INNER HEBRIDES AND THE MINCHES PROPOSED … · INNER HEBRIDES AND THE MINCHES PROPOSED SAC . ADVICE TO SUPPORT MANAGEMENT . ... From there it crosses the Sea of the Hebrides to the

INNER HEBRIDES AND THE MINCHES

PROPOSED SAC ADVICE TO SUPPORT MANAGEMENT

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

Further information on Special Areas of Conservation, the wider network and protected areas management is available at -

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

The following documents provide further information about the evidence and assessment of the Inner Hebrides and the Minches

proposed SAC and should be read alongside this paper -

• Site summary • Selection Assessment Document

Available from: www.snh.gov.uk/porpoiseSAC

http://www.snh.gov.uk/porpoiseSAC

1

Contents

Purpose of this advice................................................................................................. 2

Harbour porpoise in the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC ................................ 3

Roles of SNH and Marine Scotland ............................................................................ 4

Draft Conservation Objectives .................................................................................... 6

The role of Conservation Objectives ....................................................................... 6

Purpose of Conservation Objectives ....................................................................... 6

Draft Conservation Objectives ................................................................................. 7

Management Options.................................................................................................. 9

Purpose of management options ............................................................................ 9

Existing species protection ....................................................................................... 11

Overview of activities relevant to the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC ........... 12

Acoustic surveys ....................................................................................................... 15

Aquaculture - finfish .................................................................................................. 17

Cables and pipelines................................................................................................. 20

Commercial shipping ................................................................................................ 22

Introduction to fishing activities ................................................................................. 25

Fishing – mobile/ active gear ................................................................................. 27

Fishing - static gear ............................................................................................... 29

Marine Renewable Developments ............................................................................ 30

Ports and harbours ................................................................................................... 32

Recreational Activity - Leisure boats ......................................................................... 36

Scientific research .................................................................................................... 39

Wildlife tourism ......................................................................................................... 41

Potential cumulative effects ...................................................................................... 43

Summary of management options ............................................................................ 44

Further information ................................................................................................... 48

Annex 1 Roles and responsibilities...................................................................... 49

Annex 2 Existing best practice ............................................................................ 52

Annex 3 Version control ...................................................................................... 53

2

Purpose of this advice

This is a working document that has been produced to support initial discussions with stakeholders about management of activities associated with the proposed Special Area of Conservation (pSAC) during the formal consultation. This document sets out the Conservation Objectives for harbour porpoise which is the only qualifying feature of the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC. The Conservation Objectives provide the starting point for considering whether site management is required. This document also sets out management options based on our current understanding of sensitivities of harbour porpoise and activities. The development of site management is an ongoing process which will continue after designation.

This paper covers a range of different activities and developments but is not exhaustive. It focuses on where we consider there could be a risk in terms of achieving the Conservation Objectives. The paper does not attempt to cover all possible future activities or eventualities (e.g. as a result of accidents), and whilst it identifies activities that could contribute to cumulative effects relating to harbour porpoise, we do not at this stage have the information to carry out detailed assessments.

3

Harbour porpoise in the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC

The Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC comprises an area of 13,539.77 km2. The site’s northern boundary crosses the North Minch between the Point of Stoer and Tolsta Head. A simple boundary follows the coastline of the Outer Hebrides to Rubha na h-Ordaig on South Uist. From there it crosses the Sea of the Hebrides to the northern tip of Coll, and then runs from Port a’ Mhùrain on the south-west of Coll, down to Rubha Bholsa on the north coast of Islay. It has a southern boundary between the Rhuba na Tràille at the southern end of Jura and the mainland coast near Ballochroy. From Ballochroy it follows the mainland coastline back to the Point of Stoer including the Sound of Mull and Kyle Rhea. It encompasses the islands of Skye, Mull, Lismore, the group of small islands within the Firth of Lorn, and Colonsay (Map 1).

The Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC is heterogenous in terms of its physical characteristics. The water depth within the site ranges from mean low water springs at the coast to depths of around 250 m in the Firth of Lorn. Harbour porpoise feed on a wide variety of fish that are associated with a range of seabed substrates, and they generally focus on the most abundant local species. There is a mosaic of substrate types within the site with sand, mud and coarse sediments dominating in different areas. It is likely that the variety of sediments within the site and the prey species they support provide a productive foraging area for harbour porpoise, supporting them in high densities.

In the UK, work on identifying SACs for harbour porpoise has been based around divisions of the sea called management units. The Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC lies within the West Scotland management unit. The site supports approximately 31.4% of the harbour porpoise population present within the UK’s part of the West Scotland management unit in depths of less than 200 m. Although this site has been identified using summer modelled data, harbour porpoise are present throughout the year and thus the designation applies year round.

This site for harbour porpoise has been chosen because it incorporates virtually all of the top 10% of persistent high density areas identified by Heinänen & Skov (2015)1 for the West Scotland management unit, and the top 20% of densities predicted by work derived from Booth et al. (2013)2 (see SNH (2016) for further details). Harbour porpoise could therefore potentially be present within any part of the site at any given time. Hence, the location and extent of harbour porpoise distribution within the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC has not been mapped and only the site boundary is shown in Map 1.

1 HEINÄNEN, S. and SKOV, H. 2015. The identification of discrete and persistent areas of relatively high harbour porpoise density in the wider UK marine area, JNCC Report No. 544, JNCC, Peterborough. http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/JNCC_Report%20544_web.pdf 2 BOOTH, C.G., EMBLING, C., GORDON, J., CALDERAN, S.V. and HAMMOND, P.S. (2013). Habitat preferences and distribution of the harbour porpoise Phocena phocena west of Scotland. Marine Ecology Progress Series 478: 273-285

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/JNCC_Report%20544_web.pdf

4

Activities occurring in the site include acoustic surveys, aquaculture, ports and harbours, marine renewable developments, commercial shipping, fishing and leisure boat use, scientific research and wildlife tour operations.

Roles of SNH and Marine Scotland

SNH’s role is to advise Scottish Government on options for developing management for harbour porpoise in the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC to ensure the Conservation Objectives for harbour porpoise in the site are met.

In the event of the site being designated, Marine Scotland or the relevant authority should consider this advice and develop specific management measures if they are required. Marine Scotland will be responsible for making recommendations to Scottish Ministers on any measures they develop. Scottish Ministers will then decide whether to implement these measures.

Stakeholders can provide additional evidence to support the development of management options, including local knowledge of the environment and of activities. Discussions with stakeholders will be one way of highlighting the implications of any management options to both SNH and Scottish Government. This will contribute to the development of well-designed and effective management measures if the site is designated by Scottish Ministers.

5

Map 1 Location of the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC

6

Draft Conservation Objectives

The role of Conservation Objectives

Site level Conservation Objectives are a set of specified objectives to be met in a site in order to make sure that the site contributes to maintaining Favourable Conservation Status (FCS) for harbour porpoise. FCS applies at the national level and within the relevant EC biogeographic region (Atlantic marine). The Conservation Objectives are designed to ensure that the obligations of the Habitats Directive are met.

The Conservation Objectives form the framework for establishing appropriate management measures and for assessing all plans and projects that have the potential to affect the qualifying features of the site.

Harbour porpoise are protected everywhere under the provisions of Annex IV and Article 12 of the Habitats Directive (see section on Existing species protection for further information). Harbour porpoises in UK waters are considered to be part of a wider European population. The mobile nature of this species means that although site-based measures can contribute to the conservation of harbour porpoise, the concept of a ‘site population’ is not appropriate. Any site-based conservation measures will complement existing wider-ranging measures within UK waters. These include the UK harbour porpoise conservation strategy, measures undertaken at the scale of UK waters, and international measures such as ASCOBANs.

