NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014
advertisement
Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation August 2014 Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment 303529 EVT EES 002 C C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\ c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx 12 August 2014 Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation August 2014 Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority 8 Ennerdale Road, Blyth, Northumberland. NE24 4RT Mott MacDonald, Caledonian Exchange, 3rd Floor, 19A Canning Street, Edinburgh EH3 8EG, United Kingdom T +44 (0)131 221 2300 F +44 (0)131 229 3735 W www.mottmac.com Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Issue and revision record Revision A Date 30.05.14 Originator N Levy Checker K Leather Approver A Heather Standard Description First Draft for Client Comment B 07.07.14 N Levy K Leather A Heather Consultation Draft incorporating client comments C 12.08.14 N Levy C Bannister K Leather A Heather Draft for Consultation This document is issued for the party which commissioned it and for specific purposes connected with the above-captioned project only. It should not be relied upon by any other party or used for any other purpose. We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this document being relied upon by any other party, or being used for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an error or omission in data supplied to us by other parties. This document contains confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it.. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Contents Chapter Title Page Abbreviations i Glossary iii Non-Technical Summary vi 1 Introduction 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 Introduction________________________________________________________________________ Application of the SEA process to Fisheries _______________________________________________ Application of the SEA process to the NIFCA Fisheries Management Regime ____________________ Purpose of the Assessment Stage and Environmental Report _________________________________ Compliance with SEA Directive ________________________________________________________ Limitations of the SEA _______________________________________________________________ 1 1 2 2 2 3 2 SEA Process and Methodology 4 2.1 2.2 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 2.2.4 SEA Legislative Requirements and Purpose ______________________________________________ SEA Process and Stages _____________________________________________________________ SEA Process Overview ______________________________________________________________ Scoping Consultation ________________________________________________________________ Assessment Methodology ____________________________________________________________ Assessment Assumptions ____________________________________________________________ 4 4 4 6 7 8 3 Description and Context of the Northumberland IFCA Fisheries 9 3.1 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.2 3.3 3.4 Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority ________________________________ 9 Background _______________________________________________________________________ 9 Aims and Objectives _________________________________________________________________ 9 Overview of Fisheries _______________________________________________________________ 10 Shellfish and Finfish Fisheries Management Regime – the “Plan” _____________________________ 11 NIFCA Legacy Byelaw Review ________________________________________________________ 17 4 Stage A Scoping Summary 18 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.6.1 4.6.2 4.6.3 Relationship with other policies, plans and programmes ____________________________________ Baseline Information ________________________________________________________________ Future Baseline ___________________________________________________________________ Key Issues and Opportunities_________________________________________________________ SEA Framework ___________________________________________________________________ Compatibility of SEA Framework Objectives and the NIFCA Management Regime Objectives _______ Introduction_______________________________________________________________________ Compatibility between SEA Framework Objectives ________________________________________ Compatibility of Northumberland IFCA Fisheries Management Objectives and the SEA Framework Objectives________________________________________________________________________ 18 20 21 21 31 36 36 36 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx 39 Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 5 NIFCA Management Regime Assessment 41 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.3.1 5.3.2 5.3.3 5.3.4 5.3.5 5.3.6 5.3.7 5.3.8 5.3.9 5.3.10 41 41 42 44 46 47 48 51 53 55 56 57 5.3.11 5.3.12 5.3.13 5.4 Introduction_______________________________________________________________________ ‘Do Nothing’ Assessment ____________________________________________________________ Assessment of the NIFCA Current Fisheries Management Regime ____________________________ Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops _____________________________ Dredge Fishery for Scallops (King Scallop Pectin maximus) _________________________________ Drift Net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout ______________________________________________ Trawl Fishery for Nephrops __________________________________________________________ Gillnet Fishery for Lobster ___________________________________________________________ Hand Line Fishery for Mackerel _______________________________________________________ Hand Gathering for Mussels __________________________________________________________ Hand Gathering for Winkles __________________________________________________________ Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel _________________________________ Trawl Fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other Flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish, and Catfish (Bycatch Fishery) _________________________________________________________________________ Hand Gathering Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, and Velvet Crab ____________________________ Pacific Oyster Farm ________________________________________________________________ Beach and T-net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout _______________________________________ Cumulative Assessment _____________________________________________________________ 6 Consultation 69 6.1 Environmental Report Consultation ____________________________________________________ 69 7 Conclusions and Recommendations 7.1 7.2 Conclusions ______________________________________________________________________ 70 Recommendations _________________________________________________________________ 71 8 Monitoring 78 8.1 8.2 8.2.1 8.2.2 8.2.3 Links to Other Plans and Programmes __________________________________________________ Monitoring Proposals _______________________________________________________________ Introduction_______________________________________________________________________ SEA Effects Monitoring______________________________________________________________ Action Plan Monitoring ______________________________________________________________ 78 78 78 79 82 9 References 85 Appendices Appendix A. Appendix B. Appendix C. C.1 C.2 C.2.1 C.2.1.1 59 61 62 64 66 70 88 Plans and Programmes Review _______________________________________________________ 89 Current NIFCA Byelaws ____________________________________________________________ 110 Baseline Information _______________________________________________________________ 118 Air Quality _______________________________________________________________________ 118 Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna ________________________________________________________ 118 Target Species ___________________________________________________________________ 119 Shellfish Species _________________________________________________________________ 119 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation C.2.1.2 C.2.2 C.2.2.1 C.2.2.2 C.2.2.3 C.2.3 C.2.3.1 C.2.3.2 C.2.3.3 C.2.4 C.2.5 C.2.6 C.3 C.4 C.5 C.6 C.7 C.8 C.8.1 C.8.2 C.8.3 C.8.4 C.9 C.10 C.10.1 C.10.2 C.10.3 C.10.4 C.11 C.11.1 C.11.2 C.11.3 C.11.4 C.12 C.12.1 C.12.2 C.12.3 C.13 C.14 Appendix D. Appendix E. Finfish Species ___________________________________________________________________ Non-target Species ________________________________________________________________ Effort ___________________________________________________________________________ Bycatch_________________________________________________________________________ Discards ________________________________________________________________________ Other Species ____________________________________________________________________ Birds ___________________________________________________________________________ Mammals _______________________________________________________________________ Amphibians and Reptiles ___________________________________________________________ Habitats and Designated Areas ______________________________________________________ Bio-safety _______________________________________________________________________ Bait Digging _____________________________________________________________________ Climate _________________________________________________________________________ Energy _________________________________________________________________________ Historic Environment ______________________________________________________________ Landscape/Seascape ______________________________________________________________ Soils ___________________________________________________________________________ Waste __________________________________________________________________________ Discards ________________________________________________________________________ Waste at Sea ____________________________________________________________________ Onshore Processing _______________________________________________________________ Material Waste ___________________________________________________________________ Water Quality ____________________________________________________________________ Human Health ___________________________________________________________________ Health in the North East ____________________________________________________________ Seafood Consumption _____________________________________________________________ Health and Safety of Fishermen ______________________________________________________ Discarded Fishing Gear ____________________________________________________________ Material Assets ___________________________________________________________________ Fishing Vessels __________________________________________________________________ Ports and Harbours _______________________________________________________________ Processing Facilities _______________________________________________________________ Educational Facilities ______________________________________________________________ Socio-Economics _________________________________________________________________ Population ______________________________________________________________________ Economy _______________________________________________________________________ Recreation ______________________________________________________________________ Tourism ________________________________________________________________________ Transport _______________________________________________________________________ Scoping Consultation Responses _____________________________________________________ NIFCA Appraisal Tables ____________________________________________________________ 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx 122 123 123 124 124 124 124 125 126 126 130 130 131 133 133 135 135 135 136 136 136 137 137 138 138 139 139 140 140 140 140 140 141 141 141 143 143 144 145 146 174 Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Abbreviations AONB Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty AQMA Air Quality Management Area BAP Biodiversity Action Plan BNNC Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast CEFAS Centre for Environment, Fisheries, and Aquaculture Science CO Carbon Monoxide CO2 Carbon Dioxide DCLG Department for Communities and Local Government DEFRA Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs EA Environment Agency EC European Commission EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMS European Marine Site EU European Union FTE Full Time Employment FU Functional Unit GDP Gross Domestic Product GHG Greenhouse Gas ha hectares ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea IEEP Institute for European Environmental Policy IFCA Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority IMD Index of Multiple Deprivation IVMS In-Vessel Monitoring System km kilometres LPUE Landings Per Unit Effort LNR Local Nature Reserve m metres MaCAA Marine and Coastal Access Act MAGIC Multi-Agency Geographic Information for the Countryside MCA Maritime Coastguard Agency MCZ Marine Conservation Zone MMO Marine Management Organisation MPA Marine Protected Area MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield NIFCA Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority NNR National Nature Reserve i 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation N0x Nitrogen Oxides NPPF National Planning Policy Framework NESFC North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee NSFC Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee ODPM Office of the Deputy Prime Minister ONS Office for National Statistics PM10 Particulate Matter (up to 10 micrometres in size) PMSU Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit PPP Policies, Plans, Programmes rMCZ Recommended Marine Conservation Zone SAC Special Area of Conservation SBL Safe Biological Limits SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SOx Sulphur Oxides SPA Special Protection Area SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest TAC Total Allowable Catch UK United Kingdom UKCP09 United Kingdom Climate Projections 2009 UDP Unitary Development Plan UN United Nations UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation USA United States of America VMR Voluntary Marine Reserve WFD Water Framework Directive WWF World Wide Fund for Nature ii 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Glossary Alien Species Also known as non-native, non-indigenous, foreign, exotic, introduced, biological pollutants, are species, subspecies, or lower taxa, occurring outside their natural range (past or present) and natural dispersal potential (i.e. outside the range it occupies naturally or could not occupy without direct or indirect introduction or husbandry by humans) and includes any part, gametes or propagules of such species that might survive and subsequently reproduce. Baseline A description of the present and future state of the environment of an area, in the absence of any development, taking into account changes resulting from natural events and from other human activities. Biodiversity or Biological Diversity Is the totality of genes, species, and ecosystems in a region. Biodiversity can be divided into three hierarchical categories, genes, species, and ecosystems that describe quite different aspects of living systems and that scientists measure in different ways. BMSY BMSY is the biomass that enables a fish stock to deliver the maximum sustainable yield (MSY). In theory, BMSY is the population size at the point of maximum growth rate. The surplus biomass that is produced by the population at BMSY is the maximum sustainable yield that can be harvested without reducing the population. Carrying Capacity The potential maximum production a species or population can maintain in relation to available food resources within an area. Consultation Body An authority which because of its environmental responsibilities is likely to be concerned by the effects of implementing plans and programmes and must be consulted under the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive. The Consultation Bodies designated in the SEA Regulations for England are Natural England, English Heritage and the Environment Agency. Climate Change Adaptation Involves adjustments to natural or human systems in response to actual or expected climatic stimuli or their effects that moderate harm or exploit beneficial opportunities. Climate Change Mitigation Involves taking action to reduce the impact of human activity on the climate system, primarily through reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Climate Resilience The ability of a social or natural system to absorb disturbances as a result of climate change while retaining the same basic structure and ways of functioning and the capacity to adapt to stress and change as a result of the risks associated with climate change. Depleted The status of a fish stock or stock assemblage reduced by fishing to a low level of abundance compared to historical levels, resulting in significantly reduced spawning biomass and reproductive capacity. Discards Those components of a fish stock thrown back after capture e.g. because they are below the minimum landing size or because quota have been exhausted for that species. Most of the discarded fish are unlikely to survive. However, crustacean shellfish discards have iii 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation relatively higher rates of survival. Effort The fishing effort is a measure of the amount of fishing. Frequently some surrogate is used relating to a given combination of inputs into the fishing activity, such as the number of hours or days spent fishing, numbers of hooks used (in long- line fishing), kilometres of nets used, etc. The European Union defines fishing effort as fleet capacity (tonnage and engine power) x days at sea (time; t); the formulas are GT x t and kW x t. FMSY FMSY is the maximum rate of fishing mortality (the proportion of a fish stock caught and removed by fishing) resulting eventually, usually a very long time frame, in a population size of BMSY. FMSY is a constant and can be applied to any stock that is not impaired in its reproductive capacity. Green Infrastructure Green Infrastructure is a strategically planned and delivered network of high quality green spaces and other environmental features. It can be designed and managed as a multifunctional resource capable of delivering a wide range of environmental and quality of life benefits for local communities. Green Infrastructure includes parks, open spaces, playing fields, woodlands, allotments and private gardens. Indicator A measure of representative variables over time, usually used to measure trends, trigger management action, and monitor the achievement of objectives. Maximum Sustainable Yield Maximum sustainable yield is, theoretically, the largest yield (catch) that can be taken from a specific fish stock over an indefinite period under constant environmental conditions. It is measured in tonnes. Mitigation Measures Refers to measures to avoid, reduce or offset significant adverse environmental effects. Non-Target Species Fishing not only harvests species that are sought by fishers, but also significantly affects incidentally caught species that are not sought or wanted. Non-target species may include fish, sharks, crustaceans, molluscs, marine mammals and reptiles that are unintentionally taken by the fishery or are not routinely assessed for fisheries management. The term usually relates to an entire fishery and its management and not to the targeted fishing activities of individual fishers. Non-target species can also be classified as bycatch or by-product. By-products are species that have market value and tend to be retained and sold by fishermen, while bycatch is usually discarded. Objective A statement of what is intended, specifying the desired outcome or direction of change in trends. Scoping The process of deciding the scope and level of detail of a Strategic Environmental Assessment, including the environmental effects and options which need to be considered, and the assessment methods to be used. iv 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Directive European Directive 2001/42/EC ‘on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment’. Transposed into UK law via The Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004. Strategic Environmental Generic term used internationally to describe environmental Assessment assessment as applied to policies, plans and programmes. In this report, ‘SEA’ refers to the type of environmental assessment required under the SEA Directive. SEA Framework The SEA objectives and criteria developed for the project. SEA Objectives These are specific objectives that have been developed for this project. They are part of the SEA Framework used to assess the sustainability performance of the plan or programme. Stakeholder Any organisation or individual that has a direct interest in actions or decisions. Their interest may be because they will have a role in implementing the decisions, or because they will be affected by the decision. Stock That part of a fish population that forms a management unit or area, usually with a particular migration pattern, specific spawning grounds, and subject to a distinct fishery. Target Species Those species that are primarily sought by the fishermen in a particular fishery. The species subject to directed fishing effort in a fishery. There may be primary as well as secondary target species. V-Notching