datasets were obtained from the JNCC (Joint Nature Conservation

Committee) for the Welsh and Irish coasts (in Microsoft Excel and Microsoft Word documents), and additional Irish data was obtained from Birdwatch Ireland (Microsoft Excel document). JNCC seabird vulnerability maps were also scanned and included in the GIS.

�� Inshore fisheries data was obtained from the DOMNR (Department of Marine and Natural

Resources) for the Irish side and from MAFF (Ministry for Agriculture Fisheries and Food) statistics office London, for the Welsh coast. This information was then input into Microsoft Excel in a format providing individual species landings (in tonnes) and equivalent value (both IR£ and stg£) for the main ports along the Irish and Welsh coasts within the study area.

64

Individual geographical references had to be found for the port locations to apply this dataset to the GIS.

�� Aerial photography was obtained for the Irish coastal region of the RACER area (optical and

near infra red imagery). These images are geo-referenced around a centre point. The photographs were part of a Marine Institute funded survey carried out by Enterprise Ireland and Compass Informatics.

�� The Welsh coast aerial photography images were provided by Dr. Maggie Hill, Countryside

Council for Wales. Some of these images are ortho-rectified and some are geo-referenced. �� Information on aquaculture installations was requested from BIM (Bord Iascaigh Mhara);

however BIM are still in the process of developing a database, and this information should be available in the near future. For the purpose of this study, information on aquaculture installations for the Irish coast was extracted from the La Tene aquaculture map (1998). The main sites were noted, and grid references found for each site as a representation of the general distribution of aquaculture activity. Details including the type of species farmed along the east and south-east Irish coast were input into Microsoft Excel. Requests were also made to the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources for aquaculture information, without success.

�� Information on aquaculture for the Welsh coast was provided by Marine Estates, Crown Estate

Commissioners (Anne Whitelaw Dykes). However, this was for one site only, namely Pembroke Dock (Appendix I). CEFAS (Centre for Environment, Fisheries And Aquaculture Science, David Mc Gregor) stated that information on aquaculture installations did exist, but this information would not be available, due to confidentiality.

�� Cetacean data, in the form of strandings records, were obtained for the Irish coastal area from

published literature (Dr. Emer Rogan UCC). These records were input into Microsoft Excel detailing species name, date of stranding, location name and grid reference, county of stranding, sex and length of species stranded.

�� Cetacean distribution maps of the North West European shelf were provided by Dr Peter Evans,

Seawatch. These maps were provided in hard copy (A4 charts); however, they were in draft format, due to be edited to go into a distribution atlas that will be produced by Seawatch, publication is pending. The maps were therefore consulted but not used directly in workpackage six. Most of the observations from these maps follow the shipping lines, indicating that these observations are effort related.

�� Seal distribution data were extracted from the project Grey Seals: Status And Monitoring In The

Irish And Celtic Seas, carried out by the Coastal Resources Centre, UCC and the Dyfed Wildlife Trust, Wales.

�� Blue Flag designations for Ireland were acquired from An Taisce, The National Trust for

Ireland. Blue Flag designations for the Welsh coast were obtained from the Tidy Britain Group [www. tidybritain.org.uk]. The Blue Flag grid references had to be extracted from 1:50,000 ordnance survey maps for each site; grid references were then input into Microsoft Excel.

�� General shoreline clean-up guidelines and environmental considerations were obtained from

relevant reports and included in the GIS as a hotlinked document. These guidelines were taken from: Michel et al. (1998), NOAA (1992) and Ritchie (1995). (See training manual Appendix V, showing the guidelines used in table format).

65

�� The datasets used for this project can be updated. Datasets which were unavailable at the time of writing, or which, through time limitations could not be obtained, can be added to the GIS in the future (e.g. Welsh cetacean distribution data, designation of Green Coast award beaches etc.). There is scope for extending the criteria range on which the sensitivity index is based; therefore, the ranking system has the ability to become more site sensitive. However extending the criteria range would have to be carried out outside the remit of the RACER project.

5.3 Sensitivity Ranking of Coastline Each section of coastline has its own unique importance to both its immediate inhabitants and also to other members of the public. It is very difficult therefore to assign levels of importance to a given area, as inevitably certain individuals will be offended by the decision. However, certain areas of the coast will have specific resources that are more crucial to those areas than to others. For example, the Saltee Islands in Co. Wexford are very important breeding sites for seals, especially between September and October each year. These islands could be classified as an extremely vulnerable area in terms of this particular species, more so than for example Arklow, Co. Wicklow. However, Arklow would also be very sensitive due to its other coastal resources. Its inshore waters support thousands of seabirds moulting and feeding between July and September each year. Its Blue Flag beaches attract thousands of visitors during the summer months (and locals all year), and Arklow is also noted for sailing and boat angling attractions. This small town could be seriously affected both ecologically and in an economic sense, in the event of an oil incident. One has to exhibit extreme caution therefore in assigning weightings of importance to any section of coastline in any area.

5.4 Geographical Information System The GIS developed in this project integrates different categories of information and data. It links the spatial characteristics of a site to the site’s specific ecological characteristics and its vulnerabilities; the GIS also includes links to documentation on protective designations, and to relevant databases. This results in a profile of coastal habitat sensitivity. The coastal sensitivity tool was devised as a method to synthesise the relevant sensitivity information into a coastal sensitivity index. The sensitivity index tool utilises GIS spatial selection and buffering functionality. Weights are allocated to the various sensitivity parameters and these are combined for each coastal segment to produce a sensitivity index. The tool has been produced using MapBasic customisation to allow the user to enter their own weighting scheme for the index. In the event of an emergency, operators would not normally have the time, or often the necessary expertise, to evaluate all the environmental information contained within this GIS. With a sensitivity index, effective use can be made of the information contained within the GIS. Without the use of such an index, immediate decisions concerning the optimal location within which to contain pollution events might not take all the environmental considerations into account. This sensitivity tool was devised in association with all the partners in the project to take into account the relevant sensitivity information (where data was available), and allocate a weighting to each dataset. These parameters (e.g. proximity to Blue Flag beaches, importance of wildfowl populations, seal pupping sites etc.) are assigned weightings depending on their vulnerability to a particular threat. Once an expert weighting is placed on the vulnerable resources, the tool processes all of the coastline to determine which areas are most sensitive. These weightings are added up for each 1km segment of the coastline. A high score results from the presence of several of these sensitive features (e.g. proximity to saltmarsh, designated areas, amenity areas etc). The spatial querying functionality of the GIS was used to allow proximity assessment in addition to pure presence or absence assessment. For example, the index will take into account whether a part of the coastline is within 5km of an amenity area, or within 1km of an access location. The default

66

weighting scheme has been based on an extensive review of other international sensitivity indexing systems and discussion with project partners. The tool is also designed to allow the user to adjust the weightings to suit their specific local conditions. The presence of this sensitivity tool allows the user to place scales of importance on the different resources at the user’s own discretion and therefore allows a degree of flexibility in this sense (see Figures 22 & 23 on next page). The sensitivity tool is at an early stage of development and has much scope for future enhancement and modification. It should also be noted that not all of the datasets within the GIS are incorporated into the index calculation. At this stage of development, it would be inadvisable to rely completely on the sensitivity index tool in assessing coastal sensitivity; the system will be more accurate when further datasets are incorporated. There is great potential for this initiative to be developed further.

67

Screen shots of the default settings placed on the sensitive resources accounted for in the Irish and Welsh indices are displayed below;

Figure 22. Irish Sensitivity Index

Figure 23. Welsh Sensitivity Index Note: �� The above weightings are chosen from a scale of 1 to 10, except for the Access weightings in the

Irish Index; the scale for this is from –2 to +2. �� The seasonal functionality in the Irish Index only accounts for the ecology and amenity data

within the Irish index.

68

The layout of the GIS is kept as simple and as user friendly as possible. The previously described data sets are divided into a number of main themes within the coastal sensitivity menu of the GIS, divided as follows:

�� General Sensitivity; covering substrate and shoretype and Blue Flag beach/marina designations.

�� Designated Areas; displaying coverage of national and international conservation/preservation designations.

�� Clean-Up Guide; recommendations and restrictions for shoreline clean-up. �� Supplementary Information; aerial photography. �� Fisheries Information; providing fish landing figures for demersal, pelagic and shellfish

species for the main ports in the study area. �� Marine Mammals; providing distribution information on grey seal populations and cetacean

strandings. �� Bird Information; provides seabird distribution data for the east Irish coast and the Welsh

coast. �� Sensitivity Index; the default settings of the sensitivity weightings are displayed as colour

coded lines overlaying the east Irish coast and the Welsh coast. The colour coding represents a scale of sensitivity. The higher the sensitivity score the stronger the colour.

Data and information can be easily loaded and displayed from each of these themes to provide an idea of the importance of these resources in the study area (see Figure 24 below).

Figure 24. RACER GIS display; selection of available datasets for the Dublin Bay coastline.

69

6.0 Conclusions and Recommendations A number of important issues have been highlighted as a result of this workpackage. A study such as this, that involves comprehensive information and dataset acquisition, addresses many issues that may otherwise be overlooked.

6.1 Conclusions Coastline sensitivity assessment is primarily dependant upon availability of resource information for the coastline. In many instances disparity of information leads to inconsistent assessment or unbalanced judgement of the sensitivity scale. This is a difficult bias to overcome. This workpackage attempted to display the information and datasets that were available for the study area in the most effective method possible. The GIS platform used provides a detailed profile of the sensitivity of the study area. Within the GIS, a sensitivity index tool was developed, as mentioned already in section 5 (Methods). This tool calculates a sensitivity scale based on assigned weightings placed on the datasets accounted for within each index. Two individual indices were developed for the Irish and Welsh coasts of the RACER area. The two separate indices were decided upon to eliminate bias in their calculation. The Irish index calculation is dependant on a greater proportion of datasets than the Welsh index. If separate indices were not developed, the index calculation would ultimately have represented the Irish coastline as more sensitive than the Welsh coastline. All of the datasets held within the GIS do not feed into the sensitivity indices. The datasets were collected over an extended period of time and ultimately the time scale of the project prohibited the inclusion of all datasets into the index calculation. This can be resolved at some point in the future outside the remit of the RACER project. The default weightings which have been allocated to the resources accounted for within the indices, have been based on researched judgement and consultation, including consideration of pre-existing US and UK values. These weightings however, are only one possible representative judgement, and can obviously vary from one expert to another. Apart from the sensitivity index tool, one must not ignore the integral nature of the GIS platform as an independent tool, with a variety of datasets and information accounted for and displayed. It is a very clear, fast and effective method of coastline assessment and one which can be further enhanced and developed with increasing availability of data. The system offers enormous potential for development in the field of coastal zone sensitivity, with scope for development into the 3-D analyst functionality that exists in GIS software. This feature would enhance and consolidate the 2-D interpretation of the coastal shoreline characteristics, that are presently in the RACER coastal sensitivity GIS system.