Purpose of Conservation Objectives

This section sets out the draft Conservation Objectives for the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC. These have been developed by SNH in conjunction with the JNCC and Marine Scotland Science, and agreed with the Scottish Government for the consultation.

Conservation Objectives are designed to ensure that the obligations of the Habitats Directive can be met. Article 6(2) of the Directive requires that there should be no deterioration or significant disturbance of the qualifying species or to the habitats upon which they rely. Therefore, the focus of the Conservation Objectives for harbour porpoise sites is to ensure that human activities do not:

• Lead to incidental killing or injury of significant numbers of harbour porpoise (directly or indirectly);

• prevent their use of significant parts of the site (disturbance / displacement); • significantly damage relevant habitats; or • significantly reduce the availability of prey.

7

Our intention is to produce further advice in the form of Casework Guidance (e.g. describing how to apply these COs to particular activities) that would help implement these Conservation Objectives in specific circumstances.

Draft Conservation Objectives

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

1. To maintain site integrity and ensure the site continues to make a contribution to harbour porpoise remaining at favourable conservation status in UK waters

Supplementary Advice

Harbour porpoises are exposed to a range of wider drivers of change. Some of these are natural (e.g. population fluctuations/shifts or habitat changes resulting from natural processes) and are not a direct result of human influences. There may also be wide ranging anthropogenic impacts driving change within the site, such as a result of climate change or fisheries management that cannot be managed effectively at site level.

2. To avoid significant killing, injury, or disturbance of harbour porpoise Supplementary Advice Significant killing, injury, or disturbance are impacts that negatively affect the site on a long-term basis. As this site holds over 30% of the management unit population then such an impact would also have a negative effect on Favourable Conservation Status of the harbour porpoise population in UK waters. The intent of this objective is to specifically protect the species from significant incidental killing, injury, or disturbance within the site. This site has been identified on the basis of having above average densities of harbour porpoises relative to other areas of the management unit. Deliberate or reckless killing, injury and disturbance within the site is covered by provisions within European Protected Species legislation as set out in Regulation 39 of The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended).

The definitions of ‘deliberate’, ‘reckless’ and ‘disturbance’ are given in Marine Scotland’s guidance on The protection of marine European Protected Species from injury and disturbance. Disturbance is an offence under Regulations 39(1)(b) and 39(2) The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended).

http://www.gov.scot/Resource/0044/00446679.pdf


8

These definitions of disturbance are for the purposes of assessing the need for an EPS licence and apply throughout Scottish waters. Activities within the site should be managed so that any disturbance does not cause displacement of harbour porpoise on a long-term basis.

3. To maintain the habitat and prey of harbour porpoise in favourable condition Supplementary Advice The site provides good foraging habitat and it may also be used for breeding and calving. It is considered that the present condition of the site is beneficial to the species. The population of harbour porpoise using the site require sufficient prey to be available. Harbour porpoise eat a variety of prey including sandeel, whiting, herring and sprat and these should be managed at sustainable levels. Some of these species have particular habitat requirements and therefore the site needs to be managed to ensure the extent, structure, and function of the habitats are sufficient to maintain the prey species of harbour porpoise.

Anthropogenic pressures should not significantly adversely impact supporting habitats and processes (e.g. water column, acoustic environment, productivity etc.) over spatial and temporal scales which could indirectly adversely impact on the harbour porpoises or their prey on a long-term basis.

9

Management Options

This section sets out the advice on management options. This is to provide a starting point for discussing any management that might be required for the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC. Should the site be designated, development of site management will be led by Marine Scotland and/or the relevant authority involving stakeholders as required.

Purpose of management options

Management options are developed where we consider that some form of management may be necessary to achieve the Conservation Objectives for harbour porpoise. The approach to identifying management options for each activity will be risk-based, i.e. we are focusing on providing advice where we believe there is a risk to achieving the Conservation Objectives. To do this, we are using existing data and information on harbour porpoise and relevant activities, and also our understanding of the relationships between harbour porpoise and activities. The management options may be informed by discussion with stakeholders. If new information becomes available during the consultation, the management options may be revised.

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

Management options are focussed on the activities that cause an effect (a pressure) that harbour porpoise are sensitive to. Pressures can be physical (e.g. abrasion of the sea bed), chemical or biological. Different activities may cause the same pressure, e.g. fishing using bottom gears and aggregate dredging both cause abrasion which can damage the seabed habitats of the prey that harbour porpoise depend upon.

An assessment of sensitivity of harbour porpoise to various activities has been undertaken using OSPAR guidance. Similar assessments for supporting habitats are provided in the online sensitivity tool FEAST3 available on the Marine Scotland website. These sensitivity tools together reflect our current understanding of the associations between activities, pressures and harbour porpoise and support the first steps of the assessment of risks to harbour porpoise in the pSAC. This advice along with the supporting databases should be used by authorities to inform the management of any activity impacting upon harbour porpoise or supporting features.

Marine activities are listed in Table 1 where we have assessed harbour porpoise as having a high or medium sensitivity to the pressures arising from the activity. We

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

10

have identified risks to achieving the Conservation Objectives where there is an overlap between harbour porpoise and activities (based on the associated pressures) that they have either a high or medium sensitivity to.

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

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

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

• management to remove or avoid pressures; • management to reduce or limit pressures; or • no additional management required.

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

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

Considered - highlights that an issue exists, but a lack of evidence upon which to base an assessment of risk means that a specific recommendation for action cannot or need not be made at this point. However, there is sufficient cause to make managers aware of the issue and for them to consider whether a management measure or best practice guidance may be helpful in achieving Conservation Objectives - particularly, for example, where introducing a measure to improve the sustainable management of a fish stock would also contribute to achieving the Conservation Objectives.

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

We recognise that stakeholders can provide local environmental knowledge and more detailed information on activities, including in relation to intensity, frequency,

11

and methods. This additional information will help us to develop more specific management options, focused on interactions between the harbour porpoise qualifying feature and activities.

Existing species protection

Harbour porpoise is a European Protected Species through the Habitats Directive. This means they are currently afforded protection wherever they occur in Scotland’s seas. It is an offence to deliberately or recklessly kill, take or injure, disturb or harass any cetacean.

Under the Habitats Directive, only certain activities that may cause an offence can be licensed. In addition licensing authorities need to consider a series of tests that must be satisfied before licences can be granted. Assessments must consider whether an activity would be detrimental to the species’ favourable conservation status (FCS). The assessment of FCS considers possible effects at the scale of management units. For harbour porpoise, the relevant management unit for the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC is West Scotland.

Further information is available in Marine Scotland’s ‘The protection of marine European Protected Species from injury and disturbance: guidance for Scottish inshore waters’4.

Harbour porpoise occur throughout the pSAC, and they are present throughout the year. There is therefore limited potential to zone and/or consider a seasonal component when developing and implementing any management measures.

Overview of harbour porpoise sensitivities

The harbour porpoise is a wide ranging species and occurs across the continental shelf. They also occur in deeper waters but in very low densities, and perhaps only seasonally. Harbour porpoise on the continental shelf, particularly those in coastal waters, are exposed to a wide range of pressures that are both ubiquitous (e.g. pollution) and patchy (e.g. entanglement). Harbour porpoise are considered particularly sensitive to:

• Removal of non-target and target species (i.e. entanglement of harbour porpoises in fishing gears and removal of their prey species).