The NIFCA V-notching scheme puts a notch in the tail flap of a sized and berried lobster only (87mm or larger). This gives the female one or two more chances of spawning before being eligible for recapture. It is an offence to land a V notched lobster, male or female. v 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Non-Technical Summary Introduction Mott MacDonald was commissioned by the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority (NIFCA) to undertake a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of shellfish and finfish fisheries under its management jurisdiction. The SEA was undertaken in accordance with the European Directive 2001/42/EC, known as the “SEA Directive” and the resulting Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004. A SEA provides a formalised and structured process to enable the environmental effects of a plan or programme to be assessed and considered in any subsequent management or government planning decisions. The key output of the SEA process is to produce an Environmental Report that presents information on the potential environmental effects of the NIFCA shellfish and finfish fisheries management regime. This document is the Environmental Report – Draft for Consultation for the NIFCA shellfish and finfish fisheries SEA and covers Stages A-C of the SEA process as defined in the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) Guidance (September 2005). The application of the SEA process to fisheries management in the UK has been limited. The North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee (NESFC) undertook an SEA of its shellfish fisheries in 2008. This was the first time the SEA process had been applied to a fisheries management regime in the UK. The SEA process has successfully been applied to fisheries in Australia and the USA. The SEA process supports the aims of NIFCA to ensure sustainable exploitation of sea fisheries resources that balance the social and economic benefits with the need to protect the marine environment. The SEA has considered wider sustainability issues (not just environmental) to align the SEA objectives with the objectives of the NIFCA management regime that are underpinned by the principles of sustainable development. The SEA has assessed the current NIFCA management regime which consists of byelaws and regulations. This regime constitutes the ‘plan or programme’ for the purposes of this SEA. vi 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Process The NIFCA SEA was carried out in accordance with ‘The Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004’, known as the “SEA Regulations” and has taken into account the DCLG Guidance ‘A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive’ (September 2005). The figure below shows the stages in the SEA process. SEA Process and Stages Stage A Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline and deciding on the scope Stage B Developing and refining alternatives and assessing effects Stage C Preparing the Environmental Report Stage D Consulting on the draft plan or programme and the Environmental Report Stage E Monitoring implementation of the plan or programme Current Status of the Project The SEA for the NIFCA fisheries management regime is currently at Stage D of the SEA process. The Environmental Report will be issued for formal consultation in August 2014. During the consultation period stakeholders will have a chance to comment on the SEA process and recommendations. Current NIFCA Fisheries Management Regime – the “plan” Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authorities (IFCAs) are either committees or joint committees that comprise the local authorities, Marine Management Organisation (MMO) appointees, MMO, Environment Agency, and Natural England that fall within an IFCA District. They are tasked with the sustainable management of inshore sea fisheries resources in its local area. vii 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation The NIFCA District is defined as the sea within the national waters of the United Kingdom adjacent to the County of Northumberland and the Metropolitan Borough of North Tyneside out to six nautical miles from the high water extent. It also covers all of the land in the County and the Metropolitan Borough, and all rivers and estuaries within the District up to the tidal limits. The District runs from the English/Scottish border in the north to the border between North and South Tyneside in the River Tyne in the south. The aims and objectives of NIFCA and the current fisheries management regime are: To ensure that the exploitation of sea fisheries resources is carried out in a sustainable way; To balance the social and economic benefits of exploiting the sea fisheries resources of the district with the need to protect the marine environment from, or promote its recovery from, the effects of such exploitation; Take any other steps which in the Authority’s opinion are necessary, or expedient for the purpose of making a contribution to the achievement of sustainable development; To balance the different needs of persons engaged in the exploitation of sea fisheries resources in the district; and To ensure all objectives of any Marine Conservation Zone in the district are furthered. For the purpose of the SEA process the management regime was divided into the different fisheries in the district and the current byelaws and regulations that govern each fishery. The table below presents the shellfish and finfish fisheries and their current management regime (in terms of byelaws and regulations), that were assessed. Current NIFCA Fisheries Management Regime Fishery Current Regime (Byelaws, UK, EU regulations/legislation) Shellfish Pot fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus) 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish viii 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Fishery Current Regime (Byelaws, UK, EU regulations/legislation) 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot Limitation, EU SI Minimum Landing Size and SI V Notched Lobster Dredge fishery for Scallops (King Scallop Pectin maximus) 12. Dredges 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation (SAC) 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation Trawl fishery for Nephrops 3. Trawling and Size of Vessels 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation Hand gathering fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster and Velvet Crabs 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus) 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns EU SI Minimum Landing Size and SI V Notched Lobster Hand gathering fishery for Mussels Natural England restrictions within Lindisfarne Nature Reserve Hand gathering fishery for Winkles 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation Gillnet fishery for Lobster 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus) 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait 10.Re-depositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot Limitations EU SI Minimum Landing Size and SI V Notched Lobster Pacific Oyster Farm Currently no NIFCA byelaws; Regulated by Natural England Finfish Gillnet fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel 4. Fixed Engines Minimum Landing Sizes set by Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (not Turbot) Drift net fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout 4. Fixed Engines EA restrictions for anglers Hand line fishery for Mackerel MMO Licence and Minimum Landing Size Trawl fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish, and Catfish 3. Trawling and Size of Vessel ix 5. Purse Seine Net 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the Berwickshire and 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Fishery Current Regime (Byelaws, UK, EU regulations/legislation) North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation MMO Licence and Minimum Landing Sizes (not Turbot) Beach and T net fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout 4. Fixed Engines Minimum Landing Sizes enforced by Environment Agency (EA) In 2011 the Sea Fisheries Committees (SFC) were replaced by the Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authorities (IFCA) which undertake new duties under the Marine and Coastal Access Act (MaCAA). As a part of their High Level Objectives, IFCAs are required to review their legacy byelaws (current management regime) by April 2015. NIFCA currently operate with 15 legacy byelaws and two new byelaws (Byelaws 16 and 17) as set out in the table above. The SEA was started before the legacy byelaws review commenced, and therefore, the assessment has been undertaken on the current management regime (legacy byelaws and the two new byelaws). Scoping Stage Summary The SEA Scoping Report was issued for formal consultation in April 2013 to the three statutory consultees (Environment Agency, Natural England and English Heritage) and wider stakeholders. Comments received were taken into consideration in the preparation of this Environmental Report – Draft for Consultation. The scoping process identified the relevant plans and programmes at International, National, Regional and Local level and their implications for the SEA and NIFCA fisheries management regime. The scoping process also sets the environmental and socio-economic baseline context for the NIFCA district, and identified key environmental challenges and opportunities. Key challenges and opportunities identified included: Potential threats to seabirds from fishing nets; Effects of bait digging on birds (food chain) and habitat disturbance; Potential effects of the Pacific Oyster Farm (classed as an invasive species) on other species, particularly mussel populations; Effects of fishing activities on designated sites such as the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation and European x 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Marine Site, particularly effects of nets on rocky reef habitat, and effects of fishing activities on grey seals, mussels, and birds which are all qualifying features of the site. Mott MacDonald and NIFCA worked collaboratively to produce a SEA Framework consisting of sustainability objectives, appraisal criteria and indicators that was updated following consultation. The SEA Framework was based on the SEA Directive topics; baseline information; key issues for the district; and current best practice. Key changes to the SEA Framework following consultation included: Dividing the target species objective into two separate objectives, one for shellfish and one for finfish; Non-target species objective re-worded to include disturbance; Dividing the ecology objective into two separate objectives, one for species and one for habitats; and Re-wording the water quality objective to give it a wider water quality focus than just the Water Framework Directive. The SEA Framework objectives were: NIFCA SEA Framework Objectives 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities xi 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation NIFCA SEA Framework Objectives 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets1, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime SEA Methodology The assessment under SEA Stage B was undertaken at a workshop with stakeholders, held in February 2014. The methodology used in the assessment was based on the DCLG SEA guidance, and best practice identified previously for the former North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee SEA. Sustainability objectives and assessment criteria were developed during the scoping stage and updated following consultation (for changes see scoping stage summary section of this non-technical summary above). The sustainability objectives and assessment criteria were used to assess the current NIFCA fisheries management regime. Based on the results of the assessment, environmental, sustainability, and fisheries experts developed recommendations to influence the development of the NIFCA management regime to improve its sustainability performance. Recommendations were developed to address the potential negative effects and areas of uncertainty, and to strengthen the current NIFCA management regime. 1 That infrastructure and those assets necessary to the sector, including fishing vessels, ports and processing facilities. xii 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Assessment Results and Conclusions The SEA process has been carried out for the NIFCA fisheries management regime. It has identified potential positive and negative effects of the current regime on environmental and socio-economic objectives, these are described below. Overall the NIFCA management regime performs well when judged using the SEA framework. The main positive effects of implementing the management regime (‘plan’) were: The current management regime positively contributes to maintaining sustainable harvesting of finfish and shellfish stocks through the byelaws and regulations that regulate minimum landing sizes, reduce effort, and limit vessel size; The current management regime helps to reduce effects of bycatch through byelaws and regulations on re-depositing shellfish, net sizes, and fixed engines; The current management regime helps protect species and habitats from damaging fishing activities through byelaws and regulations on dredging, vessel sizes, and use of mobile fishing gear within specified areas within the Special Area of Conservation. In particular, the mobile fishing gear byelaw aims to prevent damage or deterioration to designated conservation features such as Rocky Reefs, Cobble Reefs and Seagrass in the area, through a buffer zone in which fishing with mobile gear is prohibited; and The current management regime helps to maintain sustainable fisheries and fishing communities through byelaws and regulations that protect sustainable levels of fish stocks whilst not placing undue restrictions on the fishing industry. Negative effects identified included: The Marine Management Organisation minimum landing sizes have a moderate negative effect on fishing tourism e.g. the minimum landing size for cod is currently perceived to be too small and the fish stock diminishes before it has had a chance to breed, therefore, affecting recreational fishing and conservation of sustainable stock levels. If the minimum landing sizes were to be increased above the national standards this would have benefits for anglers and conservation of stocks; and xiii 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation The assessment identified concerns over the lack of information on the Pacific Oyster Farm and the regulations surrounding this fishery, and the potential for negative effects now and in the future. However, until further information is obtained by NIFCA the positive or negative effects of the Pacific Oyster farm cannot be accurately identified and addressed. This has been identified as an action for NIFCA to take forward in the Action Plan presented below. The Pacific Oyster farm will be a cultivation operation in which, normally, seed oysters are bought, laid, grown on, and then lifted as required for sale. Such operations, especially in a private fishery, are typically not judged on sustainability criteria (as applied to open ended natural stock). The Pacific Oyster farm could be regarded as a development with the potential to increase the local economy (resulting in positive effects), provided that the potential ecological issues are mitigated. However, to expand the farm further would probably require a full impact assessment as it is within a European Marine Site (EMS). It is also likely to impact directly upon the mussel populations which are a sub-feature of the site. During the assessment a number of uncertainties over effects were also identified. These included: Trawl fishery for Nephrops – uncertainties over effects on landscape and seascape; waste and discharges; pollution and water quality; health and safety; and material assets; Gillnet fishery for lobster – lack of information about this fishery including effects on material assets e.g. where do nets come from, are they reused. An action to monitor this fishery has been included in the Action Plan below; Hand line fishery for mackerel - under the MMO Minimum Landing Sizes regulation boats could be out longer to get their quotas, therefore, generating more waste but this is speculation and, therefore, effects remain uncertain; Hand gathering fishery for mussels and for winkles – stock status is uncertain. Information on numbers of mussels and winkles captured needs to be undertaken by NIFCA. This has been included in the Action Plan below. The SEA has informed the legacy byelaw review by highlighting the positive and negative effects of the current byelaws. The assessment process has demonstrated that all of the current byelaws contribute to the overall sustainable xiv 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation management of the fisheries within the NIFCA district. It is, therefore, recommended that the legacy byelaw review does not remove any of the byelaws completely but NIFCA would seek to consolidate and update them in line with current legislation. This will help ensure that the current protection of fisheries and the environment is continued. Consultation As required by the SEA Regulations and under stage D of the SEA process, NIFCA is consulting on this Environmental Report to ensure the views and concerns of statutory and non-statutory consultees are taken into account in the SEA process. The SEA Regulations do not state a specific time period for consultation but states that ‘authorities shall be given an early and effective opportunity within appropriate timeframes for a meaningful consultation period to express their opinion’. This Environmental Report – Draft for Consultation will be issued for public consultation for a six week period from 15th August 2014 to 26th September 2014. The relevant authorities/stakeholders will be provided with a paper or electronic copy of this report and the current byelaws. The documents will also be published on the NIFCA website. The responses received during the stage D consultation will be reviewed and taken into account in the final Environmental Report. A separate statement of the influence of the SEA process on the plan will then be provided. In order to engage with a wider group of stakeholders including fishermen, further stakeholder consultation events were undertaken by NIFCA on the legacy byelaw review and SEA in June and July 2014. The results of these consultation events will be reviewed and taken into account in the final Environmental Report. Recommendations for the future plan As a result of the assessment undertaken as part of the SEA process a number of mitigation measures and actions were recommended by the team of xv 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation environmental, sustainable development, and fisheries specialists to improve the sustainability performance of the management regime. These actions have been developed into an action plan for NIFCA to implement. Following discussions and agreement with NIFCA the actions identified were given a priority ranking. The aim of the Action Plan is to help continue the sustainable management of fisheries and the fishing industry whilst also protecting the environment. The Action Plan includes actions to increase knowledge of fisheries, develop further management frameworks, and implement measures to improve sustainability. Priority Key High Action to be taken in the next 0-6 months Medium Action to be undertaken in the next 6-12 months Low Action to be undertaken in the next 1-2 years Action not taken forward Action not taken forward by NIFCA – reasons for this will be provided Action Plan Ref Fishery Recommendations and Justification 1 General (applicable to general management of all fisheries) Action: Develop a clear and concise set of postcards or flashcards with key requirements of byelaws in visual format where possible using key words. 2 Priority NIFCA Comments - Justification: This action aims to ensure that the byelaws (which are quite technical) are understood by everyone using sea fisheries resources to promote sustainable management of the fisheries. Action: Organise a free trial of the In Vessel Monitoring System (IVMS) tracking system through a company such as Succorfish. Justification: The current vessel tracking system uses GPS while IVMS uses mobile phone signal which is more accurate at tracking locations of vessels. This would help with health and safety and monitoring of vessel fishing patterns. The MMO are currently going through a procurement process. Therefore, at this stage NIFCA cannot take the action forward until an agreed IVMS is determined by the MMO 3 Action: Undertake a survey of ship wreck sites (and other archaeological/historic features/ areas) to identify which have archaeological or historic interest and should be monitored by NIFCA to help preserve them. Justification: Under the Marine and Coastal Access Act (MaCAA) NIFCA has a responsibility to protect the marine environment (including historic environment) from fishing activities. This actions aims identify and monitor as risk heritage assets. This is likely to require commissioning through a third party organisation such as an Archaeological Trust. This is a low priority compared to other work, and will not be taken forward by NIFCA. 