6.2 Issues �� Successful sourcing of datasets from the relevant organisations and government bodies was

difficult. It was quite unclear as to whether certain datasets existed, where they were housed, or if they could be located. Frequently, datasets were not located at the suggested or most likely sources.

�� Subsequent to sourcing the datasets, there were additional time delays in obtaining them. This varied from a couple of weeks to ongoing postponements of several months duration. This lost valuable time and resulted in extra pressure for deadlines.

70

�� It would have been more efficient if the Welsh partners had gathered the datasets for the Welsh GIS, while both partners worked from a common template of requirements. Acquisition for the Irish side was slow and tedious, however acquisition for the Welsh side was very difficult due to the unfamiliarity with Welsh contacts and government bodies and lack of information on who to approach to access the datasets.

�� Many of the datasets acquired had to be manually extracted from written publications and input into customised databases before being applicable to the GIS. A large proportion of the datasets were not geographically referenced; therefore, acquiring appropriate grid references had to be done manually by seeking out the individual grid references from 1:50,000 maps. Many grid references were not provided in the required accurate format.

�� The main problem in compilation of the GIS was the disparity between Irish and Welsh datasets. The formats of datasets were often mismatched, or the level of detail and quality of the information was not appropriate. In many cases one side or the other possessed more information, or not enough information on resources and the datasets were inconsistent. The datasets were arranged to compliment the level of detail in both sides in the most effective way possible.

�� Access to Irish and Welsh data from state/governmental bodies should not pose as much difficulty as it does.

6.3 Recommendations �� For this frequently studied INTERREG region a marine/coastal/environmental directory of

contact lists should be compiled. Such a directory could be divided into different headings, under which all of the relevant people/associations/organisations, both national and international, should be listed. This would prove invaluable for future studies requiring data acquisition. The recently awarded INTERREG project, Marine Information System (mentioned earlier), which incorporates marine and coastal datasets into one system, will in some way alleviate this problem.

�� There is a need to geo-reference all locations mentioned in environmental/marine/coastal publications. This would be very useful, not just to researchers, but also to anyone who finds these publications of relevance.

�� A large proportion of information is not in digital/electronic format; this needs to be addressed as important datasets may eventually go unused or be overlooked.

�� Upkeep and updating of the system will be the responsibility of the individual Coast Guards. There is great scope for addition of datasets as they become available. The sensitivity index would be greatly refined as a result of this. The Coast Guards should inform one and other of any alterations to the system to maintain a standardised format of the GIS on both sides of the Irish Sea.

�� Further work could also include the development of the 3-D analyst functionality in GIS. An enhancement of the current 2-D interpretation in the GIS would increase the functional relevance of the system to operators in both Coast Guards.

71

7.0 References An Taisce, 1999. Blue Flag beaches and Marinas in Ireland 1999. On behalf of the Foundation for Environmental Education in Europe (Feee). Baker, J.M., Spalding, M., Moore, J., 1995. Sensitivity Mapping Worldwide: Harmonisation and the Needs of Different User Groups. 1995 Oil Spill Conference – Evolving Technologies. Barbier, E.B., Acreman, M., and Knowler, D., 1997. Economic Valuation of Wetlands. A guide for policy makers and planners. Ramsar Convention Bureau, Gland Switzerland. The University of York, Institute of Hydrology, IUCN – The World Conservation Union. [Also available on net: http://ramsar.org/lib_val_e_1.htm#cap2] Barne, J.H., Robson, C.F., Kaznowska, S.S., and Doody, J.P. (Eds.)., 1995. Coasts and Seas of the United Kingdom. Region 12 Wales: Margam to Little Orme. Produced by the Coastal Directories Project of the JNCC on behalf of the project steering group. ISBN 1 873701 86 1. Berrow, S.D., and Rogan, E., 1997. Review of Cetaceans Stranded on the Irish Coast, 1901-95. Mammal Rev. 1997, Vol. 27, No. 1, 51-76. Boelens, R.G.V., et al., 1999. Ireland’s Marine and Coastal Areas and Adjacent Seas: An Environmental Assessment. Quality Status Report. Prepared by the Marine Institute on behalf of the Departments of Environment & Local Government and Marine & Natural Resources, Dublin, 1999. 381pp + appendices. Bowden, K.F., 1980. Physical and dynamic oceanography of the Irish Sea. In: The North-West European Shelf Seas: The seabed and the sea in motion II. Physical and chemical oceanography, and physical resources. ed. By F.T. Banner, M.B. Collins & K.S. Massie, Amsterdam, Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company. (Elsevier Oceanography Series, 24B). Brady, Shipman, Martin, 1997. Coastal Zone Management – A Draft Policy for Ireland. CCW map, 1999. Countryside Council for Wales map on European Marine Sites in Wales (Existing and Potential). Basemap Automobile Association 1:200,000 Digital Data. ©Automobile Association, 1998. Maps produced by Geographic Information Unit ©Countryside Council for Wales. Code:3004599, Drafted: 25/01/99. CCW, Countryside Council for Wales, 1999. Phase I – Intertidal Update (Areas of Search 8,9,10,11). Comprises of intertidal spread sheet of sites surveyed, with additional text of individual site descriptions of SSSIs, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (in English and Welsh). Carolyn Davies, Maritime and Earth Sciences, CCW. (CRC received the material from Dr Maggie Hill, CCW). Connolly, N. and Hegarty, A., 1999. Review of ICZM Methodologies, Work Package 2, Bantry Bay Charter – Building Consensus for Coastal Zone Management. (Coastal Resources Centre, UCC). Cooke, A. and McMath, M., 1998. SENSMAP: Development of a Protocol for Assessing and Mapping the Sensitivity of Marine Species and Benthos to Maritime Activities (Working Draft). CCW Marine Report: 98/6/1

72

http://ramsar.org/lib_val_e_1.htm

Davies, G.J. and Wilson, J.L.J. 1995. Wildlife sensitivity criteria for oil and gas developments in Great Britain. (Contractor: Environment and Resource Technology Ltd., Stromness). Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report, No. 206. (ERT Report, No. 94/079) Dept. of Arts, Heritage, Gaeltacht and the Islands, 1998. – Produced by The Heritage Policy and Leglislation Division. The National Report on the Convention of Biodiversity in Ireland, 1998. http://www.biodiv.org/natrep/index.html Department of the Environment. HMSO, 1995. A Guide to Risk Assessment and Risk Management for Environmental Protection. ISBN 0 11 753091 3 Ecopro 1996. Environmentally Friendly Coastal Protection. Code of Practise. Dublin Government Publication Sales Office. Edwards, R., and Sime, H., Eds., 1998. The Sea Empress Oil Spill, Proceedings of the International Conference held in Cardiff, 11-13 February 1998. Environment Agency, 1999. The State of the environment of England and Wales: Coasts. ESRI (Economic and Social Research Institute), 1996. Report on water-based leisure activities in Ireland. Prepared by Brendan J. Whelan for the Marine Institute, Dublin. 36pp. European Commission (EC), 1999. Lessons from the European Commission’s Demonstration Programme on Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM). Directorates-General, Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection, Fisheries, Regional Policies and Cohesion. European Environment Agency, 1995. Scoping study on Integrated Environmental Assessment of Coastal Zones. Final Report. Publ. European Topic Centre on Marine and coastal Environment, September 1995. Evans, P.G.H., 1980. Cetaceans in British Waters. Mammal Review, 10, 1-52. Field Studies Council Research Centre and Natural Environment Consultants Ltd, 1995. “Oil Spill Sensitivity Maps for the South and East Coasts of Ireland”. Prepared for Marathon Oil UK Ltd., and Marathon Petroleum Ireland Ltd., by Field Studies Council Research Centre and Natural Environment Consultants Ltd (March 1995 FSC/RC/14/94). Gundlach, E.R., and Hayes, M.O., 1978. Vulnerability of Coastal Environments to Oil Spill Impacts. Marine Technology Society Journal, Vol. 12, No. 4 pp18-27 Harper, J.R., et al., 1991. Shore-Zone Mapping System for Use in Sensitivity Mapping and Shoreline Countermeasures. Environment Canada Arctic and Marine Oil Spill Program, 14th Technical Seminar Environment Canada. Pp509-523 Harper, J.R., D.F. Dickins, D. Howes and G. Sergy, 1992. Recent shoreline mapping projects in British Columbia and significance to oil spill countermeasure planning. Proceedings of the 15th Arctic and Marine Oil Spill Technical Seminar (AMOP), Environment Canada, p. 293-300. Hayes, M.O., Owens, E.H., Hubbard, D.K., and Abele, R.W., 1973. Investigation of Form and Processes in the Coastal Zone. In: Coastal Geomorphology (Edit. By D.R. Coates), Proc. Third Annual Geomorphology Symposium Series, Binghamton, N.Y., 1973, p.11-41

73


Hickie, D., 1997. Evaluation of Environmental Designations in Ireland. 2nd Ed. The Heritage Council. Hiscock, K., 1999. Identifying Marine “Sensitive Areas” – The Importance of Understanding Life-Cycles. Paper submitted for publication in the proceedings of the symposium on Aquatic Life Cycle Strategies: Survival in a Variable Environment. Hiscock, K. 1998. Biological Monitoring of Marine Special Areas of Conservation: a review of methods for detecting change. Joint Nature Conservation Committee Report No. 284 Holt, T.J., et al., 1995. The Sensitivity of Marine Communities to Man-Induced Change – A Scoping Report. CCW Contract Science Report 65 Hutchinson, C., 1994. Where to Watch Birds in Ireland. © Clive Hutchinson. ISBN 0 7171 2204 2 International Oil Pollution Compensation (IOPC) Funds, 1997. Annual Report. Irwin, R.J., et al., 1997. Environmental Contaminants Encyclopedia, Oil Spill Entry, July 1, 1997. National Park Service with assistance from Colorado State University Student Assistant Contaminants Specialists. National Park Service Water Resources Divisions, Water Operations Branch, 1201 Oakridge Drive, Suite 250, Fort Collins, Colorado 80525. [http://www.aqd.nps.gov/toxic/list.html] Jensen, J.R., Ramsey, E.W. III, Holmes, J.M., Michel, J.E., Savitsky, B. and Davis, B.A., 1990. Environmental Sensitivity Index (ESI) Mapping for Oil Spills Using Remote Sensing and Geographic Information System Technology. Int. J. Geographical Information Systems, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp181-201 JNCC, 1990. Maps of “Coastal Sites Sensitive to Oil Pollution”. Prepared for the Marine Pollution Control Unit, Department of Transport with support from the British Petroleum Company plc. Prepared by Cartographic Services, Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, © NCC 1990. Kiely, O., et al., 1999. Grey Seals: Status and Monitoring In the Irish & Celtic Seas. 1999. Marine Institute In Pres. Knut L.S., Sandersen, E., Mehlum, F., and Ryssdal, J., 1991. Damages to Seabirds from Oil Spills: comparing simulation results and vulnerability indexes. Ecological Modelling, 53 (1991) 39-59. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. Amsterdam. Lafolley, D., and Hiscock, K., 1993. The Classification of Benthic Estuarine Communities for Nature Conservation Assessments in Great Britain. Netherlands Journal of Aquatic Ecology, Vol. 27 (2-4) pp181-187 La Tene Maps, �1999. Irish Aquaculture Directory and Guide, 4th Edition. La Tene Maps, �1998 John Coleman. Irish Aquaculture Site Map. MacDonald, A., McGeechan, C., Cain, M., Beattie, J., Holt, H., Zhou, R., and Farquhar, D., 1999. Identification of Marine Environmental High Risk Areas (MEHRAs) in the UK. Report for the Department of the environment, Transport and the Regions. Doc. No: ST-87639-MI-1-Rev 01