• Contaminants (e.g. through effects on water quality and bioaccumulation of contaminants that in turn affects the survival and productivity rates of harbour porpoises).

4 See www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0044/00446679.pdf

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0044/00446679.pdf

12

• Underwater noise (e.g. from acoustic surveys).

• Death or injury by collision (predominantly in relation to collision with various types of fast moving vessels from commercial shipping to personal leisure craft and potentially from tidal turbines).

These four pressures were used as the basis for undertaking our assessment of risk in terms of achieving the Conservation Objectives for harbour porpoise.

Overview of activities relevant to the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC

Table 1 below lists the activities that take place within or close to the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC. In addition, we have also included some activities currently not existing within the site. These include activities that may have occurred in the past or are identified as development option areas for the future and where the management option could potentially be 'remove or avoid' or 'reduce or limit' (these are identified in italics).

Those activities that we consider could be considered capable of affecting harbour porpoise are explored in more detail in the sections on individual activities (see left hand column of Table 1 e.g. acoustic survey, fishing, etc.). Activities that harbour porpoise are not thought to be sensitive to (listed in the right hand column on Table 1) will not be considered further within this document. The advice provided in this document does not, however, preclude the requirement for all new projects and plans to undergo a Habitats Regulations Appraisal (HRA) by the relevant competent authority (see Annex 1 for further details). We would anticipate that for the majority of activities not covered by this document, and for existing activities where we have identified no additional management, that impacts from these activities on the qualifying features can be scoped out at an early stage of the HRA.

Further discussions with those who use the area are required to improve our understanding of current activities (e.g. locations, extent and intensity). New or other activities not identified within the table would need to be considered on a case-by-case basis.

For harbour porpoise, we have only considered activities that are relevant to the role of the pSAC and whose potential effects are not necessarily managed through existing species protection (Annex 1). In each of the sections on the different activities, we have also identified those that could contribute to cumulative effects on harbour porpoise. These principally relate to disturbance. These are discussed in more detail in a section on the Potential cumulative effects.

It should be noted that there is still a significant pollution issue for at least some cetacean species in European waters, including harbour porpoise, and across European waters the risk from some contaminants is considered to be high.

13

However, there is insufficient evidence at the current time for us to be able to identify management options for any associated activities likely to be relevant to the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC. The most effective approach may be one focused on wider seas management and thus this pressure is identified in the proposal for an UK Harbour Porpoise Conservation Strategy currently under development. Should future research establish a clear relationship between the pressures caused by a specific activity and impacts on harbour porpoise, we will review all relevant information and provide advice on a management option.

Annex 2 describes existing good practice relevant to harbour porpoise that should already be followed within the pSAC. This includes the Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code and the WiSe scheme as well as the industry best practice guidance.

14

Table 1 Overview of existing activities believed to take place within or close to the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC

Activities considered likely to affect harbour porpoise5

Activities considered not likely to affect harbour porpoise (other than insignificantly)6

Acoustic survey • e.g. geophysical and geotechnical

surveys Aquaculture - finfish

• use of ADDs

Cables and pipelines

Commercial shipping7 • e.g. ferries, cargo/ tanker vessels

Fishing - static gear • bottom-set netting

Fishing - demersal mobile/ active gear • trawling, dredging

Marine Renewable Developments

• piling, collision risk

Ports and harbours • e.g. piling, dredging and disposal

Recreational Activity

• sailing vessels and motor boats, recreational angling

Scientific research

Wildlife tourism

Anchorages

Moorings

Aquaculture - shellfish

Harbour porpoise occur throughout the pSAC, and they are present throughout the year. There is therefore limited potential to zone and/or consider a seasonal component when developing and implementing any management measures. 5 Note although military activities occur throughout the site they are not included here as they are managed through a separate process 6 Only the specific examples of activities listed in the table have been excluded, rather than the

broad activity types. This does not preclude the requirement for all plans and projects to undergo a Habitat Regulations Appraisal.

7 Vessel activity associated with specific developments or with fishing activity is covered under those activities. This category refers to commercial vessels that pass through the site following pre-defined routes.

15

Acoustic surveys

A range of acoustic ground discrimination surveys are undertaken within the pSAC, including for scientific research and site surveys undertaken in association with various infrastructure projects. Acoustic surveys involve the use of equipment such as airguns, sub-bottom profilers and boomers. Sounds produced by these surveys tend to be characterised by relatively high source levels (>220dB re 1µPa (pk-pk)) and variable frequency ranges (e.g. airguns have peak energy < 10 Hz – 1 kHz, together with broadband emissions at lower intensities, whereas sidescan sonar can emit frequencies up to 500 kHz). The frequency range of the acoustic equipment depends on its purpose. Low frequency equipment is used to characterise subsurface layers of the sea bed, with higher frequencies used to achieve better seabed surface resolution.

Harbour porpoise are known to be sensitive to noise. Given the high source levels and the overlap between the sounds produced during acoustic surveys and the hearing range of harbour porpoise, there is potential for disruption of porpoise feeding activity through injury and disturbance.

Harbour porpoise are considered to have a low sensitivity to collision from large, slow moving vessels associated with acoustic surveys.

Recommended management option:

Reduce/limit pressures as required:

• Reduce or limit the pressure through effective mitigation measures.

• Existing best practice should be followed (see Relationship with existing management).

• Vessel movements associated with acoustic surveys are low throughout the majority of the site. However, our view is that the likely effects of disturbance on harbour porpoise should be considered within the context of all boat activity within the proposed SAC. See section on Potential cumulative effects.

Proposed way forward: Industry should engage in early pre-application discussions with regulators and advisers to ensure that any impacts on harbour porpoise are considered.

Should consideration of the likely cumulative effects of boat movements and underwater noise identify risk(s) to the Conservation Objectives for harbour porpoise we will continue discussions with those involved in

16

undertaking acoustic surveys to help us understand more about the likelihood of collision and/or disturbance from noise and to consider measures for reducing any unacceptable risks.

Relationship with existing management

See Annex 2 for the JNCC Guidelines for minimising the risk of injury and disturbance to marine mammals from seismic surveys

See Existing Species Protection (page 12) for information on Marine Scotland’s guidance on The protection of marine European Protected Species from injury and disturbance

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/50005/jncc-seismic-guide.pdf






17

Aquaculture - finfish

In assessing likely impact, our focus has been on the equipment on site, likely vessel routes, and the use of Acoustic Deterrent Devices (ADDs) which together represent the main interactions between aquaculture developments and harbour porpoise.

There are numerous finfish farms within or immediately adjacent to the pSAC, mainly close to the shore. Map 2 shows the distribution of aquaculture developments within or close to the boundary of the pSAC.

Aquaculture farm equipment includes pens, nets, moorings and can include floating buildings. We consider that there is a low risk of entanglement for harbour porpoise from aquaculture infrastructure.

Finfish farms often use ADDs as part of their anti-predator measures, however, these may result in disturbance/habitat exclusion of harbour porpoise. The evidence of impacts on cetaceans from ADDs currently in use is varied and is dependent on many variables (e.g. noise characteristics of device, how the device is used, the topography, animal behaviour and importance of the area/habitat where the ADD is being used). We are aware there are ongoing trials and research relating to new ADDs for which noise emissions do not overlap with the most sensitive range of harbour porpoise hearing. Further research is required but these new devices may in the future provide a suitable alternative seal defence mechanism which is more compatible with the conservation objectives of the site.