4 Action: Work with the RSPB to undertake the following measures: Medium to low priority Investigate the feasibility and benefits of introducing net modifications to reduce numbers of birds caught. Undertake training for fishermen in the safe release of seabirds and other species from nets, and the xvi 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Ref Fishery Recommendations and Justification importance of net attendance (this could increase survival rates of those animals that do get caught) Priority NIFCA Comments Justification: Catching and death of seabirds in fishermen’s nets is currently an issue in the area. The aim of these actions is to reduce numbers of birds caught in nets. 5 Action: Investigate the effects of bait digging on protected and non-protected species. - Work with other organisations such as Natural England, National Trust, and Northumberland County Council to look at the effectiveness of bait digging byelaws, and whether these should be strengthened or extended based on the outcomes of the investigation into effects. Justification: Bait digging can cause effects for birds through reduction of food and can damage other species and habitats such as sea urchins and razor shells. These actions aim to ensure that appropriate regulations are in place to limit bait digging and reduce its associated negative effects on species and habitats. 6 Action: Investigate opportunities to pilot an eco-labelling scheme. Justification: This action provides an opportunity to increase and recognise socio-economic and environmental benefits of sustainably caught fish through a labelling scheme. 7 Drift Net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout Action: The MaCAA states that it is not an IFCA’s responsibility to manage migratory fish. However, DEFRA says that IFCA’s are responsible for “Marine organisms” in inshore waters (including sea fisheries resources). IFCA is meeting with DEFRA lawyers to resolve this issue. This is not a current priority for NIFCA and will not be taken forward at this time The Environment Agency manage and record landings data for this fishery If the meeting results in NIFCA having additional responsibilities then appropriate management, recording and monitoring will need to be implemented in relation to this fishery. Justification: The aim of this action is to resolve the issue about whether NIFCA has any responsibility for managing migratory fish (Salmon and Sea Trout) and if the outcome is ‘yes’ then management measures such as recording and monitoring species and amount caught will be implemented. 8 Trawl Fishery for Nephrops Action: Better information and links are needed with other organisations to monitor Nephrops caught outside the district but landed in the district. Conduct study into Nephrops stocks biomass within the district, and compare with international advice and stocks at Farne Deeps. Activity is currently too low. Therefore, a study will not be undertaken as a priority The MMO monitor and record this fishery Monitor and record boat numbers and landings within the district. Justification: There is a current lack of information about this fishery as NIFCA are not monitoring this fishery. In order to ensure sustainable Nephrops stocks, information on stock status, boat numbers, and catch data needs to be monitored by NIFCA. 9 xvii Action: There is a lack of Functional Unit management as recommended by International Council for Exploration of This is not currently being taken forward by NIFCA 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Ref Fishery Recommendations and Justification the Sea (ICES). Although this is not a direct IFCA management issue, it is a wider ‘big picture’ issue which needs addressing. It raises an important issue about the overall relationship between the duty of the NIFCA to its local stocks, and the co-related duty of Cefas, Defra and the EU to the wider stock picture. Priority NIFCA Comments While NIFCA couldn’t implement functional unit management, they could promote it when asked (or proactively) to contribute to sustainable fishing. Justification: The ICES recommends that Nephrops fisheries are managed on function unit (sub-areas) basis rather than on the basis of large sea areas such as the North Sea etc. This allows more detailed analysis of stock levels by different areas. It is not NIFCA’s responsibility to implement a functional unit but they can proactively promote it within the industry and to regulatory organisations. 10 Action: Conduct a study to investigate bycatch rates, and the effects of bycatch on seals, seabirds, and other nontarget species. Justification: The effects of bycatch of seals, seabirds and other species are currently not known for this fishery. The action aims to investigate any potential effects and implement protection measures if necessary to reduce death of seals, seabirds, and other species. 11 Action: Collect data on habitats and species within the fishery area. Conduct study into the effects of this fishery on the identified habitats and species. Activity is very low and occurs outside the EMS and Marine Conservation Zone (MCZ) sites. Therefore, this is not a current priority for NIFCA This is not currently being taken forward by NIFCA Justification: The SEA identified a gap in knowledge about effects of the trawl fishery for Nephrops on habitat and species. This action aims to fill that knowledge gap and identify if any further protection or monitoring measures are required. 12 Gillnet Fishery for Lobster Action: Put procedures in place to monitor this fishery to record current information gaps, and gain a better understating and knowledge of the fishery to enable better management of potential effects. - Justification: The SEA identified a lack of knowledge about this fishery, for example, how often does the boat go out, rate of bycatch, number and area of nets used. To ensure sustainable lobster stocks are maintained and that the marine environment is protected this fishery needs to be monitored. 13 Action: Conduct a study to investigate the effects of nets on the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast (BNNC) Special Area of Conservation (SAC) habitat and species, and bycatch. If the results of the study show significant negative effects then development and implementation of a byelaw regulating effort e.g. number and area of nets will be considered. Justification: This fishery mainly takes place within the BNNC SAC and, therefore, has potential to damage features of the SAC. The byelaws do not restrict number or area of nets. These actions aim to investigate whether any damage is being caused to the SAC from this fishery and xvii i 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Ref Fishery Recommendations and Justification put protection measures in place such as a new byelaw regulating nets, if necessary. 14 Hand Gathering Fishery for Winkles Action: Conduct study to establish baseline information on numbers of winkles captured. This information should be updated each year. Priority NIFCA Comments - Based on the results of the initial baseline study develop management actions as required (Action Plan). These may include: Permit for hand gathering of winkles; Restrictions (bag limits) for personal use; and Code of Conduct (this can be prepared without the baseline information and should be done as best practice) – raise awareness to tourists, requirement to remove all waste, effects on other habitats and species from disturbance and litter. Justification: Information is required to understand the number of winkles captured and whether this is within sustainable limits. Based on the results management actions could be put in place (as described above) to ensure sustainable stock s are maintained and the environment is protected. The code of conduct will help educate winkle pickers about effects of litter and disturbance on habitats and species. 15 Action: Take on an MSc student to undertake a study into how winkles adapt to sea temperature change, and use the results to determine future management requirements. Justification: NIFCA currently have limited knowledge of how winkles adapt to sea temperature change and how this will affect stocks and the fishing industry. This action aims to fill that knowledge gap so that future management can be planned. 16 Action: Identify archaeological and historic features within hand gathering areas, and monitor potential future listed features, to identify if any action needs to be taken to protect historic assets in areas where hand gathering takes place. This could be included in the Code of Conduct. Although this is relevant to adapting to climate change, this research is not a current priority for the NIFCA. This is not currently being taken forward by NIFCA Justification: Archaeological or historic features that are present on the beach and foreshore can be damaged as a result of human disturbance from hand gathering of winkles. This action aims to identify any features at risk and implement protection measures such as an exclusion zone if necessary. 17 18 Hand Gathering Fishery for Mussels Action: Conduct study to establish baseline information on numbers of mussels captured. This information should be updated each year. Justification: Information is required to understand the number of mussels captured and whether this is within sustainable limits to maintain mussel stocks. Action: Identify archaeological and historic features within hand gathering areas, and monitor potential future listed features, to identify if any action needs to be taken to protect historic assets in areas where hand gathering takes place. This could be included in the Code of Conduct. Commercial fishery doesn’t exist anymore (partially due to supply problem through NE setting a quota, and market issues including a fall in quality of the mussels) This is not currently being taken forward by NIFCA Justification: Archaeological or historic features that are present on the beach and foreshore can be damaged as a xix 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Ref Fishery Recommendations and Justification result of human disturbance from hand gathering of mussels. This action aims to identify any features at risk and implement protection measures such as an exclusion zone if necessary. 19 Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel Action: Conduct study into the rates and effects of bycatch of birds. Use the results of the study to identify if a new byelaw is needed for the gillnet fishery for finfish. Potential opportunity for a health & safety assessment to be required under the new byelaw. Priority NIFCA Comments Medium / Low NIFCA do not regulate finfish. Vessels with a migratory licence are regulated by the Environment Agency. An alternative to a new byelaw is to develop a Code of Conduct for the fishery to help reduce negative effects on bycatch, in particular for vessels with a migratory licence. Justification: Birds being caught in nets are an issue for this fishery, and the current byelaw does not relate to those with a migratory licence. The actions aim to investigate the rate and severity of effects so that the correct level of response can be developed. This could either be a new byelaw or a code of conduct to educate people. 20 21 Action: Investigate the benefits on fish stocks if minimum landing size for cod is increased. Ensure there is a smooth and clear transition from the MMO regulation to the NIFCA regulation on minimum landing sizes through development and communication of clear guidelines and requirements. Justification: The MMO regulations on the minimum size of fish that can be caught and sold are soon to be removed as part of the revised approach dealing with new bycatch regulations requiring all quota species to be landed. NIFCA is considering increasing the minimum landing size for cod to improve sustainable fishing of this species. The action will investigate the benefits of an increase and ensure there is a smooth transition between regulations. Pacific Oyster Farm (Crassostrea gigas) Action: Agree and define NIFCA’s role in the management regime of the privately owned Crassostrea gigas operation at Ross Sands. This should be undertaken in light of MaCAA, and in consultation with Natural England, CEFAS, and the private operator. If it is decided that NIFCA do have a clear role in the management of the C. gigas farm then a management framework needs to be developed and implemented. Management issues and opportunities should include (but are not limited to): There is an opportunity to manage any potential residual effects of the Oyster farm in relation to the wider ecosystem; Currently there is limited data/ monitoring for the Pacific Oyster Farm, this data would facilitate informed discussions as to the appropriate management regime; and Further information is needed to understand the impact of the Pacific Oyster farm on the wider ecosystem, is there potential removal of food stocks from the mussel population. Justification: These actions aim to clarify and define NIFCA’s role in management of the Pacific Oyster Farm, and protect the wider environment, particularly the mussel population from potential effects of Pacific Oysters as an xx The Pacific Oyster Farm cannot be a priority for the NIFCA at this point. The NIFCA will continue to survey the mussel bed, and because any actual spread of C. gigas outside the farm might affect NIFCA waters it agrees that a management framework should be developed by an appropriate responsible body. NIFCA do have some jurisdiction over private fisheries (from the MaCAA) but in this case as the farm is within the Lindisfarne SSSI overall jurisdiction lies with Natural England and NIFCA cannot itself devote further resources to this issue. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Ref Fishery Recommendations and Justification invasive species. Priority NIFCA Comments Monitoring the implementation of the future plan Monitoring proposals for the next five to ten years have been developed for the NIFCA fisheries management regime. Monitoring will be undertaken by NIFCA and reviewed yearly. Two monitoring frameworks were developed: SEA Effects Monitoring – this presents monitoring proposals that were developed as a result of negative or uncertain effects identified during the assessment process; and Action Plan Monitoring – this presents a framework for monitoring the progress of the Action Plan. xxi 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 1 Introduction 1.1 Introduction Mott MacDonald was commissioned by the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority (NIFCA) to undertake a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of shellfish and finfish fisheries under its management jurisdiction. The SEA was undertaken in accordance with the European Directive 2001/42/EC, known as the “SEA Directive” and the resulting Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004. A SEA provides a formalised and structured process to enable the environmental effects of a plan or programme to be assessed and considered in any subsequent management decisions. The key output of the SEA process is to produce an Environmental Report that presents information on the potential environmental effects of the NIFCA shellfish and finfish fisheries management regime. This document is the Environmental Report – Draft for Consultation for the NIFCA shellfish and finfish fisheries SEA and covers Stages A-C of the SEA process as defined in the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) Guidance (September 2005). The SEA process supports the aims of NIFCA to ensure sustainable exploitation of sea fisheries resources that balance the social and economic benefits with the need to protect the marine environment. The SEA has considered wider sustainability issues (not just environmental) to align the SEA objectives with the objectives of the NIFCA management regime that are underpinned by the principles of sustainable development. The SEA assessed the current NIFCA management regime which consists of byelaws and regulations. This regime constitutes the ‘plan or programme’ for the purposes of this SEA. 1.2 Application of the SEA process to Fisheries The application of the SEA process to fisheries management in the UK has been limited. The North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee (NESFC) undertook an SEA of its shellfish fisheries in 2008. This was the first time the SEA process had been applied to a fisheries management regime in the UK. The SEA process has successfully been applied to fisheries in Australia and the USA. The application of the SEA process to fisheries management has been recognised and advocated in several key UK studies2. In 2004, the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit (PMSU) recommended that “Fisheries departments should introduce Strategic Environmental Assessments of both inshore and offshore fisheries by the end of 2006 as the first stage of establishing comprehensive Environmental Management Systems” (PMSU, 2004). In response, the UK Fisheries Administrations stated their support for the SEA approach (DEFRA et al., 2005). The Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP) produced a paper on the application of SEA in the UK fisheries sector (IEEP, 2006). It recognised that SEA is a process that presents a number of 2 ‘Net Benefits, a Sustainable and Profitable Future for UK Fishing’ (Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit, 2004) and ‘Turning the Tide: Addressing the Impact of Fisheries on the Marine Environment’ (Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution 2004). 1 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation opportunities for improving fisheries management. It can contribute to improved transparency, stakeholder participation and help deliver a more ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management. 1.3 Application of the SEA process to the NIFCA Fisheries Management Regime SEA is required for plans and programmes that set the framework for future development consent of projects listed in Annex I and II of the EIA Directive. This includes intensive aquaculture and port developments, but not fishing activities. However, an SEA is required for fishing activities in those instances where plans and programmes set the framework for future development consent of fishing activities and are likely to have significant environmental effects. Other plans and programmes requiring an SEA are those subject to “appropriate assessments” under the Habitats Directive. 1.4 Purpose of the Assessment Stage and Environmental Report The purpose of the Assessment Stage and Environmental Report is to review the NIFCA management regime as well as any relevant national and international regulations and identify any potential effects (positive and negative) on shellfish and finfish fisheries within the management jurisdiction. This was achieved through undertaking the following: Review of the NIFCA scoping report; Review of the baseline information and plans and programmes review; Review the findings from the stakeholder engagement workshop; Identify and evaluate predicted effects of the NIFCA management regime on shellfish and finfish fisheries, looking at cumulative effects through appraisal using the SEA Framework; Identify mitigation measures and opportunities for maximising benefits; Develop recommendations and actions for further development of the management regime; Prepare an Environmental Report for public consultation; and Address consultation comments and finalise the Environmental Report for submission. 1.5 Compliance with SEA Directive This Environmental Report – Draft for Consultation has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the SEA Directive. Table 1.1 indicates where the specific requirements in the SEA Directive relating to the Environmental Report (SEA Directive Annex I) can be found within this report. Table 1.1: SEA Directive Requirements Signposting Table SEA Directive Report Requirements 2 Section of Report where Requirements is found a) An outline of the contents, main objectives of the plan or programme and relationship with other relevant plans and programmes Section 3 and Section 4 b) The relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and the likely evolution thereof without implementation of the plan or programme Section 4 and Appendix B c) The environmental characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected Section 3, Section 4, and Appendix B d) Any existing environmental problems which are relevant to the plan or programme including, in particular, those relating to any areas of a particular environmental importance, such as areas designated pursuant to Directives 79/409/EEC and 92/43/EEC Section 4 e) The environmental protection objectives, established at international, Community or Member State level, which are relevant to the plan or programme and the way those objectives and any environmental considerations have been taken into account during its preparation Section 4 and Appendix A 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Directive Report Requirements 1.6 Section of Report where Requirements is found f) The likely significant effects on the environment, including on issues such as biodiversity, population, human health, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the interrelationship between the above factors Section 5 and Appendix E g) The measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and as fully as possible offset any significant adverse effects on the environment of implementing the plan or programme Section 7 h) An outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with, and a description of how the assessment was undertaken including any difficulties (such as technical deficiencies or lack of know-how) encountered in compiling the required information Section 2, Section 3, and Section 5 i) A description of the measures envisaged concerning monitoring in accordance with Article 10 Section 8 j) A non-technical summary of the information provided under the above headings Non-Technical Summary Section Limitations of the SEA Mott MacDonald has relied on published data and information provided by NIFCA and from third party organisations in the production of this Environmental Report – Draft for Consultation. The baseline data used as part of this Environmental Report – Draft for Consultation was based on the best available information until June 2014. However, it is possible that conditions described in this report may change. As such the baseline data gathered has been used to provide the context of the current conditions in the NIFCA district. The consultation process has addressed and minimised any gaps in information where possible to ensure all potential environmental effects have been considered with regard to the NIFCA fisheries management regime. 