74

MacDonald, D.S., et al., 1996. Disturbance of Benthic Species by Fishing Activities: A Sensitivity Index. Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, Vol. 6, 257-268 (1996). Marine Institute, 1999. Maritime Ireland/Wales INTERREG Programme 1994-1999. Measure 1.3 Protection of the Marine and Coastal Environment and Marine Emergency Planning. Project/Network Summaries. July 1999. Corporate Services Division, Marine Institute, Dublin. Michel, J. and Dahlin, J., 1993. Guidelines for Developing Digital Environmental Sensitivity Index Atlases and Databases. Hazardous Materials Response and Assessment Division, NOAA Michel, J., Benggio, B., and Byron, I., 1998. Shoreline Assessment Manual. 2nd Ed. HAZMAT Report No. 98-3, for NOAA (National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration). August 1998. Nairn, R., et al., 1995. Oil spill sensitivity maps for the south and east coasts of Ireland, prepared for Marathon Oil U.K. Ltd. and Marathon Petroleum Ireland, Ltd., by Field Studies Council Research Centre and Natural Environment Consultants Ltd., FSC/RC/14/94 Nairn, R., Partridge, K., Moore, J., and Elliott, R., 1995. The South East Coast of Ireland – An Environmental Appraisal. ISBN 0 9525669 0 7 Narumalani, S., et al., 1992. Coastal Sensitivity Mapping for Oil Spills in the United Arab Emirates Using Landsat Thematic Mapper Imagery and GIS Technology. American Society of Photogrammetry Remote Sensing 1992, annual Convention. Pp 314-319 National Report of Ireland for COP7. National Report Prepared for the 7th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties to the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971). Implementation of the Ramsar Convention in general and of the Ramsar Strategic Plan 1997-2002 in particular, during the period since the National Report was prepared in 1995 for Ramsar COP6 (http://ramsar.org/cop7_nr_ireland.htm) . Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, © NCC 1990. Cartographic Services. “Coastal Sites Sensitive to Oil Pollution”. Prepared for the Marine Pollution Control Unit, Department of Transport with support from the British Petroleum Company plc. NOAA, 1992. Introduction to Coastal Habitats and Biological Resources for Spill Response. (http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/oilaids/monterey/monterey.html) O’ Brien, S.H. and Weir, C.R. 1999 (In Prep.) UNPUBLISHED. Association of the Harbour Porpoise (Phocoena Phocoena L.) with the Western Irish Sea Front. Orford, J.D., 1989. A Review of Tides, Currents and Waves in the Irish Sea. In: Special Publication No. 3, The Irish Sea: A Resource at Risk. Edited by John C. Sweeney, Geographical Society of Ireland, Maynooth, pp18-45. Owen, J., 1999. Risk Assessment of Shipping in Environmentally Sensitive Areas. A report to the Marine Programme of WWF UK and the wildlife Trusts. Pollack, C.M., Reid, J.B., Webb, A., and Tasker, M.L. 1997. The distribution of seabirds and cetaceans in the waters around Ireland. JNCC Report, No. 267.

75

http://ramsar.org/cop7_nr_ireland.htm

Quigley, D.T., Flannery, K., and O’ Shea, J., 1991. Trigger Fish (Balistes carolinensis Gemlin 1789) in Irish Waters; A Biogeographical Review. Biogeography of Ireland; Past, Present and Future. Trinity College, Dublin. Ritchie, W., 1995. Maritime Oil Spills – Environmental Lessons and Experiences With Special Reference to Low-Risk Coastlines. Journal of Coastal Conservation Vol 1, pp 63-76 Sanderson, W.G., 1996. Rarity of Marine Benthic Species in Great Britain: Development and Application of Assessment Criteria. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems, Vol. 6, pp245-256 Sea Empress Environmental Evaluation Committee (SEEEC), 1998. Final Report. The Environmental Impact of the Sea Empress Oil Spill. ISBN 0 11 702156 3 Sheehan, R., 1994. “Coastal zone management is okay but it’s not as good as the real thing!” Association of Geographic Information Conference Papers. 15th-17th November, 1994. Birmingham, UK. Smith, J., Yonow, N., Elliott, R., 1995. The Coast of Dyfed and South West Glamorgan – An Environmental Appraisal. © Field Studies Council 1995. ISBN 1 851532 994. The National Report on the Convention of Biodiversity in UK – http://www.biodiv.org/natrep/index.html (site active in 1999). Tidy Britain Group, 1999. 1999 Seaside Awards and Blue Flag UK. Tortell, P., 1992. Coastal Zone Sensitivity Mapping and Its Role in Marine Environmental Management. Marine Pollution Bulletin, Vol. 25, 1-4, pp 88-93 US Coast Guard and NOAA, 1992. Oil Spill Case Histories 1967-1991, Summaries of Significant U.S. and International Spills, September 1992, Report No. HMRAD 92-11, NOAA/Hazardous Materials Response and Assessment Division Seattle, Washington. [http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/oilaids/spilldb.pdf] Webb, A., Stronach, A., Tasker, M.L., and Stone, C.J., 1995. Vulnerable Concentrations of Seabirds South and West of Britain. JNCC (Joint Nature Conservation Committee). ISBN 1 873701 59 4. Wells, M.P., 1997. Environmental Economics Series Paper No. 55. Economic Perspectives on Nature Tourism, Conservation and Development. [http:www-esd.worldbank.org/eei/text/publ/wells.html] Wiens, J.A., et al., 1984. Information Needs and Priority for Assessing the Sensitivity of Marine Birds to Oil Spills. Biological Conservation Vol 28, pp 21-49 Williams, J.M., Tasker, M.L., Carter, I.C. and Webb, A., 1995. A Method of Assessing Seabird Vulnerability to Surface Pollutants. IBIS 137: S147-S152 World Bank, 1993. Guidelines for Integrated Coastal Zone Management. Issued at the World Coast Conference, Noordwijk, The Netherlands.

76


Appendix I

Maps digitised - GIS component of workpackage six Irish “Oil Spill Sensitivity Maps for the South and East Coasts of Ireland”. Prepared for Marathon Oil UK Ltd., and Marathon Petroleum Ireland Ltd., by Field Studies Council Research Centre and Natural Environment Consultants Ltd (March 1995 FSC/RC/14/94). ��Map 1 Ballagan Point to Dunany Point ��Map 2 Port to Laytown ��Map 3 Ben Head to Portrane and Lambay Island ��Map 4 Malahide to Dublin Bay ��Map 5 Dun Laoghaire to Greystones ��Map 6 Kilcoole to Wicklow Head ��Map 7 Ardmore Point to Arklow Head ��Map 8 Clogga Strand to Donaghmore ��Map 9 Glascarrig Point to Blackwater ��Map 10 Ballinesker to Greenore Point ��Map 11 Rosslare Harbour to Bastardstown ��Map 12 Forlorn Point to Baginbun Head ��Map 13 Hook Head to Tramore ��Map 14 Brownstone Head to Bunmahon ��Map 15 Annestown to Ballynacourty Point ��Map 16 Ballynacourty Point to Whiting Bay Welsh “Coastal Sites Sensitive to Oil Pollution”. Prepared for the Marine Pollution Control Unit, Department of Transport with support from the British Petroleum Company plc. Prepared by Cartographic Services, Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, © NCC 1990. Map 25 Swansea to Tenby Cliffs Map 26 Tenby Cliffs to St. David’s Peninsula Coast Map 27 St. David’s Peninsula Coast to Creigiau Pen y Graig Map 28 Creigiau Pen y Graig to Morfa Bychan Map 29 Morfa Bychan to Dinas Dinlle Map 30 Dinas Dinlle to Great Orme’s Head

Oil Incidents affecting the Irish Sea since the 60s Taken from: 1. Oil Spill Case Histories 1967-1991. Summaries of Significant US and International Spills. Sept. 1992. Report No. HMRAD 92-11. NOAA Hazardous Materials Response and Assessment Division, Seattle, Washington. 2. Report on the Activities of the International Oil Pollution Compensation Funds In 1997. IOPC Annual Report. Vessel Name

Date of Incident

Location of Incident

Volume Spilled

Cause of Incident

Geographical Location

Sea Empress

15/02/96 Milford Haven, South

77356 GT (Gross

Ran aground

77

(Ref: IOPC) West Wales, UK

Tonnage)

Portfield (Ref: IOPC)

05/11/90 Pembroke, Wales, UK

481 GT (Gross Tonnage)

Sinking

Christos Bitas (Ref: NOAA)

12/10/78 Irish Sea, South Wales

21990 Barrels

Ran aground

Lat 51 43 N Long 005 40W

Hamilton Trader (Ref: NOAA)

30/4/69 Liverpool Bay, England

4000 Barrels Collision Lat 53 30 N Long 003 20W

Torrey Canyon (Ref: NOAA)

18/3/67 Lands End, England

860000 Barrels

Ran aground

Lat 50 03 N Long 004 44W

Welsh Aquaculture Haven Harvest Ltd - Salmon Farm At Pembroke Dock A lease was granted to Haven Harvest to occupy Crown seabed at Pembroke Dock, Milford Haven for the purpose of operating a Salmon Fish Farm. The lease is for 20 years from 9th February 1996. Haven Harvest took over an operation run by Pembroke Trout & Salmon Ltd which went into liquidation. The site has been run as a fish farm since approximately 1985 since receiving it's consent from the Department of Transport and is registered with MAFF under the Fish Farming and Shellfish Farming Business Order 1985. Reference: Anne Whitelaw Dykes, Marine Estates, Crown Estate Commissioners [email protected]

78

Appendix II

Biological Sensitivity to Oil Pollution (NOAA, 1992)

Marine Birds Seabirds: Surface-feeding pelagic seabirds: (petrels, fulmars and shearwaters Diving pelagic seabirds: (auks, murres, murrelets, puffins, guillemots and auklets {auks and alcids}) Diving coastal seabirds: (cormorants, gannets) Surface-feeding coastalseabirds: (kittiwakes, skuas)

Gulls & terns Raptors: (osprey and peregrine falcons) Shorebirds: (plovers, turnstones, sandpipers, phalaropes and oystercatchers) Wadingbirds: (herons, egrets, bitterns, rails, cranes, stilts and avocets) Waterfowl: (swans, geese, diving and dabbling ducks, mergansers, coots, gallinules, loons {divers} and grebes)

Fouling of Plummage Exposure to oil causes loss of water-proofing in seabirds. The oiled plummage gets matted and allows water to penetrate to the surface of the body which induces hypothermia and loss of buoyancy. Auks and murres are highly sensitive to oil contamination. Gulls, guillemots and razorbills are more resilient and have been observed to successfully clean themselves after several weeks.