Working with industry, we are currently undertaking a review of ADD use within or near the pSAC. Information relating to current ADD use within the pSAC is required to determine the level of ADD noise emission currently in operation and whether further constraints on or more targeted use of ADDs should be considered. Our view is that there could be a risk to the Conservation Objectives as a result of the cumulative effects of ADD use within the site.

To reduce/limit the potential of cumulative risks from ADD use on the Conservation Objectives of the SAC, we suggest that appropriate feedback loops within predator control management are considered to ensure ADD noise emission is minimised. This could be done through the development of a best practice ADD use protocol in discussion with industry and regulators; this could include a preference for triggered devices and only activating devices when seal predation becomes a problem. It is our view that continuous noise emission from ADDs at fish farm sites is not best practice. In areas of higher cumulative risk to the Conservation Objectives (e.g. areas with larger numbers of fish farms within straits, sounds and embayments where ADD use may limit access to these areas), further measures to reduce ADD noise emission should be considered via ongoing discussions with industry.

Vessel activity associated with aquaculture farms include small rapid staff transfer boats and larger fish harvest vessels. Although there is limited evidence of collision

18

risk for harbour porpoise from vessels of this type, there is potentially more risk of disturbance. Disturbance is considered further under Potential cumulative effects. In our view, no additional management is required for vessel activity providing best practice is followed.

Map 2. Finfish aquaculture sites in relation to the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC

19


Reduce or limit pressures as required:

• ADD deployment plans and codes of conduct (utilising best practice and taking into account site-specific circumstances) should be considered for all existing and new developments. This may include use of triggered devices, non-continuous use of ADDs, or other non-lethal methods of predator control. The cumulative effects of ADD use within the pSAC should also be considered and taken into account in the development of such plans. For further details see section on Potential cumulative effects.

• In areas of higher cumulative risk (areas with larger numbers of fish farms within straits, sounds and embayments where ADD use may restrict access) a more restricted use of ADDs should be considered.

Proposed way forward: We propose that discussion with aquaculture industry is necessary to understand more about the current levels of risk to harbour porpoise from current ADD use e.g. ADD models in operation, ADD noise emissions, levels of use, etc., to inform the best course of action to manage the potential risks to the Conservation Objectives. New finfish sites planning to use ADDs will require careful consideration to ensure that cumulative impacts will not compromise the Conservation Objectives of the pSAC.

Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with industry and regulators.

Relationship with existing management:

The use of ADDs for predator control at salmon farms may require an EPS licence. See Existing Species protection (page 12) for Marine Scotland’s guidance on The protection of marine European Protected Species from injury and disturbance

See Annex 2 for Existing good practice for vessels and mobile species.



20

Cables and pipelines

Communications and electricity cables are vitally important for communities in the Western Isles and on the west coast of Scotland. In particular, an interconnector to the Western Isles has been identified in the National Planning Framework as being of strategic importance. Currently, the Western Isles HVDC connection from Arnish to Dundonnell is the only transmission proposal that falls within the site. There are several existing lower voltage distribution cables along with telecoms and broadband cables within the site. Policies outlined in the National Marine Plan may require some of these to be replaced and others to have protection installed.

The aspect of cable installation most likely to disturb porpoises is acoustic surveying during initial surveys, pre-lay and post-lay. Installation of cable protection such as rock placement could also result in disturbance, but over a more limited time period and area. Providing best practice is followed it is unlikely that this activity will pose a risk to the Conservation Objectives.

Geophysical surveys used in the process of cable laying are covered under the Acoustic surveys section of this document. Harbour porpoise are considered to have a low sensitivity to collision from large, slow moving vessels associated with cable and pipe laying.


Reduce/limit pressures as required:


• Existing best practice should be followed (see Relationship with existing management).

Proposed way forward: Industry should engage in early pre-application discussions with regulators and advisers to ensure that any impacts on harbour porpoise are considered.

Should consideration of the likely cumulative effects of disturbance identify risk(s) to the Conservation Objectives for harbour porpoise we will continue discussions with those involved in this activity to help us understand more about the likelihood of disturbance from noise and to consider measures for reducing any risks.

21


Although there are not specific best practices developed for this activity, the general approach of using a qualified Marine Mammal Observer during specific parts of the cable lay process is encouraged. See Annex 2 for the JNCC Guidelines for minimising the risk of injury and disturbance to marine mammals from seismic surveys .

See Existing Species Protection (page 12) for information on Marine Scotland’s guidance on The protection of marine European Protected Species from injury and disturbance.







22

Commercial shipping

There is a variety of commercial vessels operating in the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC including ferries, cargo and tanker vessels. These large boats typically have relatively consistent vessel routes and operate at a fairly regular frequency (although this may vary e.g. between summer and winter). These vessels are generally associated with low frequency (Hz) noise characteristics. See Map 3 which shows ferry routes and commercial shipping activity in the site. Other boating activity within the pSAC is covered under the relevant activity (e.g. aquaculture, fishing, recreation). Mortality and serious injury of cetaceans resulting from ship strikes is mainly reported in slow-swimming (e.g. sleeping) large baleen whales. There are relatively few recorded ship strikes with smaller cetaceans such as harbour porpoise. Vessel strikes are perhaps not likely to occur frequently, due to the avoidance behaviour of porpoises when ships approach. Shipping produces continuous underwater sounds which are unlikely to cause physical trauma, but could make preferred habitats less attractive as a result of masking or disturbance (habitat displacement, area avoidance). In UK waters, a negative influence of shipping density on the presence and abundance of harbour porpoise was found when shipping intensity surpassed thresholds of approximately 50 ships per day in the Celtic and Irish Sea management unit and 80 ships per day in the North Sea management unit (Heinänen & Skov 2015). Ship-avoidance behaviour in combination with masking effects by the ship-generated noises will make areas with high shipping densities less suitable for harbour porpoise. Current levels of shipping intensity are not thought to pose a risk to the Conservation objectives for the site.

23

Map3. Ferry routes and commercial shipping activity within the Inner Hebrides and The Minches pSAC

24


No Additional Management:

• Shipping levels throughout the majority of the site are low, with localised areas of increased activity near harbours. The likely effects of disturbance on harbour porpoise should be considered within the context of all boat activity within the proposed SAC. See section on Potential cumulative effects.

Proposed way forward:

We will continue discussions with public authorities, Marine Scotland and other regulators to ensure that any impacts on harbour porpoise are considered when they are assessing new and amended proposals. Should consideration of the likely cumulative effects of boat movements identify risk(s) to the Conservation Objectives for harbour porpoise, we will continue discussions with commercial shipping interests to help us understand more about the likelihood of displacement and to consider measures for reducing any risks. Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with commercial shipping stakeholders and regulators.

25

Introduction to fishing activities

The management options for fishing activities are based on the known sensitivities of harbour porpoise to different types of fishing activity and whether or not that fishing activity may affect the achievement of the site’s Conservation Objectives. This initial advice is based on expert judgement of existing evidence in the scientific literature.

In addition to any direct interactions between fishing operations and harbour porpoise within the site, maintaining the abundance of prey species for porpoise is an important consideration. For herring, sandeel or sprat the management of populations of these species (and related fisheries) occurs at a scale much larger than the SAC itself. Consequently, management of fisheries at the wider scale can make a contribution to meeting the site’s Conservation Objectives, and to a large extent may already do.