3 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 2 SEA Process and Methodology 2.1 SEA Legislative Requirements and Purpose An SEA is required for the NIFCA Shellfish and Finfish Fisheries Management Regime under the European Union Directive 2001/42/EC, more commonly known as the SEA Directive. The SEA Directive was transposed into United Kingdom (UK) law via the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004, that requires an assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment. Article 3 of the SEA Directive defines the scope of when SEA is required for plans and programmes. Article 3 (2a) states that SEA is required for plans and programmes which are prepared for agriculture, forestry, fisheries, energy, industry, transport, waste management, water management, telecommunications, tourism, town and country planning or land use and which set the framework for future development consent of projects listed in Annexes I and II to Directive 85/337/EEC. Article 3 (2b) states that an SEA is required for plans and programmes which, in view of the likely effect on sites, have been determined to require an assessment pursuant to Article 6 or 7 of Directive 92/43/EEC. Some of the key objectives of the SEA process are to provide for a high level of protection of the environment and to contribute to the integration of environmental considerations into the preparation and adoption of plans with a view to promoting sustainable development. The SEA also works to inform the decision-making process through the identification and assessment of the significant and cumulative effects a plan or programme may have on the environment. This is conducted at a strategic level and enables consultation on the potential effects of a plan with a wide range of stakeholders. 2.2 SEA Process and Stages 2.2.1 SEA Process Overview The NIFCA SEA was carried out in accordance with SEA Directive and ‘The Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004’, known as the “SEA Regulations” and has taken into account the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) (now the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG)) Guidance ‘A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive’ (September 2005). Figure 2.1 shows the stages in the SEA process, and Table 2.1 breaks the stages down into the individual tasks involved. The SEA for the NIFCA fisheries management regime is currently at Stage D of the SEA process. 4 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Figure 2.1: SEA Process Stages Stage A Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline and deciding on the scope Stage B Developing and refining alternatives and assessing effects Current Status of the Project Stage C Preparing the Environmental Report Stage D Consulting on the draft plan or programme and the Environmental Report Stage E Monitoring implementation of the plan or programme Table 2.1: Description of SEA Stages and Tasks SEA Stage SEA Task Task Purpose Stage A A1: Identifying other relevant plans, programmes, and environmental protection objectives To establish how the plan or programme is affected by outside factors, to suggest ideas for how any constraints can be addressed, and to help to identify SEA objectives A2: Collecting baseline information To provide an evidence base for environmental problems, prediction of effects, and monitoring; to help in the development of SEA objectives A3: Identifying environmental problems To help focus the SEA and streamline the subsequent stages, including baseline information analysis, setting of the SEA objectives, prediction of effects and monitoring A4: Developing SEA objectives To provide a means by which the environmental performance of the plan or programme and alternatives can be assessed A5: Consulting on the scope of SEA To ensure that the SEA covers the likely significant environmental effects of the plan or programme B1: Testing the plan or programme objectives against the SEA objectives To identify potential synergies or inconsistencies between the objectives of the plan or programme and the SEA objectives and help in developing alternatives B2: Developing strategic alternatives To develop and refine strategic alternatives B3: Predicting the effects of the draft plan or programme, including alternatives To predict the significant environmental effects of the plan or programme and alternatives B4: Evaluating the effects of the draft plan or programme, including alternatives To evaluate the predicted effects of the plan or programme and its alternatives and assist in the refinement of the plan or programme Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline and deciding on the scope Stage B Developing and refining alternatives and assessing effects 5 The SEA for the NIFCA fisheries management regime is currently at Stage D of the SEA process. The Environmental Report will be issued for formal consultation in August 2014. During the consultation period stakeholders will have a chance to comment on the SEA process and recommendations. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Stage SEA Task Task Purpose B5: Considering ways of mitigating adverse effects To ensure that adverse effects are identified and potential mitigation measures are considered B6: Proposing measures to monitor the environmental effects of plan or programme implementation To detail the means by which the environmental performance for the plan or programme can be assessed Stage C Preparing the Environmental Report C1: Preparing the Environmental Report To present the predicted environmental effects of the plan or programme, including alternatives, in a form suitable for public consultation and use by decision-makers Stage D D1: Consulting on the draft plan or programme and Environmental Report To give the public and the Consultation Bodies an opportunity to express their opinions on the findings of the Environmental Report and to use it as a reference point in commenting on the plan or programme. Consulting on the draft plan or programme and the Environmental Report Stage E Monitoring implementation of the plans or programme To gather more information through the opinions and concerns of the public D2: Assessing significant changes To ensure that the environmental implications of any significant changes to the draft plan or programme at this stage are assessed and taken into account D3: Decision making and providing information To provide information on how the Environmental Report and consultees’ opinions were taken into account in deciding the final form of the plan or programme to be adopted E1: Developing aims and methods for monitoring To track the environmental effects of the plan or programme to show whether they are as predicted; to help identify adverse effects E2: Responding to adverse effects To prepare for appropriate responses where adverse effects are identified Source: Adapted from 'A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive' (ODPM, September 2005) 2.2.2 Scoping Consultation The SEA Scoping Report was subject to a five week consultation period from April 2013 to May 2013, in compliance with the SEA Regulations, during which the three statutory consultees (Environment Agency, Natural England, and English Heritage), and wider stakeholders had the opportunity to comment on the scope, content and level of detail of the Scoping Report and SEA. Feedback was received from the following organisations: Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB); Northumberland County Council; Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast European Marine Site Officer; and Marine Management Organisation. Consultation responses received are provided in Appendix C, along with how the consultation comments have been considered in the SEA process. A summary of the key changes are provided below: Updates to baseline – – Protected areas within the district updated and those outside the district relevant for birds included; – Separate section on recreation; – Details on the Pacific Oyster aquaculture; – Further details on wider species including birds, seals etc. Updates to key issues and opportunities – – Potential threats to seabirds; – Role of natural environment in tourism and local economy; – Bait digging; 6 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation – Potential impact on Grey seal; – Pacific Oyster aquaculture. Changes to SEA Framework – – Splitting the target species objective into two separate objectives, one for shellfish and one for finfish; – Non-target species objective re-worded to include disturbance; – Splitting the ecology objectives into two separate objectives, one for species and one for habitats; – Re-wording the water quality objective to give it wider water quality focus than just the Water Framework Directive. 2.2.3 Assessment Methodology The assessment under SEA Tasks B3 and B4 was undertaken at a workshop with stakeholders, held in February 2014. Workshop attendees included NIFCA officers, Environment Agency, Natural England, MMO, and Northumberland County Council. The aims of the workshop were: To appraise the current management regime for finfish and shellfish fisheries within the NIFCA district against a set of sustainability objectives and assessment criteria to determine the sustainability performance of the regime. This will allow good areas of practice to be highlighted, and identify areas where the current regime needs to be strengthened and how this can be achieved (e.g. through changes to byelaws, improved communication or links with other organisations); and To use the output from the workshop in a SEA Environmental Report that will be issued for public consultation. The methodology used in the assessment was based on the DCLG SEA guidance, and best practice identified previously for the former North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee SEA. Sustainability objectives and assessment criteria were developed during the scoping stage and updated following consultation (see Table 4.2). These sustainability objectives and assessment criteria were used to assess the current NIFCA fisheries management regime. The management regime is not a single or discrete plan or programme. It is made up of a number of byelaws, and national and European regulations which govern particular fisheries within the NIFCA district. Individual fisheries within the district and their associated byelaws and regulations were identified (see Section 3.3). For each of the fisheries, the relevant byelaws, national and European regulations were assessed using the sustainability objectives and assessment criteria to determine potential positive or negative effects. For each sustainability objective a score (where possible or appropriate) and record of decision was recorded. Where appropriate sustainability opportunities or mitigation was developed under each objective to reduce negative effects or maximise positive effects. To assess an objective a group discussion took place to gain views and opinions on effects. A consensus of opinion was reached as to the predicted effects. The following level of performance, based on the DCLG guidance, was used for the assessment: +++ Significant positive effect Duration of Effect Cumulative Effect ++ Moderate positive effect LT Long Term D Direct + Minor positive effect MT Medium term I Indirect 0 Neutral / no effect / negligible effect ST Short Term SE Secondary - SY Synergistic Minor negative effect P Permanent -- Moderate negative effect T Temporary --- Significant negative effect ? 7 Uncertainty over effect or multiple effects which are both positive and negative 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation D 2.2.4 Effect depends on implementation Assessment Assumptions The following assumptions were made as part of the appraisal: The appraisal was made on the current NIFCA management regime as of February 2014 that consists of NIFCA byelaws, and those overarching UK and European regulations that apply in the NIFCA district; The appraisal was a strategic level appraisal of potential effects based on the baseline collected and does not go into the detail of an EIA; and The appraisal is mainly qualitative and has been undertaken by environmental specialists, with input from stakeholders attending workshops arranged for the purpose, or through correspondence. 8 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 3 Description and Context of the Northumberland IFCA Fisheries 3.1 Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority 3.1.1 Background Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authorities (IFCAs) are either committees or joint committees that comprise the local authorities, Marine Management Organisation (MMO) appointees, MMO, Environment Agency, and Natural England that fall within an IFC District. They are tasked with the sustainable management of inshore sea fisheries resources in its local area. They are made up of representatives from the constituent local authorities (who provide funding for the IFCA) along with people from across the different sectors that use or are knowledgeable about the inshore marine area, such as commercial and recreational fishermen, environmental groups and marine researchers, who offer their time voluntarily. NIFCA exists to lead, champion and manage a sustainable marine environment and inshore fisheries by successfully securing the right balance between social, environmental and economic benefits to ensure healthy seas, sustainable fisheries and a viable industry in the NIFCA District. The NIFCA District is defined as the sea within the national waters of the United Kingdom adjacent to the County of Northumberland and the Metropolitan Borough of North Tyneside out to six nautical miles from the high water extent. It also covers all of the land in the County and the Metropolitan Borough and all rivers and estuaries within the District up to the tidal limits. The District runs from the English/Scottish border in the north to the border between North and South Tyneside in the River Tyne in the south (see Figure 3.1). 3.1.2 Aims and Objectives The aims and objectives of NIFCA and the current fisheries management regime are to: Ensure that the exploitation of sea fisheries resources is carried out in a sustainable way; Balance the social and economic benefits of exploiting the sea fisheries resources of the District with the need to protect the marine environment from, or promote its recovery from, the effects of such exploitation; Take any other steps which in the Authority’s opinion are necessary, or expedient for the purpose of making a contribution to the achievement of sustainable development; Balance the different needs of persons engaged in the exploitation of sea fisheries resources in the District; and Ensure all objectives of all Marine Protected Areas in the District are furthered. 9 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Figure 3.1: Source: 3.2 NIFCA Limits of the District DEFRA Overview of Fisheries In 2012 there were 112 registered potting vessels, 12 drift net licences, 27 beach net licences, and 44 trawlers (of these 44 trawlers most purely trawl but a few trawl and dredge or trawl, dredge and pot, three of these are scallops dredgers) (all figures are total figures including active and inactive licences). Moreover, there are 65 local and visiting boats with permits to trawl within the 3 mile limit. In addition, over 500 hobby fishermen are registered (active and inactive) with the authority under its pot limitation byelaw scheme. Throughout the District potting is the main fishing method by the static fleet. Potting within the district is restricted to vessels less than 12 metres. Pots, creels, traps and cages (these are fundamentally the same fishing gear type but with different styles) are used to fish for lobsters, brown crabs, velvet crabs and some for Nephrops at various times of the year. The lobster season normally starts in June and is at its peak in August and September. In the summer when the fishermen have their pots very close inshore they are also able to catch large numbers of velvet crabs. By October lobsters start to become scarce and due to the unsettled weather most fishermen start to either reduce or take all their pots out of the water. However, although lobsters become scare, prices rise towards the Christmas period and, therefore, targeting lobsters can still remain viable. The fishermen who continue to pot usually move their pots beyond 6 miles to target brown crabs throughout the winter and into spring. In the last five years there has been an increase in the 10 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation number of fishermen who have invested in prawn pots which they tend to work further offshore, just on the edge of the hard ground, where they can catch very good quality large Nephrops which are kept alive by putting them into arrays of individual tubes in trays; this is to stop them harming each other as high quality Nephrops are more profitable. Furthermore, the trawl fleet has become ever more reliant on the local prawn (Nephrops) fishery, which is now the fleet’s principal fishery. The local fishery takes place between 0-25 miles offshore with best catches being seen during the autumn and winter months. When the fishery is at its height it also attracts a large number of visiting trawlers from Scotland, Northern Ireland and other English ports. The majority of the visiting trawlers are larger and more powerful than the local boats and most also use more than one net (multi rigged), and these combined factors enable them to work further offshore in most weather conditions and, because they are towing two or three nets, they can potentially catch more prawns, which can be an issue between the locals and visitors. Byelaw 14 was introduced by Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee (NSFC) to restrict any fishing boat from “multi rigging, pair trawling and pair seining” inside the NIFCA District (six mile limit). In the summer months a number of smaller under 10 metre boats from North Shields, Blyth and Amble move up to the Firth of Forth to target the summer prawns, normally working daylight and darkness throughout the week and coming home at weekends. The remaining under 10 metre boats and the larger local trawlers tend to work further offshore in the summer when the weather is usually finer, targeting both white fish and prawns. Mesh sizes for Nephrops are approximately 80-100mm, and for whitefish over 100mm. The Authority also restricts the size of trawlers which can fish within its District, e.g. between 0-3 miles vessels allowed to trawl must be below 11.59 metres and have a trawling permit. No vessels over 24 metres are allowed to trawl within any part of the District, and at the present time there are approximately 115 local and visiting boats with permits to trawl within the three mile limit. No vessel can Purse Seine Net or Ring Net within the Committee’s District and any vessels dredging within the Authority’s District are restricted to no more than 10 dredges in total. 