Ingestion of Oil Oil can be ingested very easily during preening or consumed whilst scavenging contaminated prey. Ingested oil can induce anemia (anemic birds cannot dive or forage for food and therefore starve on beaches even after they have been cleaned), intestinal irritation, kidney damage, pneumonia, change the blood chemistry, cause a decrease in growth rate, impair osmoregulation, decreaseproduction of eggs.

Adult Cassin’s auklets and wedge-tailed shearwaters have been shown to abandon a nesting colony even when exposed to small quantities of oil. These tendencies are applied to other bird species also.

Effects on Reproduction Exposure of eggs during the early stages of incubation is considered to be the most damaging. Significant reduced reproductive success in oiled birds.

Physical Disturbance The actual physical disturbance that nesting, breeding and roosting habitats are subjected to, during the clean-up action after the spill has occurred, are often very damaging to both present and future generations of colonies.

Vulnerability Levels Bird Species Characteristics inducing

vulnerability Effects

79

Highly Vulnerable to Oil Spills

�� Seabirds: �� Auks, murres, murrelets,

puffins, guillemots and auklets

�� Storm petrels. �� Cormorants �� Waterfowl: �� Diving sea ducks (eiders,

scoters), geese, loons {divers} and grebes

�� Raptors

�� Frequently diving for food �� Prolonged roosting on the

water �� Formation of large flocks �� Dense nesting colonies in

spill susceptible areas �� Time spent on open ocean �� Low reproductive rates

�� Alcids are most susceptible to oil spills, spend a lot of time swimming or floating in water.

�� Pelicans also very susceptible, due to feeding habits, small colony numbers, classified as a dangered species and have low reproductive rates.

�� Diving sea ducks and geese use coastal marine waters for staging and overwintering during migration and occur in large flocks.

�� Western and Pacific species of loons and grebes rarely leave the water.

�� Bald eagles have a very small population and very slow recovery rate, and they become susceptible to exposure when ingesting contaminated prey.

80

Low Vulnerability to Oil Spills

�� Gulls & terns �� Shorebirds �� Waterfowl: �� Dabbling ducks & coots �� Wading birds: �� Herons, egrets and rails

�� Rarely immersed in water �� Most time spent on land or

in sheltered water bodies �� Productive breeders �� Can avoid oil affected areas

by easily moving habitat

�� Although these birds do use the marine environment, their behaviour within largely reduces the possibility of them being affected by spilled oil.

�� It is thought that the majority of gulls do not get affectd by oil spills and that they are easily able to avoid them, as historically, very few gulls have been seen affected during spills.

�� Terns are rather resilient also, although trouble can result when clean-up measures are taken and breeding colonies may be disrupted.

�� Shorebirds are also rarely affected, as they can avoid oily patches along the shoreline, however during spills their shoreline prey can be effected.

�� Dabbling ducks are not very vulnerable to oil spills either as they generally prefer inshore freshwater environments which largely reduces the risk of getting in contact with spills.

�� Wading birds have low vulnerability also as they rarely enter the water unless to wade and in which case they choose shallow and sheltered environments.

81

Marine Mammals Marine mammals are effected by oil in three main ways: 1. Direct surface fouling. 2. Direct and indirect ingestion with the affects of bioaccumulation. 3. Inhalation of the toxic vapours released from the petroleum hydrocarbons as

they evaporate. Effects on Cetaceans; discussed earlier. Effects on Pinnipeds; This group includes walruses, seals and sea lions. These are very sociable animals and spend a large portion of their time gathered on beaches, rocky shores and tidal flats. They are therefore very much at risk when an oil spill occurs. Oiled seals groom their coats to maintain their insulative properties thereby ingesting oil in the process. This increases the chance of the mother indirectly contaminating the pups during lactation. Contact with oil during the breeding season can reduce the reproductive success of the colony. The insulative properties can be destroyed even by light oiling.

83

Appendix III

EU National Implementing Measures Related To The Coastal And Marine Environment

[From - http://europa.eu.int/scadplus/leg/en/m15000.htm] WATER PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT Bathing water:

Council Directive 76/160/EEC of 8 December 1975 concerning the quality of bathing water. Council Directive 90/656/EEC of 4 December 1990 on the transitional measures applicable in Germany with regard to certain Community provisions relating to the protection of the environment. Council Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991 standardising and rationalising reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment. Shellfish waters:

Council Directive 79/923/EEC of 30 October 1979 on the quality required of shellfish waters. Council Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991 standardising and rationalising reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment. Urban waste-water treatment:

Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment. Commission Directive 98/15/EC of 27 February 1998 amending Council Directive 91/271/EEC with respect to certain requirements established in Annex I thereof. WATER POLLUTION Water suitable for fish-breeding:

Council Directive 78/659/EEC of 18 July 1978 on the quality of fresh waters needing protection or improvement in order to support fish life. Council Directive 90/656/EEC of 4 December 1990 on the transitional measures applicable in Germany with regard to certain Community provisions relating to the protection of the environment. Council Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991 standardising and rationalising reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment. DRINKING WATER Surface freshwater - quality and control requirements:

Council Directive 75/440/EEC of 16 June 1975 concerning the quality required of surface water intended for the abstraction of drinking water in the Member States.

84

Council Directive 79/869/EEC of 9 October 1979 concerning the methods of measurement and frequencies of sampling and analysis of surface water intended for the abstraction of drinking water in the Member States. Council Directive 90/656/EEC of 4 December 1990 on the transitional measures applicable in Germany with regard to certain Community provisions relating to the protection of the environment. Council Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991 standardising and rationalising reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment. NATURE CONSERVATION Conservation of wild birds:

Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds. Council Directive 81/854/EEC of 19 October 1981 adapting, consequent upon the accession of Greece, Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. Commission Directive 85/411/EEC of 25 July 1985 amending Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. Council Directive 86/122/EEC of 8 April 1986 adapting, consequent upon the accession of Spain and Portugal, Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. Council Directive 90/656/EEC of 4 December 1990 on the transitional measures applicable in Germany with regard to certain Community provisions relating to the protection of the environment. Commission Directive 91/244/EEC of 6 March 1991 amending Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. Council Directive 94/24/EC of 8 June 1994 amending Annex II to Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. Council Decision of 1 January 1995 adapting instruments regarding the accession of the new Member States to the European Union (Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and Sweden). Commission Directive 97/49/EC of 29 July 1997 amending Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. DISCHARGES OF DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES Other substances - protection of the aquatic environment of the Community:

Council Directive 76/464/EEC of 4 May 1976 on pollution caused by certain dangerous substances discharged into the aquatic environment of the Community. Council Directive 90/656/EEC of 4 December 1990 on the transitional measures applicable in Germany with regard to certain Community provisions relating to the protection of the environment. Council Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991 standardising and rationalising reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment. WASTE Disposal of waste oil:

Council Directive 75/439/EEC of 16 June 1975 on the disposal of waste oil.

85

Council Directive 87/101/EEC of 22 December 1986 amending Directive 75/439/EEC on the disposal of waste oils. Council Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991 standardising and rationalising reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment. Waste disposal:

Council Directive 75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste. Council Directive 91/156/EEC of 18 March 1991 amending Directive 75/442/EEC on waste. Council Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991 standardising and rationalising reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment. Commission Decision 96/350/EC of 24 May 1996 adapting Annexes IIA and IIB to Council Directive 75/442/EEC on waste. Council Directive 96/59/EC of 16 September 1996 on the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls (PCB/PCT). PRODUCT LEGISLATION Quality of water for human consumption:

Council Directive 80/778/EEC of 15 July 1980 relating to the quality of water intended for human consumption. Council Directive 81/858/EEC of 19 October 1981 adapting, consequent upon the accession of Greece, Directive 80/778/EEC of 15 July 1980 relating to the quality of water intended for human consumption. Council Directive 90/656/EEC of 4 December 1990 on the transitional measures applicable in Germany with regard to certain Community provisions relating to the protection of the environment. Council Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991 standardising and rationalising reports on the implementation of certain Directives relating to the environment. CHEMICAL PRODUCTS Disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls:

The current Directive repeals Directive 76/403/EEC. Council Directive 96/59/EC of 16 September 1996 on the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls (PCBs/PCTs). Pending Legislation in Ireland Wildlife (Amendment) Bill; this amendment Bill has almost been passed and is at the

second stage in the Oireachtas, the Upper House of the Government.