Fisheries management under the Common Fisheries Policy takes account of research and advice on multispecies and food web dynamics, helping to ensure that stocks are harvested within sustainable limits. In achieving this it is likely that availability of prey species to harbour porpoise will be maintained. In addition, certain existing management measures within or adjacent to the site may also be making a contribution, such as area restrictions under the Inshore Fishing (Scotland) Act 1984 to protect herring spawning grounds.

More information on the specific characteristics of the various fisheries and therefore their specific interactions, directly and indirectly, with the harbour porpoise is required. Discussions with those involved with fishing within or adjacent to the site will be important for completing the assessment of the extent to which harbour porpoise may actually be affected by fishing activities

26

Map 4. Designated sites with existing fisheries management overlapping the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC. See Marine Scotland website for further details of the fisheries restrictions in place.

http://www.gov.scot/Topics/marine/marine-environment/mpanetwork/MPAMGT/protectedareasmgt

27

Fishing – mobile/ active gear

Harbour porpoise are known to take a wide range of pelagic shoaling small fish species, and the main prey species in this region are the lesser sandeel (Ammodytes marinus), whiting (Merlangius merlangus), sprat (Sprattus sprattus) and herring (Clupea harengus). The harbour porpoise is a relatively small predator with limited ability to store energy. It is dependent on foraging throughout the year without prolonged periods of fasting. The almost constant need to feed makes harbour porpoise potentially vulnerable to prey depletion; therefore the removal of prey species has the potential to negatively affect them. There is currently no targeted fishing for sandeels within the site. Fishing methods with the potential to cause significant disruption of sandeel-supporting habitat could cause local depletion of sandeels. Hydraulic fishing methods used for certain bivalves are the most likely example, however, this method is not widely employed and tends to be limited by depth. It is thought that current levels of fishing and the removal of target species which form part of the diet of harbour porpoises in this area are unlikely to have a significant negative impact on the species at this time. Harbour porpoise bycatch has rarely been recorded in towed gears and therefore no additional management is required with regard to this.


Remove/avoid pressures

• We recommend that targeted fishing for sandeels in this site should be excluded because of the importance of sandeels as a prey species for harbour porpoise.

• We recommend exclusion of demersal fishing gear using hydraulic methods from sandeel-supporting habitats within the site.

• Sandeels occur widely throughout the pSAC proposal and any management should be applied to the whole site.

Reduce/limit pressures as required

• Fishing for herring, sprat and whiting may occur with the pSAC. We recommend ensuring that fishing activity doesn’t prevent or disrupt the availability of prey species should be a principle objective of the management of these fisheries within the site, i.e. it should be considered as part of a broader ecosystem-based approach to management of these fisheries.

• Herring and sprat occur widely throughout the site and any measures should therefore be applied to the whole site.

28

• There is currently no evidence to support the

requirement for a management option for the interactions of demersal towed gears with the habitats of relevant prey species (for sandeels and spawning grounds of herring). Should future research establish a clear relationship between the pressures caused by a specific activity and the availability of these important prey species to harbour porpoise, we will review all relevant information and provide advice on a management option.

Proposed way forward: Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with fishing interests and fishery managers and informed by any detailed information about fishing activity that can be made available. Marine Scotland will lead the development of specific management measures.

29

Fishing - static gear

There is a risk of bycatch from any form of static fishing gear that is set in the water column or on the sea bed, with those in the water column being of most concern. Harbour porpoise are considered to have a high sensitivity to bycatch (removal of non-target species). In this section we discuss risk relating to the use of bottom-set gillnets, trammel nets and tangle nets set on the seabed. Entanglement of harbour porpoise in creel lines has rarely been recorded and therefore no additional management is required with regard to this.

Work undertaken through the UK Bycatch Monitoring Strategy has demonstrated that harbour porpoise bycatch most often occurs in static nets, usually deployed from vessels <12m. Bycatch by static nets is the greatest anthropogenic threat to harbour porpoise in UK and adjacent waters. However the use of certain set nets is not permitted in Scotland and the use of drift nets is not allowed in European North Atlantic waters.


Remove or avoid pressures:

• We recommend the continued exclusion of drift nets and nets set on the sea bed (tangle, trammel, gill) to avoid the risk of entanglement/bycatch within the pSAC.

Proposed way forward: Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with fishing interests and fishery managers and informed by any detailed information about fishing activity that can be made available. Marine Scotland will lead the development of specific management measures.

30

Marine Renewable Developments

Within the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC area, there are a number of small scale wave device deployments, as well as both proposed and consented tidal applications either within or outside of the boundary of the site. Currently there are no planned offshore wind sites around the west coast. An option area for the future commercial exploitation of wave energy, identified in Marine Scotland’s sectoral plans for the industry, lies off the Ross of Mull. No other option areas for offshore wind, wave or tidal energy sit within the pSAC boundary, though various option areas, for all three technologies, lie immediately beyond it, especially in the south-west. The deployment of wave devices is considered unlikely to cause meaningful risks to harbour porpoise as long as sufficient detail and consideration is given to tensioning of anchors and mooring lines so as to avoid the risk of entanglement. Tidal stream developments are identified as posing two mechanisms for negative effects: disturbance due to construction with increased vessel movements and underwater noise where foundations require piling / drilling, and the risk of collision during the operation of tidal turbines. Our understanding of the potential for collision risk is limited and studies are underway to increase our understanding of the interactions between all cetacean species and operating tidal turbines. For offshore wind activities, the pressure would occur during construction phase if foundations required piling / drilling leading to an increase in underwater noise. The construction and deployment of renewable energy developments is considered to be an activity that could lead to localised habitat exclusion for extended periods depending on the location and nature of construction. Whilst the construction and deployment of a single development is unlikely in itself to lead to population level impacts, that risk would be increased through the cumulative effects of multiple projects being constructed or operated at the same time (see later section on potential cumulative impacts).

Geophysical surveys used in the process of site development are covered under the Acoustic survey section of this document.


Reduce or limit pressures:

• Reduce or limit the pressure through effective mitigation measures:

Underwater noise – site/development specific consideration of proposed construction methods. For example noise mitigation measures for piling may include; soft start, use of vibro piling, Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) and / or visual observers to reduce risk from underwater noise.

31

Collision – these may include site selection, turbine design, detection systems and other technological solutions that address unacceptable risks of collisions

• Existing best practice should be followed (see Annex 2)

• Particular consideration should be given to managing this activity alongside other cumulative pressures which also produce underwater noise / present risk of collision.

Proposed way forward: Early pre-application discussions with regulators,

developers and statutory advisers to identify any risks and discuss and agree suitable mitigation measures for inclusion as supporting information for application. Where management measures are required, these may form part of any consent conditions.


See Existing Species protection (page 12) for information on Marine Scotland’s guidance on The protection of marine European Protected Species from injury and disturbance.

See Annex 2 for best practice for minimising the risk of injury to marine mammals from piling noise and explosives use.




32

Ports and harbours

There are numerous small ports and harbours in the area (see Map 5.) Although harbours themselves are excluded from the pSAC boundary, areas within harbour authority limits may be within the pSAC boundary.

Of these, Glensanda and the Marine Resource Centre, Barcaldine are identified as possible Marine Renewable Infrastructure Plan (MRIP) sites (for wave and tidal infrastructure) but at present there is a low likelihood of development of these and the proposed activities (mostly land based) are currently envisaged as being unlikely to impact on harbour porpoise.