3.3 Shellfish and Finfish Fisheries Management Regime – the “Plan” An important part of the SEA process is to accurately define the plan or programme to be assessed. In the context of this SEA the “plan” is the current NIFCA fisheries management regime which consists of byelaws and regulations. The current NIFCA byelaws are shown in Table 3.1 below. Table 3.1: NIFCA Byelaws Byelaw Ref Byelaw Title 1 Revocation of Existing Byelaws 2 Application and Saving for Scientific Purposes 3 Trawling and Size of Vessels 4 Fixed Engines 5 Purse Seine Net 6 Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7 Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus) 8 Parts of Shellfish 9 Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait 10 Re-depositing of Shellfish 11 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Byelaw Ref Byelaw Title 11 Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 12 Dredges 13 Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 14 Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 15 Pot Limitations 16 Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation 17 Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation For the purposes of the SEA process, the management regime was categorised into methods undertaken to harvest the shellfish and finfish species in the NIFCA district, and the species taken across like methods of harvesting. Table 3.2 and Table 3.3 outline the results of this approach. Table 3.2: Categorisation of NIFCA Shellfish Fisheries by Fishing Method Employed and Species Method Employed Species Pot Fishery Brown Crab Lobster Dredge Fishery Trawl Fishery Gillnet Scallops Mussels Velvet crabs Nephrops Table 3.3: Hand Gathering Categorisation of NIFCA Finfish Fisheries by Fishing Method Employed and Species Method Employed Species Gillnet Drift net Hand line Cod Trawl Beach & T- net Sole Turbot Other flatfish Mackerel Haddock Salmon Sea trout Whiting Monkfish Catfish From the results of Tables 3.2 and 3.3 it was agreed with NIFCA (and stakeholders through the scoping process) that the SEA would be undertaken for the management regime for the following shellfish and finfish fisheries: Shellfish Pot fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops; Dredge fishery for Scallops (King Scallop Pectin maximus); 12 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Trawl fishery for Nephrops; Hand gathering fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, and Velvet Crabs; Hand gathering for Mussels; Hand Gathering for Winkles; Gillnet fishery for Lobster; and Pacific Oyster Farm. Finfish Gillnet fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel; Drift net fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout; Hand line fishery for Mackerel; Trawl fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish, and Catfish; and Beach and T net fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout. The current state of these fisheries and the nature of the management regime in place are further described in Table 3.4 to Table 3.13. Table 3.4: Characteristics of the Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops Species Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops Method of Capture Pot Fishery Geographical Area Whole district Stock Status NIFCA believe that lobsters and crab within the NIFCA district are being fished sustainably and are currently undertaking surveys to confirm or otherwise assess the true nature of the stock Catch History Records by permit return and national landing statistics held by MMO Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus) 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait 10.Redepositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot Limitation, EU SI Minimum Landing Size and SI V Notched Lobster 13 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Table 3.5: Characteristics of the Dredge Fishery for Scallops Species Scallops (King Scallop Pectin maximus); Method of Capture Dredge fishery Geographical Area North of the district, Amble to border Stock Status Unknown Catch History National landing statistics held by MMO Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) 12. Dredges 16. Prohibition of the use of mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation Table 3.6: Characteristics of the Trawl Fishery for Nephrops Species Nephrops Method of Capture Trawl fishery Geographical Area Predominantly Amble south and outside of district Stock Status Unknown, further research required for Nephrops stock within NIFCA district. The ICES assessment for the Farne Deeps is that harvest rate, though low is above Fmsy, and the biomass (from burrow counts) has fallen below Bmsy. But it is not clear how these findings relate to that portion of the Nephrops stocks that are found within the 6 mile limit. Catch History National landing statistics by MMO Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) 3. Trawling and Size of Vessels Table 3.7: 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation Characteristics of the Hand Gathering Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster and Velvet Crabs Species Brown Crab, Lobster and Velvet Crabs Method of Capture Hand gathering Geographical Area Intertidal – whole district Stock Status NIFCA believe that lobsters and crab within the NIFCA district are being fished sustainably and are currently undertaking surveys to confirm or otherwise assess the true nature of the stock (this fishery is trivial compared to the pot fishery for these species, so although the actual take from the hand gathering is not assessed separately, the overall stock status of the three principal species will be similar to that described for the pot fishery). Catch History Unknown Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus) 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns EU SI Minimum Landing Size and SI V Notched Lobster Table 3.8: Characteristics for Hand Gathering for Mussels Species Mussels Method of Capture Hand gathering Geographical Area Shoreline, Mussel bed on Fenham Flats (approx. 41.30 hectares with 66.5% coverage) Stock Status 2013 Mussel Bed Survey – mean biomass per square metres 8.48kg/m2, mean density per square metres 469 mussels/m2, total tonnage of mussel biomass 3503 tonnes. Total population estimate at 193 million. Overall numbers of mussels are decreasing. 14 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Species Mussels Catch History Unknown Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) Natural England restrictions within Lindisfarne Nature Reserve Table 3.9: 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation Characteristics for Hand Gathering for Winkles Species Winkles Method of Capture Hand gathering Geographical Area Shoreline Stock Status Unknown Catch History Unknown Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation Table 3.10: Characteristics of the Gillnet Fishery for Lobster Species Lobster Method of Capture Gillnet Geographical Area Whole district Stock Status NIFCA believe that lobsters and crab within the NIFCA district are being fished sustainably and are currently undertaking surveys to confirm or otherwise assess the true nature of the stock Catch History Permit return and national landing statistics held by MMO Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus) 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot Limitations EU SI Minimum Landing Size and SI V Notched Lobster Table 3.11: Characteristics of the Pacific Oyster Farm Species Pacific Oyster Method of Capture The site is accessed by tractor or boat. Oysters are gathered by hand. Juvenile oysters are brought in from outside the district and put into wire bags and placed on trestles for ongrowing. Geographical Area Lindisfarne NNR Stock Status Unknown – private owner Catch History Unknown – private owner Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) Regulated by Natural England (Marine and Coastal Access Act) Table 3.12: Characteristics of the Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel Species Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel Method of Capture Gillnet Geographical Area Whole district Stock Status ICES assessment results for the main stocks (outside the District) are held by CEFAS. 15 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Species Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel Fisheries within the district are very unlikely to detract from the overall status of the stocks. The cod stocks are not giving maximum sustainable yield but are subject to strict recovery programmes. The haddock, sole and plaice fisheries are sustainable. The status of whiting, turbot and catfish is undefined Catch History National statistics held by MMO Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) 4. Fixed Engines Minimum Landing Sizes set by MMO (not Turbot) Table 3.13: Characteristics of the Drift Net Fishery for Salmon, and Sea Trout Species Salmon and Sea Trout Method of Capture Drift net Geographical Area Whole district Stock Status Held by Environment Agency Catch History Held by Environment Agency Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) 4. Fixed Engines EA restrictions for anglers Table 3.14: Characteristics of the Hand Line Fishery for Mackerel Species Mackerel Method of Capture Hand line Geographical Area Whole district Stock Status Held by Cefas Catch History Held by MMO Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) MMO Licence and Minimum Landing Size Table 3.15: Characteristics of the Trawl Fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish, and Catfish Species Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish, and Catfish Method of Capture Trawl fishery Geographical Area Potentially whole district, generally Amble south and outside of district Stock Status ICES assessment results for the main stocks (outside the District) are held by CEFAS. Fisheries within the district are very unlikely to detract from the overall status of the stocks. The cod stocks are not giving maximum sustainable yield but are subject to strict recovery programmes. The haddock, sole and plaice fisheries are sustainable. The status of whiting, turbot and catfish is undefined Catch History MMO Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) 3. Trawling and Size of Vessel 5. Purse Seine Net 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Protection Area MMO Licence and Minimum Landing Sizes (not Turbot) Table 3.16: Characteristics of the Beach and T-net Fishery for Salmon, and Sea Trout Species Salmon and Sea Trout Method of Capture Beach and T Net Geographical Area Whole district Stock Status Held by EA 16 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Species Salmon and Sea Trout Catch History Held by EA Management Measures (byelaws/regulations) 4. Fixed Engines 3.4 Minimum Landing Sizes enforced by EA NIFCA Legacy Byelaw Review In 2011 the Sea Fisheries Committees (SFC) were replaced by the Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authorities (IFCA) which undertake new duties under the Marine and Coastal Access Act (MaCAA). As a part of their High Level Objectives, IFCAs are required to review their legacy byelaws (current management regime) by April 2015. The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) would also wish IFCAs to review their legacy byelaws and consolidate them in addition IFCAs should correlate byelaws as much as possible with adjoining IFCAs to give a level of consistency across the country. The legacy byelaws are also being reviewed due to the fact that the byelaws refer to the SFC which no longer exists as well the limits of the district having changed. Therefore it is imperative for the IFCAs to undergo this process in order to bring everything up to date and to review byelaws to ensure operation of the IFCAs is occurring in the most up to date manner. NIFCA currently operate with 15 legacy byelaws and two new byelaws (Byelaws 16 and 17) as set out in Table 3.1. The legacy byelaws will be amended and consolidated as part of the review of the byelaws in order to meet the 2015 deadline. Draft byelaws have been developed and are undergoing consultation. The draft byelaws are subject to change following consultation outcomes. 17 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 4 Stage A Scoping Summary 4.1 Relationship with other policies, plans and programmes As outlined in Table 1.1, Annex 1 of the SEA Directive requires: An outline of the contents, main objectives of the plan or programme and relationship with other relevant plans and programmes (Section a); and The environmental protection objectives, established at international, Community or Member State level, which are relevant to the plan or programme and the way those objectives and any environmental considerations have been taken into account during its preparation (Section e). A review of the range of plans and programmes relevant to the NIFCA shellfish and finfish fisheries management regime SEA was undertaken as part of the scoping process. The aim was to determine how the current management regime and future management options may be affected by these outside factors. This step ensures compliance with Annex 1(a) of the SEA Directive. Furthermore, the fisheries regime must comply with all current relevant policies, plans, programmes (PPPs) and environmental protection legislation at international, national and local levels. The regime must support and where possible strengthen the objectives of other local plans and strategies within the NIFCA region. A review of these documents is required in order to identify any potential inconsistencies or constraints between these documents and the regime. Any inconsistencies and constraints identified can then be addressed. Figure 4.1 lists current relevant PPPs, which were considered during the scoping stage, and updated following consultation. Appendix A presents the PPP review and a description on how these objectives or requirements were considered in the development of the regime and SEA process. 18 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Figure 4.1: Relevant Policies, Plans, Programmes and Environmental Protection Legislation NATIONAL REGIONAL (NORTH EAST ENGLAND) INTERNATIONAL North East Declaration on Climate Change DEFRA, Fisheries 2027 Sea Fisheries Act 1967 (as amended in 1997) Sea Fisheries Regulation Act (1966) Sea Fish Conservation Act (1992) The Environment Act (1995) The Sea Fisheries (Wildlife Conservation) Act (1992) The Shrimp Fishing Nets Order (2002) Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006) The Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) Regulations (2012) The Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) (Amendment) Regulations (2012) The Countryside and Rights of Way Act (2000) The Registration of Fish Buyers and Sellers and Designation of Fish Auction Sites Regulations (2005) Marine and Coastal Access Act (2009) UK Marine Policy Statement (2011) National Planning Policy Framework (2012) Securing the future – Delivering UK Sustainable Development Strategy (2005) Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) Climate Change Act (2008) The Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Regulations (2003) Water for People and the Environment – Water Resources Strategy for England and Wales (2009) Sea Trout and Salmon Fisheries Strategy (2008 – 2012) National Trout and Grayling Fisheries Strategy (2003) Merchant Shipping Act (1995) Environmental Protection Act (1990) Climate Change – UK Programme (2006) Future Water: The Government’s Water Strategy for England (2008) UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework (2012) Water White Paper (2011) Natural Environment White Paper (2012) Biodiversity 2020: A Strategy for England’s Wildlife and Ecosystems (2011) Scallop Fishing Order 2012 UK Marine Strategy Regulations 2010 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 Protection of Wrecks Act 1973 19 Northumberland IFCA Fisheries Regime Strategic Environmental Assessment Ramsar Convention on wetlands of International Importance (1971) Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change (1997) UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992) Berne Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (1979) Bonn Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (1979) UNESCO Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and National Heritage (1972) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement (UNFSA) (1995) Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries MARPOL 73/78 OSPAR Convention (1992) EUROPEAN LOCAL NIFCA Byelaws Strategic Environmental Northumberland IFCA Annual Plan Assessment Northumberland and North Tyneside Shoreline Management Plan 2 River Basin Management Plan Northumbria River Basin District (2009) Solway Tweed River Basin Management Plan (2009-2015) Northumberland Coast AONB and Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast EMS Management Plan (2009-14) Northumberland County Council Core Strategy Preferred Options (February 2013) Northumberland Consolidated Planning Policy Framework Northumberland Area Tourism Management Plan (ATMaP) (2010 – 2015) Northumberland Economic Strategy (2010 – 2012) Northumberland: Resilient for the Future: Sustainable Community Strategy for Northumberland (2011) Catchment Flood Management Plans (2009) Northumberland Local Biodiversity Action Plans Northumberland Rights of Way Improvement Plan (2007) Northumberland Joint Municipal Waste Strategy (2003) Northumberland Coastal and River Oil Pollution Contingency Plan Lindisfarne NNR Byelaws Common Fisheries Policy (2014) Electronic Recording and Reporting System (ERS) EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020: Our Life Insurance, Our Natural Capital (2011) EC Directive on the Conservation of Natural Habitats of Wild Fauna and Flora (92/43/EEC) EC Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds (2009/147/EC) EC Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EEC) EC Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EEC) EC Directive on Bathing Water (76/160/EEC) The European Community Shellfish Waters Directive 2006/113/EC (the Directive) Shellfish Hygiene Directive EU Strategy on Climate Change EU Air Quality Directive (2008/50/EC) The European Landscape Convention (2004) Charter for the Protection and Management of Archaeological Heritage (1990) Convention for the Protection of Architectural Heritage of Europe (2009) Mainstreaming Sustainable Development into EU Policies (2009) including Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development (2002) and EU Sustainable Development Strategy (2006) Regulation (EU) No 579/2011of 8 June 2011 Commission Regulation (EC) No 517/2008 of 10 June 2008 Commission Regulation (EC) No 146/2007 of 15 February 2007 Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 4.2 Baseline Information High level environmental and socio-economic baseline information for the fisheries management regime was collected and examined for NIFCA District as part of the scoping process. This information provides the basis for predicting and monitoring the effects of both current and possible future fisheries management options. It also helps to identify potential sustainability issues, and alternative management options in the context of national, regional and local targets and trends. The baseline information is presented in Appendix B, and was updated following the scoping consultation process. The baseline topics outlined include, but are not limited to, those identified in Annex 1(f) of the ‘SEA Directive’. The topics have been separated into environmental considerations and socio-economic considerations: Environment Air Quality – emissions to air, particulate matter and odour; Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna – target species, non-target species, habitats and issues concerning biosecurity; Climate Change - the effects of climate change on the North Sea; Energy – fuel consumption by fishing fleet; Historic Environment – inland historical assets and wreck sites; Landscape/Seascape – natural environment features and characteristics; Soils – interaction with the sea; Waste – liquid and solid waste from fish processing; and Water Quality – chemical and ecological status and bathing water quality. Socio-Economic Human Health – region’s health, the benefits of consuming seafood, the health and safety of the District’s fishermen, the indirect benefits from recreational fishing and impacts of discarded fishing gear; Material Assets – fleet size, ports and processing facilities; Socio-Economics – population, the fishing community and the fishing industry; Tourism – tourism destinations and angling; and Transport – distribution network. 20 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 4.3 Future Baseline The SEA Directive requires that ‘the relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and the likely evolution thereof without implementation of the Plan or Programme’ is identified. Prediction of future trends is difficult because they depend on a wide range of global, national and regional factors and decisionmaking. A ‘Do Nothing’ scenario was assessed and the results are presented in Section 5.2. From an initial review of baseline data it is likely that the following trends will continue: Air Quality – a decline in number of vessels could have a positive impact on the industry’s contribution to greenhouse gas emissions; Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna - habitats and species are likely to continue to be protected through European and UK legislation. However, continued overfishing and unsustainable fishing practices may put pressure on these ecological areas. Whilst existing protection is likely to continue, there are a number of sites which may be designated in the future such as Coquet to St Mary’s recommended Marine Conservation Zone (rMCZ), Special Protection Area (SPA) marine extensions to the Farne Islands SPA and Coquet Island SPA, and the potential future designation of the Aln Estuary as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC). Although outside the NIFCA limits the Farne East rMCZ and Fulmar rMCZ may also be relevant in terms of birds. Therefore, NIFCA should be mindful of fishing activity that could cause damage to sites yet to be designated. Future climate change effects and a rise in sea temperature may also affect ecosystems, habitats and species; Climate – future climate change effects are likely to include sea level rise, higher temperatures and more severe weather conditions; Energy – there is predicted to be a continued reliance on energy from fossil fuels; Historic Environment – historic assets are likely to continue to be protected through European and UK legislation. The regime is not likely to have any impact on the historic environment inland; however, it could have a positive impact on wreck sites; Landscape/Seascape – the UK’s coastlines will continue to be protected under either conservation objectives or specific landscape designations; Soils – the fisheries sector is not likely to have any impact on soils; Waste – reduced numbers of fish landed will likely see a proportional decrease in solid and liquid wastes from processing; Water Quality – it is desirable that water quality is maintained and improved through legislation such as the Water Framework Directive; Human Health – the overall health of the region is expected to increase; Material Assets – the fishing industry is in steady decline and this is expected to continue in the future; Socio-Economics – the population of the County is predicted to increase. This may put pressure on food security (leading to overfishing) and access to jobs; Tourism – tourism is important for the area and it is expected that the number of people visiting the District is likely to increase; and Transport – a declining industry could see a reduction in fishing related transportation. 