The following text is taken from the Explanatory Memorandum to the Wildlife (Amendment) Bill, 1999 (supplied by D�chas, 26/04/00) The main objectives of this Bill are to:

(a) provide statutory protection for Natural Heritage Areas (NHAs);

86

(b) improve a number of measures, or introduce new ones, to enhance the conservation of wildlife species and their habitats;

(c) enhance a number of existing controls in respect of hunting, which are designed to serve the interests of wildlife conservation, and introduce new powers to regulate commercial shoot operators;

(d) ensure or strengthen compliance with international agreements and, in particular enable ratification of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) and the Agreement on the Conservation of African-Eurasian Migratory Waterbirds Agreement (AEWA);

(e) introduce statutory protection for geological and geomorphological sites; (f) increase substantially monetary fines for contravention of the Wildlife Acts

and introduce prison sentences in addition to those fines; (g) enable the Minister to act independently of forestry legislation (e.g. in relation

to the acquisition of land by agreement); (h) strengthen the protective regime for Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) by

ensuring that protection will in all cases apply from the time of notification of proposed sites; and

(i) give specific recognition to the Minister’s responsibilities in regard to promoting the conservation of biological diversity, in the context of Ireland’s commitment to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive (pending). Original directive 1985 (85/337/EEC); Amendment adopted 1997 (97/11/EC). Amended proposal 18th February 1999, not yet adopted. Reference: COM (1999) 73 Final Amended Proposal for Council Directive on Assessment of the Effect of Certain Plans and Programs on the Environment. Water Framework Directive (pending). Not yet adopted; amended proposal 17th February 1998, COM (1998) 76 Final. Common Position (41/1999/EC), with a view to adopting a Directive of the European Parliament and of the council establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy – (purpose of which is to establish a framework for the protection of inland surface water, transitional waters, coastal waters and groundwater).

87

Appendix IV

World Wildlife Fund Glossary [http://www.wwf-uk.org/countryside/glossary.htm] EUROPEAN COMMISSION The European Commission consists of representatives (commissioners) from the Member States. The role of the Commission is to ensure the proper functioning and development of the common market. The Commission is responsible for initiating policy and legislation relating to matters within the Amsterdam Treaty, as well as ensuring that the provisions of the Treaty are applied (ie acting as "Guardian of the Treaties"). DEVOLUTION The UK is undergoing a range of changes to its political and administrative structures. Scotland now has its own Parliament, Wales has an elected Assembly, and a similar body for Northern Ireland has been elected but is not yet operational. This means that each country can have more say over certain areas of its affairs, including the environment. WWF responds by targeting these institutions as well as Westminster when lobbying on key environmental issues. EU HABITATS DIRECTIVE The EU Habitats Directive is one of the strongest pieces of legislation to have been passed by the European Union in the last decade. The Directive was passed to protect Europe's most threatened habitats and species other than birds (an earlier Directive was passed to protect wild birds in 1979). In the UK, this includes Caledonian pine forests, meadows, bogs, reefs, the otter and the harbour porpoise. It obliges countries to designate and protect Special Areas of Conservation (SACs). Together, SACs and Special Protection Areas (SPAs) designated under the EU Wild Birds Directive make up Natura 2000 - a pan-European network of protected areas designed to safeguard Europe's natural heritage. UK BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN The UK Biodiversity Action Plan is the UK's response to the endorsement of the Biodiversity Convention at Rio, Brazil in June 1992. At Rio, over 150 world leaders committed themselves to stop the loss of plants and animals and their habitats which were - and are - disappearing at an alarming rate. The UK's Biodiversity Action Plan was launched in January 1994.

Description of Environmental Designations Used in GIS International Ramsar sites are designated under the International Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat (the Ramsar Convention). There are currently 128 classified Ramsar sites in the UK covering a total area of 551,191 hectares. There are seven Ramsar sites in Wales occupying an area of 11,336 ha. [http://www.jncc.gov.uk/idt/ramsar_spa/others.htm].

88

Of the 21 Ramsar sites in Ireland, seven are coastal. Although Ramsar sites in Ireland are owned by the National Parks and Wildlife (D�chas) they are not specifically protected under Irish legislation. They are protected through their designation as Special Protection Areas or Nature Reserves (Boelens et al., 1999). The Irish Ramsar sites were not available in digital format and are therefore not displayed in the GIS, however the Welsh sites are displayed in the GIS. UK Designations Special Protection Areas (SPAs) are designated under the European Commission Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds (79/409/EEC). There are currently 187 classified SPAs in the UK covering a total area of 764,198 hectares. Classified SPAs and candidate SACs together form the European wide network of sites known as Natura 2000. The Welsh area has eleven SPAs occupying a total area of 66,825 ha. [http://www.jncc.gov.uk/idt/ramsar_spa/others.htm]. Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) are designated under the EC Habitats and Species Directive for the protection of habitats and (non-bird) species. There are currently 315 candidate SACs in the UK covering a total area of 1,639,945 hectares. [http://www.jncc.gov.uk/idt/ramsar_spa/default.htm]. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) are designated under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (note that there is analogous legislation in Northern Ireland for the designation of Areas of Special Scientific Interest, ASSI). These sites are designated for their special nature conservation interest. They represent unique areas of land or water that are of special interest by reason of their flora, fauna, geological features or landforms of special interest. They also provide an excellent base for educational purposes. SSSIs provide the basis for other national and international designations e.g. NNRs and SACs (MacDonald et al., 1999). National Nature Reserves (NNRs) were introduced as a result of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949. NNRs represent some of the most important natural and semi-natural ecosystems and earth science features. They are managed to conserve their flora, fauna, features of geological, physiographical or other scientific or special interest (MacDonald et al., 1999). Marine Nature Reserve (MNR) is the only statutory designation that specifically relates to marine areas below the low water mark. Provision is made in the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 to designate marine areas in order to conserve their marine flora and fauna. MNRs are a way of conserving especially important marine habitats and wildlife and other unique features along the shore or on the seabed. There are only three MNRs designated to date in the UK, one of which is in south west Wales, Skomer (MacDonald et al., 1999). Irish Designations Special Protection Areas: There are sixty three designated SPAs (as of July 1998) on or near the coast of Ireland covering and area of >75,000 hectares. A further nineteen coastal sites were proposed for designation (as of July 1998). Many of these designated and proposed sites hold nationally or internationally important numbers of

89

waterfowl or seabirds (Boelens et al., 1999). Twenty one of the coastal SPAs are present within the Irish side of the RACER study area. Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) is the primary mechanism by which EU Directive (92/42/EEC) on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (the Habitats Directive) will be implemented. The relevant legislation implementing the habitats directive in Ireland is the European Communities (Natural Habitats) Regulations, 1997 (S.I. No. 94 of 1997). SACs are identified as outstanding examples of selected habitats types or areas important for the continued well being or survival of selected species other than birds (Boelens et al., 1999). Natural Heritage Area (NHA): This is a proposed designation and has no legal basis until the Wildlife Amendment Bill is passed. Proposed NHAs forms the basis of the system for protecting Ireland’s natural habitats; all other nature designations will overlap with NHAs. This designation evolved from the Area of Scientific Interest (ASI) designation, initially surveyed and mapped in the 1970s. Approximately 7% of national territory (500,000 ha. of land and water) covering over 1,200 sites are designated as proposed NHAs (pNHAs); approximately 280 of these are on the coast. Many of these coastal pNHAs are important as feeding and/or breeding sites for birds and are also designated as SPAs (Boelens et al., 1999). Statutory Nature Reserves are considered the most rigorous mechanism for protection of ecosystems and species of flora and fauna in Ireland. All are NHAs, most are in State ownership and some will be designated as SACs. The criteria for designation of Nature Reserve include the presence of breeding seabirds and wintering waterfowl (Boelens et al., 1999). Two of these designations exist along the Irish coast of the RACER area.

90

Appendix V

91

RACER

COASTAL ZONE SENSITIVITY

TRAINING GUIDE FOR WORKSHOP

Dublin 12th April 2000

By Mary O’Connell and Deirdre Tobin

Coastal Resources Centre, UCC

Held at The Department of the Marine and Natural Resources

Irish Coastguard Division Dublin

92

Table of contents 1.Training Guide to RACER Coastal Zone Sensitivity using a MapInfo Platform Introduction 1. Fundamental Tools Tutorial: 2. Dataset Examination and Assessment

Loading General Sensitivity Information

Loading Designated Areas Loading Clean-Up Recommendations Loading Supplementary Information Loading Fisheries Information Loading Marine Mammal Information Loading Bird Information Sensitivity Index Calculation

2.Sensitivity Issues to consider during a pollution incident; An Oil Spill Introduction Response Effects of clean-up on the coastal environment Glossary References

93

1. Training Guide to RACER Coastal Zone Sensitivity using a MapInfo Platform

Introduction: The first section of this training guide consists of an outline of the core tools of the system. Begin by taking note of each of these tools, prior to actually using them, thereby providing a basic perception of their functions. The second section of the training guide goes through a step by step procedure of loading the datasets and accessing all the associated information (if necessary, section 1 can then be referred to on use of individual tools). 1. Fundamental Tools: 1. Double click on the RACER icon on the desktop.

2. RACER set up dialog box appears; Chose appropriate drives for the project and click ok.

3. The main buttons to be used are displayed below.

4. To move around the study area click on the pan button (marked with the hand).

Hold the button down as you move and when you reach the required area release the mouse button and allow the view time to reload the image. 5. To zoom back to the full extent of the study area, click on the map button.

94

6. To zoom in/out of a desired area use the zoom button.

7. Once data has been loaded the “i” button allows additional information to be

viewed in an information dialog box.

To remove the Info Tool dialog box click on the � at the top right hand corner of the box. 8. The waste bin button removes datasets if required, from the existing view

once the data has been loaded, click on;

highlight the dataset to be removed (take note: do not highlight any other dataset other than the dataset that is to be removed) and click ok. 9. Some of the datasets have accompanying images or text which are termed “hotlinks”. These can be found in some of the Irish environmental designations (i.e. SACs and NHAs), and in the Irish clean-up guidelines and Irish and Welsh aerial photography. When these datasets are loaded in, a camera tool appears;

the user clicks on the desired data point of interest with the arrow cursor;

then clicks on the camera to load up the accompanying hotlink.

Special Area of Conservation along the Wicklow coastline (Ireland), with accompanying

word document describing the site. Note: When opening the Microsoft Word hotlinked documents, a dialog box appears on the screen requesting a password; this can be ignored. Click on the Read Only button to display the document.

95

TUTORIAL 2. Dataset Examination and Assessment: The main menu option for RACER is entitled “Coastal Sensitivity” on the main menu bar.