There are a number of harbours within the pSAC that undertake annual dredging for navigational reasons. The larger harbours and any major harbour upgrades, may also require capital dredging (one off dredging of large volumes of material to get the area to a suitable depth). Different types of dredgers may be used depending on the depth requirements and the material to be removed. Occasionally, ground preparation work (e.g. blasting) may be required to loosen material. There are a number of disposal sites shown on Map 5.

Construction activities can produce large amounts of underwater noise from piling and blasting. If porpoises are too close to an intense noise source when it is initiated, then physiological damage can result or even death. Damage can include temporary threshold shifts (TTS) and permanent threshold shifts (PTS) in hearing. Such effects are likely to be rare due to mitigation measures that are used as standard for all noisy construction activities in Scotland’s seas.

The noise generated by pile driving has also been demonstrated to disturb harbour porpoises over tens of kilometres from the activity, although with a declining effect with distance. Once the operation ceases, harbour porpoises generally return to the area. The rate of return is, however, dependent upon location of the site and perhaps the quality of the habitat.

Dredging and disposal can also produce levels of underwater noise that may disturb harbour porpoise along with causing changes to benthic habitats, and sedimentation, which indirectly affect marine mammals through changes in prey distribution and abundance. Noise emitted during dredging operations is broadband, with most energy below 1 kHz and is unlikely to cause damage to marine mammal auditory systems, but masking and behavioural changes are possible. Dredging might be audible to most marine mammals up to several kilometres from the source, depending on conditions.

In addition to underwater noise impacts from construction, development of harbours may lead to increased capacity for vessels and subsequently increased vessel movements within the pSAC.

33

Map 5. Ports, harbours and disposal sites within the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC

34



• Reduce or limit the pressure from underwater noise through employing spatio-temporal conditions to blasting/piling, reducing the sound levels at source, or using different construction techniques. Our view is that the likely risk of disturbance to harbour porpoise should be considered within the context of all activities that produce significant underwater noise within the pSAC. See section on Potential cumulative effects.

• Reduce or limit the pressure from dredging and disposal through effective mitigation measures.

• The potential implications to harbour porpoise of increased vessel facilities resulting in increased vessel movements should be considered.


Mitigation measures include the use of methods for creating a barrier to sound transfer (e.g. bubble curtains). However, the most effective way to reduce disturbance from pile driving is to develop alternative methods for construction with reduced noise emission during installation.

There is potential for a reduction or limitation of the disturbance/displacement effects by varying the schedule of piling or blasting, particularly when several developments may be under construction at the same time. This would entail spatio-temporal restrictions, e.g. not have more than one noisy event occurring at any given time in a given area.

We will continue discussions with public authorities, Marine Scotland and other regulators to ensure that any impacts on harbour porpoise are considered when they are assessing new and amended proposals.

Should consideration of the likely cumulative effects of disturbance (from underwater noise or increased vessel movements) identify risk(s) to the Conservation Objectives for harbour porpoise, we will continue discussions with those involved in developing harbours to understand more about the likelihood of disturbance and to consider measures for managing any risks.

Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with harbour authorities.

35


See Existing Species Protection for Marine Scotland’s guidance on The protection of marine European Protected Species from injury and disturbance.

See Annex 2 for best practice for minimising the risk of injury to marine mammals from piling noise or explosives use.



36

Recreational Activity - Leisure boats

There are a variety of leisure boat activities within the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC including sailing vessels and motor boats, kayaks, personal watercraft, recreational angling and diving boats. Typically, leisure craft routes are less defined (compared to those used by commercial shipping), boats produce higher frequency noise levels and increased numbers of boats may be expected during the summer period. See Map 6 that shows information on recreational boat use. Harbour porpoise are naturally shy of boats therefore interactions are expected to be few due to the avoidance behaviour of harbour porpoises when motorboats approach. Personal watercraft (e.g. jet skis) and fast-moving engine-powered vessels, however, may pose more of a risk simply because they are fast and unpredictable. Adherence to wildlife codes of conduct is recommended and is already strongly encouraged (see Relationship with existing management). At this time the scale and distribution of leisure boat activities is such that the risk to the Conservation Objectives is low.

37

Map 6 RYA Cruising Routes, Sailing Areas and marine recreation within the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC.

38


Reduce or limit any significant disturbance from recreational activities:

• Reduce or limit disturbance associated with leisure activities should be considered by following best practice. Our view is that the likely risk of disturbance to harbour porpoise is small but should be considered within the context of all boat activity within the pSAC. See section on Potential cumulative effects.

Proposed way forward: We will continue discussions with representatives of leisure boat users in relation to adoption of best practice (see section below on Relationship with existing management). Should consideration of the likely cumulative effects of boat movements identify risk(s) to the Conservation Objectives for harbour porpoise we will continue discussions with relevant organisations (e.g. Royal Yachting Association) to help us consider measures for reducing any unacceptable risks. Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with relevant organisations. Marine Scotland will lead the development of specific management measures.


Recreational boat users generally view wildlife as a positive part of their experience. If disturbance does occur, this is often as a result of a lack of understanding of the animal’s behaviour or of how human activities can affect an animal’s wellbeing. Awareness-raising and education are therefore an important part of existing management. See Annex 2 for Existing good practice for vessels and mobile species.

39

Scientific research

This section covers boat-based research that is focused on harbour porpoise or other cetaceans in the area. It does not cover research carried out using acoustic surveys (see section on Acoustic surveys). There are a number of organisations involved in carrying out research on harbour porpoise within the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC. There are also various groups working on other cetaceans whose work may take them into contact with harbour porpoise. This includes environmental NGOs, wildlife tour boat operators, universities, SNH and Marine Scotland. Within this site there is a particularly close relationship between research and wildlife tourism, with tour boats being used as platforms for cetacean sightings. Research is generally undertaken between May and September. The risks associated with scientific research are generally related to disturbance through the need to get close enough to carry out specific studies. However most research requires observations of natural behaviour and interactions or activities that may disturb animals will be kept to a minimum. It is our view that existing measures to reduce disturbance from boats involved with scientific research would contribute to achieving the Conservation Objectives, although further discussion and promotion of best practice should be considered. Further information is required to understand more about the likely risks associated with disturbance and we propose that discussions with researchers are necessary, particularly those likely to be approaching animals more closely. Recommended management option: Reduce or limit pressures:

• Vessel activity throughout the majority of the site is low, with localised, increased activity near harbours. However, our view is that the likely effects of disturbance on harbour porpoise should be considered within the context of all boat activity within the proposed SAC. See section on Potential cumulative effects.

• Adherence to the existing codes of practice.

Proposed way forward: We propose that discussion with researchers is necessary to help understand more about the potential risks of disturbance to harbour porpoise, and review current voluntary measures if necessary. Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with those involved with research. Marine Scotland will lead the development of specific management measures.

40


See Annex 2 for Existing good practice for vessels and mobile species. For certain types of research (e.g. tagging), the provisions of the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act also apply. Therefore a licence needs to be obtained from the Home Office before any work can be carried out. This is a general provision (i.e. it does not apply just to the pSAC).