4.4 Key Issues and Opportunities A key stage in the scoping process was to decide what topics were relevant for the NIFCA SEA and what topics (if any) should be scoped out. Table 4.1 presents the topics that were scoped in and out. It also presents the key issues and opportunities relevant to each topic (these were updated following the scoping consultation process). Topics were scoped in based on the baseline situation and the potential impact of 21 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation the fisheries management regime on them. This was assessed using professional judgement to review baseline conditions and current environmental issues for the NIFCA district and to determine the likelihood of this potential impact. 22 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Table 4.1: Key Issues and Opportunities SEA Topic Scoped In Scoped Out Air Quality Evidence Key Issues and Opportunities The environmental effects of fishing activities on air quality are intrinsically linked. A reduction in fuel usage will reduce the amount of emissions into the atmosphere. There are several ways the industry could reduce fuel consumption resulting in a cut in emissions and operating costs including reducing towing speed, changing fishing method and modifying gear. With the rapid rise in oil prices, fuel consumption has become a significant component of operating costs as well as an environmental concern. However, NIFCA does not have any control over vessel types except its own vessel. Carbon emission and other greenhouse gas emissions are dealt with under the climate change mitigation topic; and In addition, odour plays a significant part in air pollution in fish processing industry. The regime will not, in all likelihood have any influence in reducing the impact of odour at processing facilities. Biodiversity, flora and fauna The District supports important fisheries for a variety of shellfish and finfish species. There has been a notable decline in traditional finfish fisheries in the North Sea (in particular Cod). Fishing activity in the NIFCA District is now focused mainly on crabs, lobsters and prawns and limited processing of local salmon and other fish. Environmental effects of capture fisheries on target fish stocks Capture fisheries are widely acknowledged to result in often significant impacts on marine ecosystems. Ecosystem effects of fishing include: – biomass removal and demographic modification of the target species; – bycatch of marine mammals, seabirds, and fish; – discarding of bycatch; and – mechanical disturbance and damage of benthic communities by bottom trawling. Tendency towards increased fishing pressure (fleet capacity / effort / catch) on target fisheries; Uncertainty over the status of the target fisheries resulting from a lack of specific stock assessments/research; Concerns that certain white fish and shellfish species are being illegally fished in neighbouring districts and landed/transported in the NIFCA Area; The regime should encourage an ecosystem services approach to biodiversity, i.e. a holistic approach, encompassing the whole ecosystem, rather than focusing on one species or habitat; The regime could have a positive impact on finfish and shellfish fish stocks, through careful management (e.g. pot limitations) and by issuing of permits to fish; Getting hold of good quality bait is an on-going issue for fishermen; and Seals can cause problems particularly in the salmon fishery. Salmon and Sea Trout caught in the district. Species known to be caught in the NIFCA District fisheries bycatch include brown crab and velvet crab, caught as bycatch in the lobster fishery; however, no systematic data gathering, no quantifiable or verifiable information on the species 23 Environmental effects of capture fisheries on non-target species A particular fishery will commonly take a bycatch of non-target species, even though the focus is usually on a single species. This bycatch may be landed or, more usually, is discarded at sea. Part of the catch of exploited species may also be discarded to comply with fisheries regulations, for example if individual fish are undersized and cannot be legally landed, or if total catches exceed the species quota 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Topic Scoped In Scoped Out Evidence discarded from the shellfish or finfish fisheries in the NIFCA District. Key Issues and Opportunities (or total allowable catch, TAC); and Numerous species of seabirds and migrant and wintering waterfowl have been recorded in the district. In particular Lindisfarne SPA, Farne Islands SPA, Northumbria Coast SPA, and Coquet Island SPA support a variety of bird species. Species include (not exhaustive list): Golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria), Whooper swan (Cygnus cygnus), Little tern (Sterna albifrons), Roseate tern (Sterna dougallii), Greylag goose (Anser anser), Light-bellied brent goose (Branta bernicla hrota), wigeon (Anas penelope), bar-tailed godwit (Limosa lapponica), redshank (Tringa totanus), ringed plover (Charadrius hiaticula) and grey plover (Pluvialis squatarola). Environmental effects of capture fisheries on other species The regime could have a positive impact on non-target species fish stocks, through careful management (e.g. restrictions on seine nets) and by issuing of permits to fish. Threats to seabirds from fishing activities include indirect effects through the extraction of fish (e.g. competition for prey, effect on the food chain and the risk of exacerbating the effects of climate change on fish stocks) and direct mortality from seabird bycatch in fishing nets. During the breeding season, the loss of bycatch is likely to also result in the death of chicks at the nest; The Grey seal is a qualifying feature of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC and EMS and the Farne Islands support an internationally important breeding colony. Fishing activities have the potential to cause both harm and disturbance to grey seals and other marine mammals including porpoise, dolphins and whales; and Bait digging occurs along the coast and can cause disturbance for wading birds foraging in these areas. Potential issues in SPA’s, SAC’s, SSSI’s and Ramsar sites. A number of mammals are found along the coast within the district including: the otter, red squirrel, and five species of bats – Brandt’s bat, Natterer’s bat, Noctule, Pipistrelle, Brown long-eared bat. Grey seals can be seen regularly throughout the region, and there is a major breeding colony on the Farne Islands. Twelve species of cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) have been recorded since 1980 along the coast or in waters within 60km of the coast. Of these, five species are either present throughout the year or are recorded annually as seasonal visitors to the region. These include: Minke whale, Harbour porpoise, White-sided dolphin, Whitebeaked dolphin, Bottlenose dolphin, and Killer whale. The District is rich in flora and fauna. It contains several MPA, MCZ, SSSI, EMS (SPA & SAC) and Ramsar Sites. These are also important for tourism. Environmental effects of capture fisheries on marine habitats Continuing problem caused by damaging and potentially damaging fishing activities in European Marine Sites and other marine habitats. Those activities include all bottom-towed fishing gear, including scallop dredging, beam trawls, and otter trawls, and unregulated static fishing gear; Whilst existing protection is likely to continue for existing designated sites within the district, there are a number of sites which may be designated in the future such as Coquet to St Mary’s rMCZ, SPA marine extensions to the Farne Islands SPA and 24 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Topic Scoped In Scoped Out Evidence Key Issues and Opportunities Coquet Island SPA, and the potential future designation of the Aln Estuary (already designated MCZ) as a SAC. Although outside the NIFCA limits the Farne East rMCZ and Fulmar rMCZ may also be relevant for birds. Therefore, NIFCA should be mindful of fishing activity that could cause damage to sites yet to be designated; and Terrestrial sites designated for marine species, such as seabirds, are functionally linked to the areas of sea that those species rely on and this should be considered. Species of concern in the NIFCA District are cord grass (Spartina spp.), that has colonised mudflats particularly at Lindisfarne, and the Chinese mitten crab (Eriocheir sinensis) currently present in the River Tyne. Pacific oysters (Crassostrea gigas) are currently farmed at Fenham Flats. Bio-security Introduced species may compete with their native counterparts for food, vital space, and in some instances interbreed with the local species altering their genetic makeup. Introduced species may also potentially alter habitats and the balance of existing communities, resulting in changes to the structure and function of entire marine ecosystems; Invasive species of concern in the NIFCA district includes: cord grass, Chinese mitten crab, and Pacific oysters. The regime could contribute to the management of these invasive species; Given the potential for invasive effects to arise in the future from the cultivation of Pacific oysters, especially if seawater temperature continues to rise, their location within a sensitive European protected area is seen as a threat to qualifying features, sub-features and attributes of the designation (while locally there is no indication that p gigas are breeding anecdotal evidence suggest that spat have been observed in the Firth of Forth to the north); and There are a number of species that have recently been found, and new species ranges are being discovered as on-going data are gathered. Although NIFCA may not have the tools to manage these (as the vector for introduction may not be associated with fishing activities), they may have a role to play as NIFCA’s boats and equipment could be regarded as potential vectors for spread and introduction. Species include Caprella mutica (Japanese skeleton shrimp), Botrylloides violaceus, and Codium fragile. Other non-native species are also being discovered on an ongoing basis but their invasive impact is unknown, such as Tectura testudinalis (Tortoise shell limpet) and Calliostoma zizyphinum (Painted topshell). It should be noted that this is not an exhaustive list of marine non-native species in the NIFCA district. Climate Change Mitigation/Energy 25 Use of fuel by marine vessels leads to combustion related GHG emissions. A reduction in fuel usage or adoption of new technologies could reduce the amount of GHG emissions released into the atmosphere. There are a significant number of vessels working in the District, which contribute to GHG emissions which arise from diesel engine vessels. There are several ways the industry could reduce fuel consumption resulting in a cut in emissions and operating costs including reducing towing speed, changing fishing method and modifying equipment. With the rapid rise in oil prices, fuel consumption has become a significant component of operating costs as well as an environmental concern. Is the uptake of sail power to augment diesel a viable option? Increased global atmospheric CO2 causes a decrease in the pH of seawater (increase in acidity) which may have negative consequences for species and ecosystems particularly calcifying organisms such as shellfish. This will have 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Topic Scoped In Scoped Out Evidence Key Issues and Opportunities associated socio-economic impacts. Reduction in ocean pH also reduces oceans ability to further absorb CO2 and therefore buffer the effect on climate change; and In addition to responding to climate change risks and opportunities, climate change management is also important to demonstrate leadership in the sector. Climate Change Adaptation Climate variability and longer-term change have led to marked changes in North East Atlantic conditions over the last century. Sea surface temperatures of North Atlantic and UK coastal waters have warmed by 0·2–0·6°C a decade over the past 30 years. These seas are warming faster than the adjacent land and faster than the global average. The environmental effects of climate change on the marine environment can be far reaching. There are likely to be some positives (e.g. tourism) and negatives (e.g. native plant and animal species). Climatic processes directly impact shellfish and finfish populations and potentially alter patterns of biodiversity and ecological functioning; Changes to sea level, storms and wave climate - Increase in sea level causes flooding in coastal areas that are undefended, causing loss or damage to property, agriculture and habitats. A potentially changed wave climate and storminess may cause damage to coastal and marine infrastructure as well as disruption to shipping and ferry services; Changes to temperature, salinity and water circulation - Increased temperature may causes shifts in the type of species and numbers, affecting ecosystem structure as well as fish and shellfish catches. Warmer temperatures may provide new habitats for invasive non-native species, diseases and pathogens. Changes to salinity may disrupt ocean currents which can have devastating consequences for climate as a whole. Increased temperatures may also present some opportunities as arctic shipping lanes open for transport and UK tourism may be enhanced; Fisheries and Aquaculture - Shifts in species distribution would have economic consequences for UK fisheries if traditional target species become less abundant or move out of fishing areas, but new species may move in and present new opportunities. Increased seawater temperatures could allow the culturing of new species but may encourage diseases and invasive non-native species which could displace native species or cause unsuitability for human consumption. Cod stocks and other cold water fish are likely to move northwards replaced by warmer water species. Potential issues may be caused by the Pacific Oyster farm from warming sea temperatures; The shellfish industry may be able to adapt, by realising opportunities for developing specialist fisheries for those species dependent on higher temperatures. Additionally, harvestable areas may be extended and growing seasons may lengthen or shorten. The impacts on traditionally fished species are likely to be less favourable; Human health - Increased temperatures may increase incidence of certain diseases and pathogens (including Vibrios and certain toxic algae). Increased precipitation and flash-flooding may increase incidence of sewer flooding and release of sewage-borne pathogens; Animal health - Fish immune systems are very sensitive to temperature change. Increased temperatures may shift the balance between hosts and pathogens causing 26 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Topic Scoped In Scoped Out Evidence Key Issues and Opportunities irreparable damage to fish and shellfish stocks; Invasive non-native species - Increased temperatures may accelerate the spread of dangerous or harmful invasive non-native species, causing displacement and/or destruction of native species, shellfish stocks and damage to coastal sea defences (mitten crab). Of particular concern in the NIFCA district is the Pacific Oyster; Eutrophication - Intense precipitation and associated flash flooding may suddenly increase the nutrient composition of coastal waters causing decline in water quality, eutrophication and harmful algal bloom events; Distribution of marine species - Temperature change may result in the northward and southward shift of marine animal populations (fish, marine mammals, seabirds, zooplankton, inter-tidal invertebrates etc.) and may also result in a shift towards deeper waters. A southward shift is caused by warmer waters coming over the top of Scotland as a result of the Gulf Stream. The situation on the North East Coast is interesting with regards to species movement related to climate change, as native species may get squeezed between a northern and southern migration of cold water species; Changes in the timing of biological events (phenology) - Changes in the timing of spawning, larval life cycles, zooplankton availability etc. as a consequence of changes in weather, temperature, ocean currents or stratification, could impact on successful recruitment of commercial fish or benthic invertebrates – i.e. ‘matchmismatch’ of key prey resources; Nutrient cycles and ecosystem function - Changes in temperature, salinity and pH may impact nitrogen and carbon cycles as well as oxygen content of coastal waters. This could have consequences for pelagic and benthic production – with wider consequences for ecosystem functioning and commercial fisheries; and In addition to responding to climate change risks and opportunities, climate change management is also important to demonstrate leadership in the sector. Historic Environment Landscape / Seascape 27 It is felt that fishing activities will not impinge on the architectural heritage of the NIFCA District; however, there are a number of wreck sites in the NIFCA district, which have the potential to be affected by the Districts fishing practice. There are also a number of onshore and offshore archaeological sites within the district which should be taken into consideration. Fishing activities can directly impact on the seabed, or features on the seabed, where there may be shipwrecks or other valuable historical or cultural artefacts. Damage to the historic environment is acknowledged to occur as a result of trawling and dredging, as well as through other fishing methods such as angling, potting, and netting, and through sonic effects; and The Northumberland Coast AONB and Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast EMS are two facets of the NIFCA District coastline, characterised by long sand beaches, high rock cliffs, abundant wild bird populations, grasslands Fishing activities can directly impact on the seabed, or features on the seabed, as a result of trawling and dredging, as well as through other fishing methods such as angling, potting, and netting, and through sonic effects; and The regime seeks to protect the historic environment, through ensuring fishing activities do not damage historic features on the seabed. The regime seeks to protect the landscape/seascape, through ensuring fishing activities do not damage sensitive seascape features such as reefs. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Topic Scoped In Scoped Out Soils Waste Evidence and so on. Key Issues and Opportunities The fisheries sector has the potential to affect soils, mainly through the development of terrestrial sites for land-side facilities in port areas as well as the construction of buildings, such as fish processing facilities, on green field sites. It is not predicted that the regime will have any impact on soils and soil quality and therefore was scoped out of the SEA. The catching and processing of fish generates a significant amount of waste. In particular, large volumes of waste are generated at fish processing facilities; however, waste is also dumped at sea (discards and off-shore processing). Discards are a type of unwanted fish waste. Discarding is not good for the environment and is costly for fishermen. It is also seen as a destructive and wasteful practice. There is an opportunity to improve the selectivity of fishing gears, which should help to target catches and reduce the levels of unwanted fish and other species (discards) that can be wasted by being thrown back into the sea (often dead); The key environmental issues associated with fish processing are the high consumption of water, the generation of effluent streams, the consumption of energy and the generation of by-products. Although NIFCA is not directly responsible for fish processing facilities and waste management standards associated with these facilities, they are part of the supply chain. Often processing plant operators approach NIFCA and seek advice on disposal etc.; NIFCA should aim to promote sustainable waste management through its supply chain; and There could be an opportunity to promote reuse and recycling of fish waste, through: composting, rendering for fishmeal, creating energy from waste etc. Water Quality Eight out of nine bathing beaches in Northumberland and Berwickshire consistently achieve ‘guideline’ water quality. Fuel spills in the District are currently unknown. It is not known whether bycatch has any impact on water quality. The water quality in the District is, on the whole, very good. However water quality issues are a concern for Northumberland at Lindisfarne (Fenham Flats) the location of the Mussel beds/Pacific oyster farm. Water quality is rated as “B” which requires the shellfish to be put through a purification process before they can be utilised for human consumption. The site is regularly monitored and is acknowledged as having some water quality issues, at present the source of the pollution/water quality issues are not known but are suspected as being related to agricultural runoff and may originate from the Tweed or further afield. Recent tests on the Coquet where a proposed site to farm mussels had been proposed failed to meet the “B” standard further tests may occur to identify the reason for the failure; and There is currently no information available on fuel spills or pollution incidents in the district. However, monitoring of such incidents is an opportunity for NIFCA to control and help reduce water pollution. Human Health The general health of the region is low. Deprivation is high and life expectancy is lower than the UK average. Health and Safety of Fishermen is currently unknown. Recreational fishing occurs on various levels throughout the NIFCA area including potting, 28 The poor health of the region represents a huge burden in human and economic costs, holding the region back from achieving its potential; There is an opportunity for NIFCA to further protect the fishermen in the District through vessel checks, training etc.; Recreational fishing plays an important role in the District. It should continue to be encouraged because it is believed to have a positive impact on human health (i.e. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Topic Scoped In Scoped Out Evidence netting and hand gathering for a wide range of shellfish species. Key Issues and Opportunities regular exercise); and Potential tie in with Health and Well Being Boards and Natural England. Other examples include water sports and nature activities. Material Assets Commercial fishing in the NIFCA district has seen a decline in recent years, including a decrease in the number of fishing vessels and processing facilities. Fishermen argue they are struggling to survive in an industry hit hard by quotas, restrictions and declining fish stocks. Material assets continue to decline in the District. The regime will help to keep the industry sustainable and viable for the future. It should also help to maintain and increase vessel numbers and associated industries. However, an increase is only acceptable if there are no stock status implications. Socio-Economics The fishing industry in Northumberland is of crucial importance to local communities and the economy throughout the District, despite a dramatic decline in size and value over the past few decades. The maintenance and promotion of jobs and livelihoods in these communities is an important issue and substantial social and economic value is attached to the fisheries within the District. There are long established links between fisheries and the coastal community in the NIFCA district; In 2006, 508 fishermen were employed in the North-East commercial fishing fleet. In addition to the economic value and direct income from landings, it has been suggested that a single commercial fisherman might provide direct employment for up to four individuals in associated industries3. Fisheries have been an important source of food security and income for substantial sections of the coastal populations. However, there is growing concern to ensure that harvesting of the resources is conducted in a sustainable manner to allow for the long-term use of the fishery resources; (Population and Economy) A decline of fish stocks has seen a reduction in the number of fishermen working in the NIFCA district. Jobs lost on the boats has a knock on effect further down the supply chain, affecting the fish processors, the net makers, the equipment suppliers, the market sellers and the transport companies whose livelihoods also depend on the industry; The regime will promote sustainable fishing practices, which should in turn help to increase fish stocks, providing a sustainable fishing environment, which is able to support the needs of the local (and wider) community. The regime should also allow fishermen to continue to work in the industry and earn a decent living and should encourage / provide opportunities for other individuals to start a career as a fisherman; and There may be potential opportunities for eco-labelling and associated benefits. Tourism The economy is now changing to one where tourism is one of the most important sectors. Tourism generates more than £706 million in direct and indirect expenditure for Northumberland and it is estimated that approximately 9.1 million people visited Northumberland in 2011. Improvement in the Tourism Comfort Index is likely to increase tourism numbers throughout the year, coupled with increasing overseas tourism leading to a ‘Staycation’ culture; The natural environment, seascapes and marine species (e.g. the Farne Islands, Coquet Island) can play a key role in attracting visitors and supporting local economies; Increases in severe weather could disrupt tourism and recreational activities (water sports, fishing); it could also lead to changes in species’ distribution (birds, 3 The University of Hull. dna. Towards a Sustainable Coast. 29 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Topic Scoped In Scoped Out Evidence Key Issues and Opportunities cetaceans, seals) of ecotourism interest. Decreases in water quality due to e.g. increase in sewer overflows could reduce tourism potential; however warmer temperatures may encourage UK tourism; Angling is an important activity, with a large number of local anglers throughout the district both with Clubs and unaffiliated. Angling is also particularly important for tourism and related businesses/communities. Hotels, public houses, bed and breakfast establishments and restaurants in fishing communities at the coast and nearby will all rely to an extent on visiting sea anglers; Opportunity for diversification e.g. taking tourists on fishing trips; however, a balance must be maintained between such diversity and commercial fishing activity; and The regime will seek to manage a sustainable marine environment and inshore fisheries, by successfully securing the right balance between social environmental (e.g. tourism and recreational angling) and the economic benefits of commercial fishing to ensure healthy seas, sustainable fisheries and a viable industry. Transport 30 N/A Fishing industry transport will be concentrated around harbours and ports and could potentially cause congestion and environmental impacts. However, the regime will not, in all likelihood have any impact (positive or negative) on transport and therefore was scoped out of the SEA. Transport in terms of fishing vessels, boats etc. is covered under material assets. Transportation of illegally caught shellfish and finfish is covered under biodiversity. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 4.5 SEA Framework A key stage in the SEA scoping process was the development of the SEA Framework that includes SEA objectives, assessment criteria and indicators (Table 4.2). The SEA objectives and assessment criteria were used in Stage B (the assessment stage) to appraise the fisheries regime to determine predicted environmental effects. The SEA objectives were developed by Mott MacDonald and NIFCA based on the SEA Directive topics, baseline information, and key issues for the district. The indicators were used as the basis for monitoring proposals to monitor the implementation of the fisheries regime. Monitoring proposals and specific indicators chosen depended on the results of the assessment. 31 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Table 4.2: SEA Framework Topic Biodiversity, flora and fauna Target Species (Finfish) NIFCA SEA Objectives Assessment Criteria Indicators 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? Assess landings of finfish species through MMO statistics Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Estimate population of finfish target species using CEFAS data and assessments, and estimate fishing mortality (or its proxy) to be less than the target reference point for exploitation (or its proxy) Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? Target Species (Shellfish) 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? Assess finfish value of landings via port and species Estimate proportion of stock with full reproductive capacity using CEFAS data and assessments Estimate the proportion of stock or species that are harvested at close to Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) Use of minimum mesh size, minimum landing size, size or age distribution of the catch and landings, mean size or age of first capture, mean size or age of first maturity Estimate landings of shellfish using NIFCA data Estimate value of landings by port and species from NIFCA data Estimate population of shellfish target species, based on Newcastle University research and NIFCA stock surveys (Lobster initially followed by brown crab and inshore Nephrops) Proportion of stocks with full reproductive capacity Shellfish stocks outside of SBL Number of recorded V-notched lobster catches Number of detected illegal landings Non-target species 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to nontarget species (fish, birds, mammals)? Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? Will it maintain, as a minimum, or sustain fish stocks? Discard number per target number Discard weight per target weight Estimated mortality rate of bycatch (fish, birds, marine mammals, especially those bird species associated with the SSSI and SPA, and the Grey seal) Estimated population of non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals, especially those bird species associated with the SSSI and SPA, and the Grey seal) Will it affect disturbance to non-target 32 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Topic Other Species Habitats Bio-safety Climate Change Adaptation Climate Change Mitigation / Energy Historic Environment 33 NIFCA SEA Objectives Assessment Criteria species, (particularly birds and seals)? Indicators 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? Number and type of damaging activity reduced or removed 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of nonnative specie Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or non-native marine species? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from energy use Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? Estimated tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions generated from regime Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? Number of Designated Wreck Sites Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Number of scheduled wrecks (below Mean Low Water) Will it help protect historic assets? Number of listed buildings or scheduled monuments 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Number of incidents involving injury or death of protected species (including numbers affected) Number and type of damaging activity reduced or removed Area and number of statutory and non-statutory ecological sites that will be lost/damaged as a result of the regime Will it involve loss or damage to statutory and non-statutory habitats? Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and non-native marine species? Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? Estimate number of non-native marine species within the district based on Natural England and Environment Agency records, along with reports from Northumberland Wild Life Trust and other sources Estimate the abundance and distribution of non-native marine species within the district Adaptive capacity measures implemented Adaptation actions implemented to manage risks and realise opportunities Estimated fuel consumption l/d Number and distance of journeys 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Topic NIFCA SEA Objectives area Assessment Criteria Indicators Locally significant heritage assets affected by fishing activities Number of historic assets damaged by fishing activities Landscape/Seascape Waste 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? Identification, designation and condition of landscape/seascape Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? Number of activities which take place in designated landscape/seascape areas 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? Number of boats decommissioned Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Tonnes of fishing equipment washed onshore Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) Water Quality 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Tonnes of net / fishing equipment sent to landfill Estimated tonnes / litres of waste material discharged to sea Tonnes of waste recycled or reused Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? Ecological status of water bodies Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Estimated number of fuel spills per annum (including approximate litres spilled in each incident) Will it affect targets under the Bathing Waters Directive? Chemical status of water bodies E.coli standards for water classification Will it protect water quality from farm run-off and the input of sewage to estuaries and coastal waters? Human Health Material Assets 4 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets4, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? Number and severity of reported accidents Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Will the scheme use sustainable materials? % change in number of fishing vessels per annum % of A-Rated, recycled, reused material used in any infrastructure development That infrastructure and those assets necessary to the sector, including fishing vessels, ports and processing facilities. 34 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Topic NIFCA SEA Objectives Assessment Criteria Indicators Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? Socio-Economics Tourism 35 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? Will the regime create jobs in the community? Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? Value of landings Number of fishermen employed Total employment in sector as % of total employment Economic value of fishing industry Local spending (or GDP) generated by fishing tourism Number of recreational fishing trips per month Number of Angling licences issued 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 4.6 Compatibility of SEA Framework Objectives and the NIFCA Management Regime Objectives 4.6.1 Introduction When developing SEA Framework objectives based on environmental, social and economic issues, it is likely that not all of these objectives will relate or be compatible. For example, objectives on economic issues may sometimes conflict with environmental objectives, and vice versa. All of the SEA Framework objectives and the NIFCA management regime objectives may also not be compatible. Two compatibility matrices were produced during the scoping stage to demonstrate compatibility of objectives, and identify any potential conflicts or uncertainties between objectives. The two matrices present: The compatibility between the SEA Framework objectives; and The compatibility between the NIFCA management regime objectives and the SEA Framework objectives. The following key has been used to illustrate compatibility of objectives: + Objectives are compatible - Objectives are potentially incompatible 0 Objectives are not related / Uncertainty over relationship 4.6.2 Compatibility between SEA Framework Objectives A compatibility assessment of the SEA Framework objectives (Table 4.3) is presented in Table 4.4, and demonstrates any potential conflicts and uncertainties between objectives. Table 4.3: SEA Framework Objectives Ref SEA Framework Objectives 1 Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) 2 Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL 3 Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required 4 Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required 5 Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required 6 Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species 7 Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry 8 Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use 9 Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area 10 Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities 36 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Ref SEA Framework Objectives 11 Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations 12 Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality 13 Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities 14 Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity 15 Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime 16 Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime 37 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation + + + 0 + + + 0 0 0 + + + + 0 0 0 + + + 0 0 0 0 0 + + + + + + 0 0 0 + + + + 0 + + 0 0 0 + + + + + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 + + + + / + + 0 + + 0 + + + + + + / + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + / + + + + + + 1 Sustainable harvesting of whitefish stocks Sustainable harvesting of shellfish 2 stocks Assess impact of bycatch, mortality 3 rates, and disturbance 16 + + SEA Objectives Instances of uncertainty between SEA objectives are explained below: 1. Objective 8 with Objective 16: Promoting tourism is likely to increase visitor numbers to the area which may generate more traffic and vehicle journeys, which will cause more emissions to the atmosphere; and 2. Objectives 14 and 15 with Objective 3: Enhancing material assets should as vessel numbers and enhancing fishing communities may increase by-catch, mortality rates, and disturbance. 38 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx 16 Protect and promote fishing tourism 15 + 15 14 + 14 13 + 13 12 + 12 11 + 11 10 + 10 9 + Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets Protect and enhance landscape/ seascape Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety Maintain and enhance material assets Maintain and enhance fishing communities 8 + 9 7 + 8 Reduce carbon emissions SEA Objectives 6 + Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 5 + 7 4 + Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species 3 + 6 2 5 Assess impacts on habitats 1 SEA Framework Objectives Compatibility Matrix Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance Assess impacts on species Assess impacts on habitats Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change Reduce carbon emissions Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets Protect and enhance landscape/seascape Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety Maintain and enhance material assets Maintain and enhance fishing communities Protect and promote fishing tourism 4 Assess impacts on species Table 4.4: Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 4.6.3 Compatibility of Northumberland IFCA Fisheries Management Objectives and the SEA Framework Objectives A compatibility assessment of the NIFCA management regime objectives (Table 4.5) and the SEA Framework objectives (Table 4.3) is presented in Table 4.6, and demonstrates any potential conflicts and uncertainties between objectives. Table 4.5: NIFCA Fisheries Management Regime Objectives Ref NIFCA Management Regime Objectives 1 Ensure that the exploitation of sea fisheries resources is carried out in a sustainable way 2 Balance the social and economic benefits of exploiting the sea fisheries resources of the District with the need to protect the marine environment from, or promote its recovery from, the effects of such exploitation 3 Take any other steps which in the Authority’s opinion are necessary, or expedient for the purpose of making a contribution to the achievement of sustainable development 4 Balance the different needs of persons engaged in the exploitation of sea fisheries resources in the District 5 Ensure all objectives of all Marine Protected Areas in the District are furthered 39 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Table 4.6: 1 2 + + + + + + + + + + + 0 0 + 0 + 5 Assess impacts on habitats + + + 0 + + + + 0 + + 0 + 0 0 + 0 + 0 0 + + + 0 + + + + 0 + + + + 0 + + + + 0 + + 0 + + 0 + + + + 0 + + + + 0 + + + + 0 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change Reduce carbon emissions Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets Protect and enhance landscape/seascape Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety Maintain and enhance material assets Maintain and enhance fishing communities Protect and promote fishing tourism Ensure all objectives of all Marine Protected Areas in the District are 5 furthered + Balance the different needs of persons engaged in the exploitation of sea fisheries 4 resources in the District + Take any other steps which in the Authority’s opinion are necessary, or 3 expedient for the purpose of making a contribution to the achievement of sustainable development Assess impacts on species Balance the social and economic benefits of exploiting the sea fisheries resources of the District with the need to protect the 2 marine environment from, or promote its recovery from, the effects of such exploitation + 4 6 SEA Objectives + Ensure that the exploitation of sea 1 fisheries resources is carried out in a sustainable way 3 NIFCA Fisheries Management Objectives and SEA Framework Objectives Compatibility Matrix Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance NIFCA Aims Table 4.6 demonstrates that the NIFCA management regime objectives and the SEA Framework objectives are compatible and no areas of potential conflict have been identified. 