This menu is primarily divided into:

General Sensitivity ��

��

��

��

��

��

��

��

Designated Areas Clean-Up Guidelines Supplementary Information Sensitivity Index Fisheries Information Marine Mammals Bird Information

Scrolling down this list it is evident that each option is subdivided into their respective Irish and Welsh components depending on the associated datasets. We will now practise loading these datasets. Loading General Sensitivity Information: The first option i.e. General Sensitivity, consists of the basic geomorphological features of the Irish and Welsh coastlines e.g. shore substrate (rock, sand etc.), shore type (cliff, dunes etc.) and ecology. Amenity and access data is available for the Irish coast in this section. Blue Flag beach/marina locations are also in the general sensitivity category. CCW indicates information from the Welsh side of the Irish Sea. OPRU indicates information from the Irish side of the Irish Sea. Task 1: Load in coastal sediment. Once these have loaded, the main coastal sediment types of the study area becomes clear. Use the key within the legend box to differentiate. Task 2: Load in shore type for both Irish and Welsh coasts (see legend for key to shore type). Task 3: Load in ecological information. This dataset has the additional option (for the Irish side) of using the information tool by clicking on the “i” button (outlined earlier); then clicking on any of the ecological symbols, for example, the wader symbol;

with the “i” button, some text information on that feature will appear in the info tool dialog box, as seen below;

96

Try this with more of the symbols to become familiar. The Irish amenity and access data also allow this option. If the text in the dialog box is not fully in view, click within the text line and use the left/right arrows on the key board to scroll across, alternatively, use the mouse to highlight and scroll across. The scroll bar on the right hand side of the dialog box can be used to view up and down. Loading Designated Areas: The Designated Areas option is divided into Irish and Welsh subsections. Digital coverage of the Welsh designations is more extensive than the Irish coverage. Task 4: Load in Welsh designations of your choice. The “i” tool, as described earlier, can be used once the designations have been loaded. Click on any of the sites and brief information appears in an Info Tool box. Task 5: Load in Irish designations of your choice. Note: Of the Irish designations, both the Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and the Natural Heritage Areas (NHAs) contain hotlinks, which provide a more detailed account of the site under query by linking to a Microsoft Word document. When loading these data, a dialog box appears;

To proceed, click ok. Once the designations have completed loading the camera tool is evident. To access the site descriptions, follow the procedure described earlier in point 9 of the Fundamental Tools section. When finished viewing each hotlink, close down the Microsoft Word window by clicking on the � at the top right hand corner of the window before viewing the next site description.

97

N.B. Note: Only one hotlink-associated dataset can be loaded at a time, therefore having finished using that dataset, use the waste bin button to clear the screen of that hotlinked dataset before loading up the next hotlink-associated dataset. This prevents running problems within the system from occurring. The remainder of the designation data can be queried using the “i” tool, mentioned previously. Loading Clean-Up Recommendations: Under the Coastal Sensitivity menu there is a Clean-Up Guide available for the Irish coast; OPRU Survey (recommendations as suggested by OPRU, Oil Pollution Research Unit; integral part of CORDAH, UK). There is also a General Guidelines section within the CleanUp Guide menu. By clicking on this, a hotlinked document appears providing tables of general clean-up options and environmental considerations, which have been taken from relevant publications (see section 2 of this training manual; Sensitivity Issues). There is a hotlink connected to the OPRU survey clean-up options also. This is accessed by clicking ok when the warning comes up (described in the last section).

Once the data is loaded a series of red squares are evident along the Irish coast. To obtain clean-up guideline information, click on the perimeter of the red box of the area in question with the arrow cursor. The perimeter becomes highlighted.

Then click on the camera tool and the hotlink to a Microsoft Word document opens providing details on recommended clean-up guidelines and clean-up restrictions for each area.

98

Loading Supplementary Information: The next option on the Coastal Sensitivity menu is Supplementary Information. This is divided into Irish and Welsh aerial photography. The Irish images are loaded by clicking on the Enterprise Ireland option and following the standard sequence for loading in hotlinked data. Task 6: Load in Irish aerial photography. Note: More than one image can be loaded at a time, however depending on the capacity of your computer, having more than one viewer window loaded at a time can greatly affect the speed of the system. Thus, unless necessary, close each viewer window once the image has been assessed. Task 7: Remove this dataset from the screen. Once finished viewing the Irish images, clear the screen of this dataset before loading in further data. When the screen has been cleared of any previous hotlinked dataset, the next hotlinked dataset can be loaded. Task 8: Load in Welsh aerial photography (This dataset runs from nine separate CDs which store the individual images). Carry out same steps as previous to load in the hotlinked data. Zoom into the desired area of interest. The image locations are represented by colour-coded stars corresponding to the nine CDs that the Welsh aerial photography runs from. Click on one of the stars with the arrow cursor, then click on the camera tool. A dialog box similar to the following will appear indicating the correct CD to insert to view the image;

99

Click ok and the selected image appears. Close image by clicking on � button on top right hand corner of image viewer. Before loading the next dataset remove the aerial photographs from the screen (using waste bin button). Loading Fisheries Information: The Fisheries Information section, provides information on the pelagic, demersal and shellfish species of the Irish and Welsh coasts for the main ports. It also provides the main Irish aquaculture sites. More detail on these datasets can be viewed using the “i” button. Task 9: Load fisheries information of your choice. Loading Marine Mammal Information: The Marine Mammal section provides information on Grey seal distribution along the Irish and Welsh coastlines and provides cetacean (whales and dolphins) stranding records for the Irish coastline from a selection of sources. Task 10: Load mammal data of your choice (using “i” button as an info tool). Loading Bird Information: The Bird Information is divided into two sub-sections; monthly vulnerability information and bird surveys. The first sub-section is further divided into twelve individual monthly maps of seabird vulnerability (produced by JNCC) which are viewed by a Netscape browser. The second sub-section is further divided into datasets of bird surveys for the Irish and Welsh coastlines. (To assist in understanding the JNCC bird survey data and the Birdwatch Ireland data are explanatory notes on the data. These are obtained by clicking on the options entitled JNCC Data Key and Birdwatch Ireland Data Key respectively).

100

Sensitivity Index Calculation: The Sensitivity Index section on the coastal sensitivity menu displays the individual Irish and Welsh default sensitivity results. These are displayed as colour coded coastline segments for each coastline. The higher the index value, the more sensitive the section of coastline. The sensitivity indices run by clicking on the I and W buttons;

The I button operates the Irish sensitivity index and the W button operates the Welsh sensitivity index. The weighting of the individual criteria that the sensitivity index results are determined by, can be adjusted according to the users personal or expert judgement. Note: The sensitivity index calculation process takes quite some time to run. The Irish index run-time varies from approximately five minutes and the Welsh index from approximately ten minutes depending on the speed of your computer. Task 11: Run an index of your choice by inserting your own criteria weightings then click ok but be prepared to wait!

101

2. Sensitivity Issues to consider during a pollution incident An Oil Spill

Introduction To decide whether or not an area of coastline needs priority protection in the event of an oil spill, one has to consider two things: Is the area of coastline in question, sensitive? Is the area of coastline in question, vulnerable? These two phrases sensitivity and vulnerability are frequently used when examining coastal zone sensitivity. Although they may be interpreted as having the same meaning, it is important to distinguish between the two. According to definitions by Holt, et al., (1995) sensitivity and vulnerability are defined as follows: Sensitivity The innate capacity of an organism to suffer damage or death from

an external factor beyond the range of environmental parameters normally experienced.

Vulnerability The exposure of an organism to an external factor to which it is sensitive.

An area or given resource therefore may be classified as sensitive but not necessarily vulnerable until an actual hazard or threat arises. Response It is important to understand the effects of pollution on the different shore substrates under consideration. Our sensitivity classification has categorised the shore into four main substrates; these are rock, shingle, sand and mud. The effects of contaminants on various substrates can be minor to disastrous. The primary contaminant under consideration in the RACER project has been oil. Oil effects these four substrates in different ways, the persistence and residence time of the oil can vary from one substrate to the next. Any strategy option will depend on how sensitive to change the environment will be. Each oil spill incident is unique and its possible impacts difficult to predict; the following table summarises the general effects of oil on these substrates. Table 1 Oil Impacts on shore type (NOAA, 1992. Ritchie, 1995) SHORE-SUBSTRATE RESULTANT EFFECT OF OIL CONTAMINATION Rock Wave cut cliffs: persistence of oil is generally low, as it cannot penetrate the substrate

and may be removed by wave action. Wave cut platforms: oil may be more persistent if it penetrates any surface sediments. Also potential for greater impact on intertidal communities, in rock pools etc., where oil can cover over during the falling tide.

Sand Fine Sand Exposed beaches: max penetration usually <10cm, burial of oil by clean sand is usually limited to <30cm, deeper burial is possible if oil spills at beginning of an accretionary period. A lot of oil will be removed by proceeding storms. Can have temporary declines in infaunal populations, this can affect feeding shorebirds. Can support pedestrian and vehicular traffic and thus facilitate clean up. Sheltered beaches: more area can be covered by oil as it is narrower. Less oil penetration as sediments are finer. Usually not buried unless by wind-blown sand. Oil can persist from months to years depending on wave exposure. Asphalt pavements can form under

102

heavy accumulations of oil. A moderately rich biological community can be supported. Coarse Sand Exposed beaches: penetration of oil can reach 25cm. Burial of oil by clean sand can be rapid and reach up to 60cm; this can reach >1m if oil is spilled at beginning of accretionary period. Persistence of deeply buried oil could be long depending on time of year and beach cycle. Evidence of temporary declines in infaunal populations; this in turn affects shorebirds. Sediment can be soft making vehicle access difficult Sheltered beaches: more of beach face can be covered by oil, due to its narrower nature. Oil penetration less where sediments are finer and more poorly sorted. Oil persistence can be from months to years depending on wave exposure. There is some burial by clean sand, but less than an exposed beach. Asphalt pavements can form under heavy accumulations; these pavements change nature and stability of the substrate and thus its biological utilization.

Shingle Shingle with a mixture of cobbles and pebbles 2mm-250mm: oil penetration increases with increasing particle/stone size. In high energy environments where strong wave action persists, surface material is cleaned quickly by abrasion whereas buried oil may persist for a long time. Low viscosity oils may be flushed out by natural water movement.

Mud Characteristic of low energy environments – little penetration of the substrate by oil as the sediment is usually too water-logged; however, oil can persist on surface for significant periods of time. If oil spills during a storm, the oil may become incorporated in suspended sediment and be deposited on mud flats causing indefinite persistence. Occurrence of animal burrows and plant root channels also facilitate oil penetration. Effects on species: biological utilisation of mud can be high e.g. bivalves, macroinvertebrates etc., birds also use exposed flats as roosting and foraging sites.