41

Wildlife tourism

There are a number of wildlife tour operators working within the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC. The purpose of this activity is to get close to wildlife to allow passengers to learn about, experience and enjoy Scotland’s wildlife. This type of activity may continue to increase, as the area is highlighted as a great place to see harbour porpoise in Scotland. Some wildlife tour boats within this site are also used as platforms for research. There are numerous publications evaluating the disturbance caused by whale-watching activities on cetaceans. Harbour porpoises are, however, seldom the target species for these trips and so may be less affected than some other species. Most wildlife tour operators understand fully the sensitivities of the wildlife they seek to highlight to their passengers. There are existing measures to help promote good practice, including the WiSe (Wildlife Safe) accreditation scheme that promotes safe operation for commercial marine wildlife watching. In addition, the Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code raises awareness and gives guidance for all who want to watch marine wildlife. This existing guidance is focused on minimising disturbance on wildlife wherever they are in Scottish waters. It is our view that measures currently in place to minimise disturbance to other cetaceans will also be beneficial for harbour porpoise. Further information is required to understand more about the likely risks associated with disturbance and we propose that discussions with wildlife tour operators are necessary, particularly those offering more bespoke tours, to help share existing knowledge on this issue and identify any research requirements. Recommended management option:

Reduce or limit disturbance from vessel activities:

• Vessel activity throughout the majority of the site is low, with localised areas of increased activity near harbours. However, our view is that the likely effects of disturbance on harbour porpoise should be considered within the context of all boat activity within the proposed SAC. See section on Potential cumulative effects.

• Adherence to the existing codes of practice (see Relationship with existing management).

42


We propose that discussion with wildlife operators is necessary to help understand more about the potential risks of disturbance to harbour porpoise and other cetaceans in this area. Where management measures are required, the development of these would be undertaken via discussion with wildlife tour operators. Marine Scotland will lead the development of specific management measures.


See Annex 2 for Existing good practice for vessels and mobile species. In addition, Voluntary Awareness and Caution Zones Voluntary measures for skippers have been developed to cover an area around Coll and Tiree. Although the purpose of these zones is to highlight the relative abundance of basking sharks in these areas and suggest practical steps that skippers can take to reduce the risk of collisions, these measures will also reduce disturbance to harbour porpoise.

43

Potential cumulative effects

There is a wide range of activities occurring within the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC, the majority involving boat-based activities. Where combinations of these activities cause pressures that lead to changes to the survival and productivity rates of harbour porpoises there will be a cumulative impact. Additional activities contribute to the potential cumulative effects. Ultimately there are two parts to considering cumulative effects on harbour porpoises: firstly at a site level where we aim to avoid adverse effects on site integrity and secondly at the scale of the management unit where we aim to avoid loss of Favourable Conservation Status. Activities can give rise to pressures that have a direct effect e.g. killing of animals which will directly reduce adult and juvenile survival rates. Killing of animals may also indirectly change productivity rates. Pressures such as injury, disturbance, or removal of prey species, may have costs for animals that cause indirect changes to both survival and productivity rates. In practice it is anticipated that the focus of cumulative effects assessment for competent authorities is most likely to be in relation to combinations of human activities that are each contributing to disturbance. For example, combinations of: disturbance caused by vessel presence and noise, construction activities that produce underwater noise, and use of ADDs that also produce underwater noise. Whilst earlier sections of this document have discussed each of these activities in turn the potential requirement to assess the cumulative effects of the combination of activities exists. The table below collates the management options identified for each activity and its associated pressures. Casework guidance on assessment of plans and projects will consider case specific circumstances where it is appropriate for competent authorities to consider the cumulative effects.

44

Summary of management options

Acoustic surveys

Reduce/limit pressures:


• Existing best practice should be followed Vessel movements associated with acoustic surveys are low throughout the majority of the site. However, our view is that the likely effects of disturbance on harbour porpoise should be considered within the context of all boat activity within the proposed SAC.

Aquaculture - finfish farms

Reduce/limit pressures • ADD deployment plans and codes of conduct

(utilising best practice and taking in to account site-specific circumstances) should be considered for all existing and new developments. This may include use of triggered devices, non-continuous use of ADDs or other non-lethal methods of predator control. The cumulative effects of ADD use within the pSAC should also be considered and taken in to account in the development of such plans.

In areas of higher cumulative risk to the CO (areas with larger numbers of fish farms within straits, sounds and embayments where ADD use may restrict access) a more restrictive use of ADDs should be considered.

Cables and Pipelines Reduce/limit pressures as required:


• Existing best practice should be followed

Commercial shipping No Additional Management: • Shipping levels throughout the majority of the

site are low, with localised areas of increased activity near harbours. However, our view is that the likely effects of disturbance on harbour porpoise should be considered within the context of all boat activity within the proposed SAC.

45

Fishing - mobile/ active gear

Remove/avoid pressures:

• We recommend that targeted fishing for sandeels in this site should be excluded because of the importance of sandeels as a prey species for harbour porpoise. .

• We recommend exclusion of demersal fishing gear using hydraulic methods from sandeel-supporting habitats within the site.

Sandeels occur widely throughout the pSAC proposal and any management should be applied to the whole site. Reduce/limit

• Fishing for herring, sprat and whiting may occur with the pSAC. We recommend ensuring that fishing activity doesn’t prevent or disrupt the availability of prey species should be a principle objective of the management of these fisheries within the site, i.e. it should be considered as part of a broader ecosystem-based approach to management of these fisheries.

Herring and sprat occur widely throughout the site and any measures should therefore be applied to the whole site. There is currently no evidence to support the requirement for a management option for the interactions of demersal towed gears with the habitats of relevant prey species (for sandeels and spawning grounds of herring). Should future research establish a clear relationship between the pressures caused by a specific activity and the availability of these important prey species to harbour porpoise, we will review all relevant information and provide advice on a management option.

Fishing - static gear Remove or avoid pressures: • We recommend the continued of drift nets and

nets set on the seabed (tangle, trammel, gill) to avoid the risk of entanglement/bycatch within the pSAC.

.

46

Marine renewable developments


• Reduce or limit the pressure through effective mitigation measures:

Underwater noise – site/development specific consideration of proposed construction methods. For example noise mitigation measures for piling may include; soft start, use of vibro piling, Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) and / or visual observers to reduce risk from underwater noise.

Collision – these may include site selection, turbine design, detection systems and other technological solutions that address unacceptable risks of collisions

• Existing best practice should be followed

Particular consideration should be given to managing this activity alongside other cumulative pressures which also produce underwater noise / present risk of collision.

Ports and harbours Reduce or limit pressures:

• Reduce or limit the pressure from underwater noise through employing spatio-temporal conditions to blasting/piling, reducing the sound levels at source, or using different construction techniques. Our view is that the likely risk of disturbance to harbour porpoise should be considered within the context of all activity that produces significant underwater noise within the pSAC.

• Reduce or limit the pressure from dredging and disposal through effective mitigation measures

• the potential implications to harbour porpoise of increased vessel facilities resulting in increased vessel movements should be considered

Mitigation measures include the use of methods for creating a barrier to sound transfer (e.g. bubble curtains). However, the most effective way to reduce disturbance from pile driving is to develop alternative methods for construction with reduced noise emission during installation.

47

There is potential for a reduction or limitation of the disturbance/displacement effects by varying the schedule of piling or blasting, particularly when several developments may be under construction at the same time. This would entail spatio-temporal restrictions, e.g. not have more than one noisy event occurring at any given time in a given area.

Recreational Activity Reduce or limit: Reduce or limit disturbance associated with leisure activities should be considered by following best practice. Our view is that the likely risk of disturbance to harbour porpoise should be considered within the context of all boat activity within the pSAC.