Once the most sensitive areas or the reasons for their sensitivity, are identified, the appropriate preventative and clean-up action must be applied. There are a number of possible clean-up techniques which can be applied when responding to an oil spill. Ironically, these clean up measures can often cause more damage, as some of the chemical components of dispersants can have detrimental effects on biological life. When a spill occurs an evaluation process of the given scenario has to be performed to know what best clean up response to adopt. This can be quite a difficult procedure as resources which are sensitive to both the spill and the clean up options, have to be accounted for. A number of clean-up options which can be carried out in shoreline clean up response are described in the following section. These clean up options are part of a revised clean up methods list which was initially developed during the first year of the Exxon Valdez spill clean up program by NOAA (1992) USA. It outlines methods suitable for shoreline response; dispersant techniques are generally applied for open water situations. Table 2 Shoreline Clean-up methods (NOAA, 1992). CLEAN-UP METHOD DESCRIPTION No Action

No attempt to remove any stranded oil, to minimise impacts to the environment

Manual Removal

Removal using hand tools and manual labour

Passive Collection Sorbents

Removal by sorption onto oleophilic material placed in the intertidal zone

Debris Removal

Removal of contaminated debris and logs (involving manual and mechanical means if necessary)

Trenching

Remove subsurface oil from permeable substrates by digging trenches and removing oil floating on the water table using vacuum

103

pump or suction devices Sediment Removal

Removal of surface oiled sediments using hand tools or mechanical equipment

Cold Water Flooding (Deluge)

Washing surface oil and oil from crevices and rock interstices (using hoses) to waters edge for collection (trapped by booms or picked up by skimmers or sorbents)

(a)Cold Water/Low Pressure Washing (b)Cold Water/High Pressure Washing

(a) Removing oil which has adhered to or pooled on surfaces or become trapped in vegetation (b) Removing oil that has adhered to hard substrates or man-made structures

WarmWater/Moderate-to-High Pressure Washing (up to 100 oF)

Mobilising thick and weathered oil adhered to rock surfaces before flushing it to the waters edge where it is collected

Hot Water/High Pressure Washing (up to 170 oF)

To remove trapped and weathered oil from inaccessible locations and surfaces not amenable to mechanical removal by use of water heaters and high pressure sprayers

Slurry Sand Blasting

Remove heavy residual oil from solid substrates using sand-blasting equipment

Vacuum

Using a vacuum unit with a suction head to recover free oil from substrates or from the water surface in sheltered areas

Effects of clean-up on the coastal environment The clean-up operation can invariably have both advantageous and disadvantageous implications. The following list provides an account of the environmental considerations associated with the more common clean up methods. Table 3 Environmental Considerations of Clean-Up. BIOLOGICAL CONSTRAINTS ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS

Natural Recovery Inappropriate for areas used by large numbers of mobile animals (e.g. birds, marine mammals), or endangered species.

Same effects as the oil on the environment.

Manual Cleaning Both pedestrian and vehicular traffic over sensitive areas should be restricted to a minimum, especially during certain periods e.g. during bird nesting.

Minimal if surface disturbance by crew activity and waste generation is controlled.

Sorbents Access for retrieving sorbents should not be through soft or sensitive habitats or affect wildlife. They should not be used in a fashion that may entrap wildlife or left in place too long as they can cause ingestion hazards to wildlife once they break up.

Habitat disturbance: physical disturbance during deployment and retrieval. Improper supervision of such can crush or smother sensitive substrates.

Vacuum Restrictions should be established where traffic will trample over sensitive areas.

Minimal if traffic (pedestrian and vehicular) is controlled and if minimal substrate is removed or damaged.

Debris Removal Traffic should be restricted to a minimum, especially during spawning periods, or migratory periods in sensitive areas.

Physical disruption of environment due to removal equipment and vehicles.

Sediment Reworking Avoid this clean-up method on shores near spawning grounds or bird nesting sites, or near shellfish beds, as there is the potential for release of oil and oiled sediments into adjacent bodies of water.

Due to the mixing of oil and sediment further penetration of oil into deeper sediment layers can result in increased contamination, and longer recovery period.

Vegetation Cutting/Removal

Minimise root destruction due to potential deeper mixing of oil into sediments. Access should be restricted during bird nesting periods.

Removal of vegetation will destroy many habitats. Cutting will have reduced plant growth and some plants may die. Cutting to close to stem base may enhance penetration

104

of oil to subsurface layers. Loss of vegetation may result in erosion and habitat loss.

Flooding Special attention to be taken when collecting oil in near-shore habitats with rich biological communities. Flooding would not be suitable for muddy environments.

Physical disruption of environment by traffic. Smothering of substrate by sediments washed over. Oiled sediment may be transported to shallow near-shore areas causing contamination and burial of benthic life.

Low/High Pressure Ambient Water Flushing

May need to restrict flushing to prevent oil draining across sensitive habitats. Flushed oil has to be recovered to prevent further contamination of adjacent areas. Use from boats would reduce traffic across soft substrates and vegetation.

If containment methods are not sufficient oil and oiled sediments may be flushed into offshore areas. Trampling of substrate and biota will inevitably occur. High Pressure flushing will remove attached animals and plants directly in the spray zone and may cause erosion or force oil deeper into substrate.

Low/High Pressure Hot Water Flushing

Avoid wetlands or rich intertidal community habitats. Use should be restricted to prevent oil/water effluent washing over sensitive habitats. Operation from boats will reduce traffic over substrate. Flushed oil has to be recovered to prevent further contamination.

Hot water will kill all attached animals and plants irrespective of whether pressure is high or low. If containment is not appropriately controlled oiled sediment/water may be transported to other areas.

Sand Blasting Not to be used in areas of soft substrate, vegetation or high biological diversity.

Complete destruction of organisms in blast zone. Possible smothering of organisms. Un-recovered, used sand will introduce oiled sediments to adjacent habitats.

In-Situ Burning Effects of smoke should be evaluated. Temperature and air quality effects will probably be short-lived. Limited data on burning oiled wetlands indicate recovery of wetland vegetation will depend on season of burn, vegetation type and water level in the marsh at time of burning. On-water burn residues will probably sink.

Dispersants Use in shallow water could effect benthic life. Care should be taken not to spray any wildlife, especially birds or fur bearing marine mammals e.g. seals.

The dispersed oil may affect organisms in the upper 10 metres of the water column before it is sufficiently diluted.

Solidifiers Must be able to recover all treated material.

Un-recovered solidified oil may have longer impact because of slow weathering rates. Physical disturbance is probable during application and recovery.

Shoreline Cleaning Agents

When the product does not disperse the oil into the water column, released oil has to be recovered from the water surface. Use may be restricted where suspended sediment concentration is high – near wetlands and sensitive near-shore resources.

Toxicity and effects on dispersability of treated oil vary widely among products. So toxicity of product should always be considered before selecting the product.

Information taken from Shoreline Assessment Manual, 2nd Ed., NOAA, Michel et al., 1998. The appropriate clean up operation depends on the specific characteristics of the environment which has been affected by the spill. Correct response action is then determined by the response specialists and decision makers. This is where the coastal zone sensitivity system comes into play. Once a spill has been reported, the relevant operators and managers can scan over the area using the GIS system and assess the shoreline composition and type and associated resources at risk in the area. Thus an

105

overview of the area can be compiled before leaving the desktop, ensuring a more organised and efficient approach on arrival at the impacted site.

106

Glossary Accretionary Period A time of sediment deposition. Benthic Relating to bottom layer of water body, or bottom dwelling marine life. Foraging In this context bird foraging sites areas where birds search for food. Infaunal Aquatic animals which live in the bottom sediment of a body of water. Intertidal Concerning the area between the high and low tide mark. Macroinvertebrates Animals without backbones e.g. snails, worms, jellyfish, sponges and crustaceans. Oleophilic Oleophilic material; material which oil has an affinity to.

107

References: Edwards, R., and Sime, H., Eds., 1998. The Sea Empress Oil Spill, Proceedings of the International Conference held in Cardiff, 11-13 February 1998. Holt, T.J., et al., 1995. The Sensitivity of Marine Communities to Man-Induced Change – A Scoping Report. CCW Contract Science Report 65. McGraw – Hill, 1997. Dictionary of Bioscience (Parker, S.P., editor in chief). ISBN 0-07-052430-0. Michel, J., Benggio, B., and Byron, I., 1998. Shoreline Assessment Manual. 2nd Ed. HAZMAT Report No. 98-3, for NOAA (National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration). August 1998. NOAA, 1992. Introduction to coastal Habitats and Biological Resources for Spill Response. (http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/oilaids/monterey/monterey.html). Ritchie, W., 1995. Maritime Oil Spills – Environmental Lessons and Experiences With Special Reference to Low-Risk Coastlines. Journal of Coastal Conservation Vol. 1, pp 63-76. Sustainable development Indicators Glossary: http://www.hq.nasa.gov/iwgsdi/glossary.html Williams, J.M., Tasker, M.L., Carter, I.C. and Webb, A., 1995. A Method of Assessing Seabird Vulnerability to Surface Pollutants. IBIS 137: S147-S152.

108

http://www.hq.nasa.gov/iwgsdi/glossary.html

Appendix VI

109

Irish Environmental Designations See Hickie (1997) and Nairn et al. (1995) Notes Scientific Interest: E = Ecological G = Geological Rating: I = International N = National R = Regional L = Local Nr; n/d = Not rated; no data provided Other Designations: UNBPR = UNESCO Biosphere Reserve BGR = Biogenetic Reserve NNR or NR = National Nature Reserve SPA = Special Protection Area pSPA = proposed Special Protection Area RAM or R = Ramsar Site RF = Refuge for Fauna W or WS = Wildfowl Sanctuary SAAO = Special Amenity Area Order D = Dunes M = Machair S = Sandhills Environmental Designations for Co.Louth Special Protection Areas in Ireland (March 97 figures) Site Name Area (Hectares) Types Species Designations

Dundalk Bay 4767.00 Sea bay, estuaries Waterfowl WS, R

Carlingford Lough 172.00 Estuary n/d n/d

Environmental Designations for Co. Dublin Special Protection Areas in Ireland (March 97 figures) Site Name Area

(Hectares) Types Species Designations

North Bull Island 1395.00 Dunes, saltmarsh,

mudflat

Waterfowl, seabirds

NR, R, UNBPR, SAAO, WS

Sandymount Strand/Tolka Estuary

653.00 Mud/sandflats Waterfowl R

Baldoyle Bay 203.00 Estuary Waterfowl NR, R Malahide Estuary 546.00 Estuary Waterfowl NR, R Rogerstown Estuary 195.00 Estuary Waterfowl NR, R, WS Rockabill 1.00 Marine island Seabirds RF Lambay Island 612.00 Marine island Seabirds n/d

110

Statutory Nature Reserves Site Name Areas

(Hectares) Main

Habitats Special Interest

Overlapping Designations

Rogerstown Estuary 195.00 Mud and sandflats

Waterfowl SPA, R

North Bull Island 118.00 Sand dunes*, saltmarsh

Waterfowl, flora SPA, R, UNBPR

North Bull Island shore 1318.00 Mud and sandflats

Waterfowl SPA, R, UNBPR

Baldoyle Estuary 203.00 Mud and sandflats, saltmarsh

Waterfowl SPA, R

Designated Refuges for Fauna Name Habitats

Protected Species

Protected Rockabill Island Marine island Roseate Tern

Coastal Ramsar Sites Site Name Rogerstown Estuary Broadmeadow Estuary Baldoyle Estuary North Bull Island Sandymount Strand Areas of Scientific Interest along the south and east coasts (Environmental Appraisal-South East coast of Ireland, 1995) Name of Area Interest Rating Other

Designations Howth Head and Ireland's Eye

E, G N

North Bull Island E, G I NNR, SPA, RAM

Ringsend-North Wall E N Sandymount Strand E nr SPA Dalkey Sound-Sandycove

E N

Killiney Hill E, G R Shanganagh G N Environmental Designations for Co.Wicklow Areas of Scientific Interest along the south and east coasts (Environmental Appraisal-South East coast of Ireland, 1995) Name of Area Interest Rating

Bray Head E, G N

The Murrough E N

111

Wicklow Head E N Maherabeg E R Brittas Bay and Buckroney

E N

Arklow Sand Dunes

E R

Askintinny Dunes E L

Environmental Designations for Co.Wexford Special Protection Areas in Ireland (March 97 figures) Site Name Area (Hectares) Types Species Designations

Bannow Bay 958.00 Sea bay Waterfowl WS, R Ballyteige/The Cull/Killag

526.00 Estuary/polder

Waterfowl, seabirds

NR, BGR

Saltee Islands 126.00 Marine islands

Seabirds n/d

Lady's Island Lake 356.00 Lagoon, islands

Seabirds, waterfowl

RF

Wexford Nature Reserve

110.00 Polder, sea bay

Waterfowl WS

The Raven 589.00 Sand dunes Waterfowl NR Tacumshin Lake 528.00 Lagoon n/d n/d Statutory Nature Reserves Site Name Areas

(Hectares) Main

Habitats Special Interest Overlapping

Designations

The Raven Foreshore

589.00 Sand dunes*, sandflats, forestry

Waterfowl, flora SPA, R

Ballyteige Burrow 539.00 Sand dunes*, heath, mudflat

Waterfowl, flora SPA, BGR

Ballyteige Burrow 8.00 Saltmarsh Flora R

Designated Refuges for Fauna Site Name Habitats

Protected Species

Protected

Lady's Island Lagoon islands Arctic, Common, Roseate, Sandwich and Little Terns

Coastal Ramsar Sites Site Name

The Raven Wexford Wildfowl Reserve Bannow Bay

112

Areas of Scientific Interest along the south and east coasts (Environmental Appraisal-South East coast of Ireland, 1995) Name of Area Interest Rating Other

Designations

Ballymoney Strand

E, G R

Courtown Dunes and Glen

E L

Cahore Polders E nr Curracloe E, G R Raven Point E N NNR, SPA, RAMNorth Slob E I NNR, SPA, RAMWexford Harbour E I pSPA South Slob E I Rosslare Sand Hills

E N

St. Helen's Harbour

G N

St. Margaret's Shore

E L

Lady's Island Lake E, G I SPA, RFF Tacumsin Lake E R Kilmore Quay G R Saltee Islands E I SPA Ballyteige and the Cull

E I NNR, SPA

Keeragh Islands E L Bannow Bay E N SPA Wood Village G I Hook Head E, G I Ballyhack E R Environmental Designations for Co.Waterford Special Protection Areas in Ireland (March 97 figures) Site Name Area

(Hectares) Types Species Designations

Blackwater Estuary 468.00 Estuary Waterfowl R Dungarvan Harbour 1041.00 Sea bay, spit Waterfowl R Tramore Backstrand 367.00 Shallow bay Waterfowl R Coastal Ramsar Sites Site Name Tramore Backstrand Dungarvan Harbour Blackwater Estuary Areas of Scientific Interest along the south and east coasts (Environmental Appraisal-South East coast of Ireland, 1995) Name of Area Interest Rating Other

Designations

113

Waterford Harbour E N

Dunmore East Cliffs E N Tramore Backstrand E N SPA Newtown Cove G R Tramore to Stradbally Coast

G N

Bunmahon Dunes E R Danes Island G R Ballyvoyle Head to Tramore

E N

Dungarvan Harbour E N SPA Helvic Head E R Ardmore Lead Mine G R Kinsale Beg (Blackwater Estuary)

E L SPA

114

Appendix VII

115

METADATA TABLE Full Details of Data Sources (Already abbreviated in Dataloader Browser table in RACER folder of GIS Application) Name as in GIS Menu Source Details Irish Amenity Information Irish Ecological Information Irish Coastal Sediment Irish Access Information Irish Shore Type Irish Shore Line

OPRU Nairn, R., et al., 1995. Oil spill sensitivity maps for the south and east coasts of Ireland, prepared for Marathon Oil U.K. Ltd. and Marathon Petroleum Ireland, Ltd., by Field Studies Council Research Centre and Natural Environment Consultants Ltd., FSC/RC/14/94.

Irish Natural Heritage Areas Irish Special Areas of Conservation Irish Special Protection Areas Irish Statutory Nature Reserves

Duchas, The Heritage Service. National Parks & Wildlife, 7 Ely Place, Dublin 2, Ireland. Tel: +353 (0)1 647 2300. Email: [email protected]

Irish Clean-Up Recommendations OPRU (same as above)

Enterprise Ireland Images Compass Informatics and Enterprise Ireland, in a Marine Institute Project. Compass Informatics, GIS, Geoinformation & Internet Consultancy, 19 Nassau Street, Dublin 2, Ireland. Tel: +353 (0)1 6705761

Welsh Sites of Special Scientific Interest Welsh Proposed Special Areas of Conservation Welsh Special Protection Areas Welsh National Nature Reserves Welsh Marine Nature Reserves Welsh Ramsar Sites Welsh Ecological Information* Welsh Shoretype* Welsh Shoreline* Welsh Coastal Sediment*

CCW – Countryside Council For Wales Plas Penrhos, Ffordd Penrhos, Bangor, Gwynedd LL57 2LQ. Rob Jones Head of Geographic Information Unit. Tel: +44 (0)1248 385546 [email protected] *Map information provided to CRC by CCW: Exact reference: Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough, © NCC 1990. Cartographic Services. “Coastal Sites Sensitive to Oil Pollution”. Prepared for the Marine Pollution Control Unit, Department of Transport with support from the British Petroleum Company plc.

Irish Sensitivity Index Welsh Sensitivity Index

Composed by CRC and Judgement given to weightings based on extensive review of other international sensitivity indexing systems and discussion with project partners

Irish Aquaculture Areas La Tene Maps, �1999. Irish Aquaculture Directory and Guide, 4th Edition.

Berrow & Rogan 1997 Berrow, S.D., and Rogan, E., 1997. Review of Cetaceans Stranded on the Irish Coast, 1901-95. Mammal Rev. 1997, Vol. 27, No. 1, 51-76.

Irish Naturalist 1995 – 1998 Irish Naturalist 1995 – 1998; Relevant records were extracted from these journals.

Grey Seals Status Report 1999 – Ireland

Kiely, O., et al., 1999. Grey Seals: Status and Monitoring In the Irish & Celtic Seas. 1999. Marine Institute In Pres.

Welsh Demersal 1996 – 1997 Welsh Pelagic 1996 – 1997 Welsh Shellfish 1996 – 1997

Fisheries Statistics Unit, MAFF - Ministry for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, UK. Contact Noel London - Tel: +44 (0)1712 385913

116

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

117

Irish Demersal 1996 – 1997 Irish Pelagic 1996 – 1997 Irish Shellfish 1996 – 1997

Department of the Marine and Natural Resources, Leeson Lane, Dublin 2, Ireland. Contact Maria O’Neill - Tel:+353 (0)1 619 9200.

Birdwatch Ireland Data Dr Stephen Newton, Seabird Co-Ordinator, Birdwatch Ireland. Tel: +353 1 2804322.

Blue Flag Irish Locations An Taisce, 1999. Blue Flag beaches and Marinas in Ireland 1999. On behalf of the Foundation for Environmental Education in Europe (Feee).

Blue Flag Welsh Locations Tidy Britain Group, 1999. 1999 Seaside Awards and Blue Flag UK. CCW Welsh Images CCW – Monica Jones, Marine Intertidal Surveyor. January February March April May June July August September October November December

JNCC (Joint Nature Conservation Committee) Monthly Seabird Distribution Maps scanned from: Webb, A., Stronach, A., Tasker, M.L., and Stone, C.J., 1995. Vulnerable Concentrations of Seabirds South and West of Britain ISBN 1 873701 59 4.

Rogan 1999 Rogan, E., 1999. Zoology Department University College Cork. CRC extracted relevant records from E. Rogan strandings database.

Grey Seals Status Report 1999 – Wales

Michael Baines, 1999. Wildlife Trust, West Wales, Haverfordwest, Wales. (Kiely, O., et al., 1999. Grey Seals: Status and Monitoring In the Irish & Celtic Seas. 1999. Marine Institute In Pres).

JNCC Irish Bird Data JNCC Welsh Bird Data JNCC Data Key

Kate Thompson Co-ordinator, Seabird Monitoring Programme Joint Nature Conservation Committee Dunnet House 7 Thistle Place Aberdeen AB10 1UZ Tel.: +44 (0)1224 655703

Oil Impacts Look-Up Table NOAA Michel, J., Benggio, B., and Byron, I., 1998. Shoreline Assessment Manual. 2nd Ed. HAZMAT Report No. 98-3, for NOAA (National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration). August 1998. NOAA, 1992. Introduction to coastal Habitats and Biological Resources for Spill Response. (http://response.restoration.noaa.gov/oilaids/monterey/monterey.html). Ritchie, W., 1995. Maritime Oil Spills – Environmental Lessons and Experiences With Special Reference to Low-Risk Coastlines. Journal of Coastal Conservation Vol. 1, pp 63-76.

Birdwatch Ireland Data Key Dr Stephen Newton, Seabird Co-Ordinator, Birdwatch Ireland. Tel: +353 (0)1 2804322.

Irish Coastline: Geography Department University College Cork. Welsh Coastline: Supplied by Spike Haward: Marine Coastguard Agency UK

(Swansea) ([email protected])

Documents

COASTAL ZONE SENSITIVITY - ucc.ie · PDF filecoastal zone sensitivity workpackage six final report of risk assessment and collaborative emergency response in the irish sea racer maritime