Scientific research Reduce or limit pressures: • Vessel activity throughout the majority of the

site is low, with localised areas of increased activity near harbours. However, our view is that the likely effects of disturbance on harbour porpoise should be considered within the context of all boat activity within the proposed SAC.

• Adherence to the existing codes of practice.

Wildlife tour operators Reduce or limit disturbance from vessel activities:

• Vessel activity throughout the majority of the site is low, with localised areas of increased activity near harbours. However, our view is that the likely effects of disturbance on harbour porpoise should be considered within the context of all boat activity within the proposed SAC.

• Adherence to the existing codes of practice

48

Before any firm recommendations are made, discussions should be held with stakeholders to ensure that there is a good understanding of harbour porpoise and their likely interactions with activities. Marine Scotland will lead the discussions on management with stakeholders. These discussions will start during the formal consultation and, if necessary, may continue after the consultation. The discussions should lead to an improved understanding of the risk to harbour porpoise. The options presented here will then be reviewed by SNH and a preferred way forward may be recommended. This will form the basis of advice from SNH to Marine Scotland on management requirements for this site should it be designated as a SAC.

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

Further information

The following documents are available for background information:

• Site Selection Assessment Document • Overview document • Site summary leaflet • Site map • Questions and Answers • Porpoise Plan Proposal • Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment

http://snhwebsite:8090/docs/A1917857.pdf





http://www.gov.scot/Topics/marine/marine-environment/mpanetwork/harbourporpoisesacs

http://www.gov.scot/Topics/marine/marine-environment/mpanetwork/harbourporpoisesacs

49

Annex 1 Roles and responsibilities

This annex describes some of the legal responsibilities that SNH, Scottish Government and/or other organisations have in relation to Special Areas of Conservation. See Roles of SNH, JNCC and Marine Scotland on page 3 which sets out responsibilities in relation to developing appropriate site management. The Habitats Regulations referred to below includes The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 (as amended in Scotland).

Relevant and competent authorities

A relevant authority is a body or authority that has a function in relation to land or waters within or adjacent to a European Marine Site. A competent authority is defined as ‘any Minister, government department, public or statutory undertaker, public body of any description or person holding a public office’. In the context of a plan or project, the competent authority is the authority with the power or duty to determine whether or not the proposal can proceed. All relevant authorities are competent authorities.

Role of relevant authorities

The Habitats Regulations require relevant authorities to exercise their functions so as to secure compliance with the Habitats Directive. A management scheme may be drawn up for each European Marine Site by one or more of the relevant authorities. For marine SPAs and SACs with overlapping interests, a single management scheme may be developed.

Where a management scheme is in place the relevant authorities must ensure that all plans for the area integrate with it. Such plans may include shoreline management plans, local Biodiversity Action Plans (BAPs) and sustainable development strategies for estuaries. This must occur to ensure that only a single management scheme is produced through which all relevant authorities exercise their duties under the Habitats Regulations.

Role of SNH in providing advice on Conservation Objectives

Regulation 33(2) of the Habitat Regulations gives SNH a statutory responsibility to advise relevant and competent Authorities on the Conservation Objectives of sites and activities that may cause deterioration of natural habitats, the habitats of species or disturbance of species for which the sites have been designated.

Assessment of plans and projects

The Habitats Regulations require that, where an authority concludes that a development proposal is unconnected with the nature conservation management of a European Marine Site and is likely to have a significant effect on that site, it must undertake an appropriate assessment of the implications for the qualifying interests for which the area has been designated.

50

Review of consents

Competent authorities are required by the Habitats Regulations to undertake a review of all consents and permissions for activities affecting the site as soon as reasonably practicable after it becomes a European Marine Site. This will have implications for discharge and other consents, which will need to be reviewed in the light of the Conservation Objectives.

Responsibilities under other site designations

Other designations within or adjacent to the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC are shown in Map A1. The obligations of relevant, and other competent authorities and organisations under these other designations are not affected by the advice contained in this document.

51

Map A1 Other designations relevant to the Inner Hebrides and the Minches pSAC

52

Annex 2 Existing best practice

The Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code

The Scottish Marine Wildlife Watching Code (SMWWC) offers practical guidance which aims to minimise the risk to marine wildlife (including harbour porpoise) from encounters with people. It gives specific advice on the manner in which marine wildlife may best be viewed with minimum disturbance. Following this advice will help people stay within the law. More information on the Code can be found at www.marinecode.org.

The WiSe scheme

The WiSe (Wildlife Safe) Scheme is a UK-wide initiative that provides accreditation to marine tour operators who attend a training course and demonstrate an awareness of best practice in marine wildlife watching. The aim of WiSe is to promote responsible wildlife watching, through training, accreditation and awareness raising. The training provides participants with a better understanding of the biology and behaviour of wildlife they are likely to encounter, including harbour porpoise, and practical advice on how to watch wildlife responsibly. The principles of the WiSe Scheme match closely with those of the SMWWC. More information about WiSe can be found at www.wisescheme.org.

A number of other, more specific codes of best practice exist in some regions, often targeted at particular species. Users of the area should check for local codes.

JNCC Guidelines for minimising the risk of injury and disturbance to marine mammals from seismic surveys (updated August 2010).

Statutory Nature Conservation Agencies protocol for minimising the risk of injury to marine mammals from piling noise (August 2010)

JNCC guidelines for minimising the risk of disturbance and injury to marine mammals whilst using explosives (August 2010)

These Guidelines are aimed at reducing the risk of injury from seismic surveys, piling and explosive use so that it is negligible and following them can also potentially reduce the risk of disturbance to marine mammals. The Guidelines require the use of trained Marine Mammal Observers, the completion of JNCC reporting forms and highlight that the use of Passive Acoustic Monitoring is considered to be best practice if activities are planned to start during hours of darkness or low visibility.



http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/JNCC_Piling%20protocol_August_2010.pdf

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/JNCC_Piling%20protocol_August_2010.pdf

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/JNCC_Guidelines_Explosives%20Guidelines_August%202010.pdf

http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/pdf/JNCC_Guidelines_Explosives%20Guidelines_August%202010.pdf

53

Annex 3 Version control

Document version control

Version Date Author Reason / Comments

Version 1 01/02/2016 Karen Hall Creation of new document from Southern Sea of Hebrides

Version 2 5/2/2016 Karen Hall plus workshop members

Editing of document during workshop

Version 3 1/3/2016 Karen Hall & Sarah Cunningham

Update document to reflect agreed SAD and Overview document, revise to take account of relevant changes to SPA MOP, Insert maps, review activities with input from SNH advisers


Update document to reflect comments from MSS, SNH Area staff and advisers


Inclusion of agreed COs, cumulative section, editing of additional comments received; pass to JB and GM for QA

Version 6 21/3 2016 Karen Hall & Lorna Leask & Owen McGrath

Final editing and formatting

54

Distribution list

Format Version Issue date Issued to

Electronic 1 1/2/2016 Sarah Cunningham, Katie Gillham, Greg Mudge, John Baxter, Workshop attendees

Electronic 3 1/3/2016 Harbour Porpoise working group

Electronic 4 9/3/2016 Harbour porpoise working group

Electronic 5 16/3/2016 Sarah Cunningham, Katie Gillham, Greg Mudge, John Baxter for QA

Electronic 6 22/3/16 Consultation website

Documents

INNER HEBRIDES AND THE MINCHES PROPOSED … · INNER HEBRIDES AND THE MINCHES PROPOSED SAC . ADVICE TO SUPPORT MANAGEMENT . ... From there it crosses the Sea of the Hebrides to the