40 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 5 NIFCA Management Regime Assessment 5.1 Introduction This section presents the results of the assessment of the current NIFCA fisheries management regime and a ‘Do Nothing’ option. The potential environmental effects of the current regime and Do Nothing option were assessed using the assessment methodology presented in Section 2.2.2. Table 5.1: Assessment Scoring Key +++ Significant positive effect ++ Moderate positive effect + Minor positive effect 0 Neutral / no effect / negligible effect - Minor negative effect -- Moderate negative effect --- Significant negative effect ? Uncertainty over effect or multiple effects which are both positive and negative D Effect depends on implementation 5.2 ‘Do Nothing’ Assessment A ‘Do Nothing’ scenario was assessed, i.e. without implementation of the plan. In the context of NIFCA the management regime is already in place. However, an alternative option for the management regime could be to abolish all of the byelaws. National and European regulations would still be in force but NIFCA would not have its own byelaws. An assessment of the effects of this option is presented in Table 5.2. The results of the assessment demonstrate that abolishing the NIFCA byelaws would have negative effects on fish stocks, local fishing communities, and the marine environment. It is not considered that this is a viable option due to the potential negative effects and would undermine the duties and responsibilities of NIFCA introduced under the Marine and Coastal Access Act (MaCAA). Table 5.2: No Byelaws Assessment SEA Objective 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks 3. 4. 5. 6. 41 Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance Assess impacts on species Assess impacts on habitats Preventing the introduction and spread No Byelaws -- Having no byelaws would be detrimental to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks. Although certain species will still be regulated under the MMO and EA --- Having no byelaws would be detrimental to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and while some protection is given by other regulations, they are not as comprehensive as the byelaws. -- Having no byelaws would mean there would be no restrictions on net sizes or licences. This would result in higher bycatch rates of not only other fish species but also seabirds and marine mammals. No licences would also mean that bycatch could be landed which may contribute to overfishing -- Having no byelaws may lead to overfishing and depletion of fish stocks. This will have effects for other species who feed on these fish such as seabirds and marine mammals. Damage to habitats from unrestricted fishing activities such as dredging will also negatively affect species -- Having no byelaws will mean that fishing activities that are potentially damaging to marine habitats such as dredging will be unrestricted and could damage habitats such as reefs and sensitive areas within designated sites - Having no byelaws may increase the risk of introducing and spreading non-native species through fishermen from other areas coming to fish in the district. There would 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Objective of non-native species 7. No Byelaws be no restrictions on vessel size which means large boats capable of travelling far out to sea would be allowed in the district and may bring non-native species with them on their hulls Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change - Having no byelaws may lead to overfishing of certain species. When combined with climate change effects such as changing sea temperatures, it may lead to faster species depletion 8. Reduce carbon emissions - Having no byelaws may increase carbon emissions associated with fishing vessels, as there would be no restrictions on the numbers (licences) or size of vessels 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets - Having no byelaws may have a negative effect on historic and cultural assets because it may lead to a decline in the traditional fishing industry and towns. Larger boats and damaging fishing techniques may damage historic wreck sites and reefs. Designated wreck sites will still be protected under national legislation but there are no designated sites within the NIFCA district 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape - Having no byelaws may have a negative effect on landscape/seascape. It may lead to a decline in the traditional fishing industry and fishing towns. Damaging activities may harm the marine seascape, e.g. reefs 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment - No byelaws may have a negative effect on discharges and waste. More boats and larger boats may discharge more waste material, dump old fishing gear, or dump bycatch affecting the marine environment 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality - No byelaws may have a negative effect on water quality because there may be more boats, and larger boats within the district with potential for fuel spills, waste material and equipment, and bycatch waste - Having no byelaws may have a negative effect on health and safety standards. Boats without licences and crews without proper experience may be encouraged into the district and could cause accidents. More boats and larger boats may also increase the risk of accidents. Tension between local fishermen and those from outside the district could cause vandalism or violence - No byelaws may have negative effects on material assets. Asset may fall into disrepair and more resources may be required 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 14. Maintain and enhance material assets 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities --- 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism 5.3 -- Having no byelaws would have significantly negative effects on local fishing communities. It would allow fishermen from other districts to fish within the NIFCA district unrestricted. It would also allow unrestricted fishing for locals. This combined effect will cause overfishing leading to species depletion and could result in a severe decrease in the fishing industry’s viability and long-term future Having no byelaws would lead to overfishing and recreational fishing and other fishing tourism is likely to decrease as fish stocks decrease Assessment of the NIFCA Current Fisheries Management Regime For the purpose of the SEA process, the management regime was divided into the different fisheries in the district and the current byelaws and regulations that govern each fishery (see Section 3.3 for further details). Table 5.3 presents the shellfish and finfish fisheries and their current management regime (in terms of byelaws and regulations), that were assessed. It is important to note that the assessment assessed the byelaws for each fishery relative the SEA objectives and assessment criteria. It does not assess the effects of the fisheries on stocks. The full assessment tables for each fishery with detailed explanation for the scores awarded are presented in Appendix E. Table 5.3: Current NIFCA Management Regime Fishery Current Regime (Byelaws, UK, EU regulations/legislation) Shellfish Pot fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus) 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish 42 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Fishery Current Regime (Byelaws, UK, EU regulations/legislation) 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot Limitation, EU SI Minimum Landing Size and SI V Notched Lobster Dredge fishery for Scallops (King Scallop Pectin maximus) 12. Dredges 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation Trawl fishery for Nephrops 3. Trawling and Size of Vessels 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation Hand gathering fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster and Velvet Crabs 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus) 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns EU SI Minimum Landing Size and SI V Notched Lobster Hand gathering fishery for Mussels Natural England restrictions within Lindisfarne Nature Reserve Hand gathering fishery for Winkles 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation Gillnet fishery for Lobster 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus) 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot Limitations EU SI Minimum Landing Size and SI V Notched Lobster Pacific Oyster Farm Currently no NIFCA byelaws; Regulated by Natural England Finfish Gillnet fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel 4. Fixed Engines Drift net fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout 4. Fixed Engines Hand line fishery for Mackerel MMO Licence and Minimum Landing Size Trawl fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish, and Catfish 3. Trawling and Size of Vessel Minimum Landing Sizes set by MMO (not Turbot) EA restrictions for anglers 5. Purse Seine Net 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation MMO Licence and Minimum Landing Sizes Beach and T net fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout 43 4. Fixed Engines Minimum Landing Sizes enforced by EA 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 5.3.1 Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops Table 5.4: Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Redepositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot Limitation EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks +++ 0 ++ ++ + + +++ +++ +++ +++ 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance 0 0 + + 0 + 0 + 0 0 4. Assess impacts on species 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 5. Assess impacts on habitats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + +++ 0 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8. Reduce carbon emissions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets +++ +++ + + + ++ +++ +++ ++ +++ 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape 0 0 0 0 0 + 0 + 0 0 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7. 44 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Redepositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot Limitation EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality 0 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14. Maintain and enhance material assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism ++ + + + + + + ++ + ++ The current management regime for this fishery has positive effects in terms of contributing to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks (SEA objective 2). The current regime has a positive effect on protecting historic assets and cultural heritage (SEA objective 9) as it helps protect the fishery and maintain a traditional fishing industry and its supporting infrastructure. Byelaws 11 and 15 have minor positive effects on protecting the seascape/landscape (SEA Objective 10) through helping maintain the traditional fishing industry. The regime has a significant positive effect on maintaining fishing communities and a sustainable fishing industry (SEA objective 15) as maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws and regulations. The regime has a minor positive effect on promoting fishing tourism (SEA objective 16) because the byelaws and regulations are intended to maintain a sustainable fishing industry that supports fishing tourism and attracts recreational angling. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. Issues identified during the assessment: 45 Some marginal negative effects on sustainable shellfish stock from dredging (not most lobster grounds as too rocky for dredging); Paradox in that CEFAS (weak data) indicates over-fished, but already implementing the three main tools to protect them (6,7, and 15); The small size of vessel helps maintain the traditional landscape and seascape. Visual quality of pots and Dahn buoys may detract from the seascape; and Important fishery to help maintain local fishing communities and encourage tourism. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Dredge Fishery for Scallops (King Scallop Pectin maximus) 5.3.2 Table 5.5: Dredge Fishery for Scallops (King Scallop Pectin maximus) SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 12. Dredges 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the BNNC SAC 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks + + 0 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks + + + 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance - 0 + - 0 + 0 4. Assess impacts on species - 0 0 + + 5. Assess impacts on habitats 0 + 0 + + 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species 0 0 0 7. Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 0 0 0 8. Reduce carbon emissions 0 0 0 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets 0 0 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape + + + 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 0 0 0 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality 0 0 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 0 0 0 14. Maintain and enhance material assets + - 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities + 0 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism 0 + - 0 0 0 0 0 The current management regime for this fishery has positive effects in terms of contributing to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks (SEA objective 1) as it is expected that if you are fishing for scallops you are not fishing for finfish at the same time. There has not been a significant finfish take for approximately three years. There is also a positive effect on shellfish stocks (SEA Objective 2) as limitations imposed by the regime will reduce overall catch. The current regime has positive and negative effects on bycatch (SEA Objective 3). There is a fish bycatch with a high mortality rate, and also a crab bycatch which has minor negative effects. However, there is a minor positive effect as the regime helps to maintain fish stocks and limits disturbance to non-target species. Byelaw 12 46 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation has a potential minor negative effect as dredging can be ecologically damaging (SEA Objective 4), but this is limited by the limitation on number of dredges per boat and is predominately carried out on smooth ground. The current regime has a minor positive effect for habitats (SEA Objective 5) as Byelaw 12 limits the number of dredges per boat, which facilitates smaller vessels that may cause less disturbance; Byelaw 16 and 17 help protect the BNNC SAC and its designated conservation features such as seagrass. This will also have indirect benefits for species within the SAC. The current regime helps protect the landscape and seascape (Objective 10) because Byelaw 12 removes larger vessels, and Byelaws 16 and 17help protect the BNNC SAC including its features and habitats. The current regime may decrease the number of vessels (SEA Objective 14). This can be seen as a positive or negative effect. Byelaw 12 has a positive effect on fishing communities (SEA Objective 15) as it allows alternatives (scallops) to be targeted because it reduces overall pressure. It also helps maintain a viable small boat fleet. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. Issues identified during the assessment: Fishermen know where the grounds are but NIFCA is improving the definition of where the smooth ground is; At 16 dredges bigger, more powerful boats could come in which can lead to more depletion and more disturbance. At 10 dredges, this is not viable for the big boats; The main risk to heritage assets is operators from larger local ports; Only around half a dozen local boats 2 months per year. They move to trawling rest of the year; and There is a fish bycatch with high mortality rate. 5.3.3 Drift Net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout Table 5.6: Drift Net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 4. Fixed Engines 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance 4. Assess impacts on species 5. Assess impacts on habitats 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species 7. Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 8. Reduce carbon emissions 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets EA restrictions for anglers + + N/A N/A +++ 0 0 + 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape 0 0 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 0 0 47 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 4. Fixed Engines EA restrictions for anglers 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality 0 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 0 0 14. Maintain and enhance material assets 0 0 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities + 0 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism + + The current management regime for this fishery has positive effects in terms of helping to maintain a sustainable fishery and sustainable stocks (SEA Objective 1). Byelaw 4 has a minor positive effect as it restricts fishing for finfish close inshore in winter (November – March). It also aims to prevent bycatch of trout and salmon. The EA restrictions for anglers also has a minor positive contribution to SEA Objective 1 as it allows the fish to mature and breed before being caught, thus maintaining the fishery. Byelaw 4 has a positive effect on SEA Objective 3 and SEA Objective 4 by helping to reduce bycatch, protecting other species. Byelaw 4 also has a very minor positive effect on SEA Objective 6 as the nets are not being moved a lot, reducing the introduction of new species. It is a small but organised and time-limited fishery which is protected under Byelaw 4 which promotes a sustainable fishery which in turn benefits the local fishing community. The picturesque boats; traditional and historic infrastructure are valuable for tourism. Therefore, Byelaw 4 has a positive effect on SEA Objective 16 through encouraging tourism. There is little recreational angling, although the EA restrictions for anglers will help ensure the continued sustainability of this fishery for future recreational angling. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. Issues identified during the assessment: Mostly dealt with under MaCAA which states IFCAs don’t manage migratory fish. However, DEFRA says “Marine organisms” in inshore waters (including sea fisheries resources). IFCA is meeting with DEFRA lawyers to resolve this issue; and NIFCA are considering scrapping Byelaw 4 ‘Fixed Engines’. If the byelaw is scrapped then the current protection of bycatch could be lost causing a negative effect. 5.3.4 Trawl Fishery for Nephrops Table 5.7: Trawl Fishery for Nephrops SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 3. Trawling and Size of Vessels 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks ++ ++ 0 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks + + 0 48 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 3. Trawling and Size of Vessels 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance + + 0 4. Assess impacts on species + + + 5. Assess impacts on habitats + + + 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species + + 0 7. Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 0 8. Reduce carbon emissions + 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets 0 + 0 - 0 + + + 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape ? ? ? 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment ? ? 0 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality ? ? 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety ? ? ? 14. Maintain and enhance material assets ? ? ? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities + + + 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism 0 0 0 The current management regime for this fishery has positive effects on finfish stocks (SEA Objective 1), in particular Byelaws 3 and 14. These byelaws have a moderate positive indirect effect on the sustainable harvesting of finfish, as it reduces effort in the district. Byelaws 3 and 14 also have minor positive effects on shellfish stocks (SEA Objective 2) as a result of reduced effort. The harvest rate of shellfish stocks is advised and managed by the EU (total catch restrictions). Restrictions on trawling and the size of vessels (Byelaw 3) reduce effort in the district which has a minor positive indirect effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks. The bycatch of non-target species is not currently being regulated by NIFCA (SEA Objective 3). However, Byelaw 3 is likely to reduce effort (smaller nets) and may lead to a reduction in bycatch. Although this is anecdotal because there is a low incidence rate of non-target species bycatch, this byelaw has a minor positive indirect effect on bycatch of non-target species. Byelaw 14 also has a minor positive indirect effect on SEA Objective 3 as it reduces effort in the district which may lead to a reduction in bycatch. The current regime has a minor positive indirect effect on habitat and species through reduction of effort. Byelaws 3 and 14 reduce effort in the district which may reduce carbon emissions (SEA Objective 8) due to fewer vessels. However, restrictions under Byelaw 14 may also mean that boats travel further afield outside the district generating more GHG emissions. The current regime will have a 49 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation minor positive indirect effect on protecting heritage assets (SEA Objective 9) from reduced effort. There was uncertainty over some of the effects of the current regime in terms of effects on landscape and seascape; waste and discharges; pollution and water quality; health and safety; and material assets. For example, Byelaw 3 on the trawling size of vessels may have a positive visual impact, as people enjoy seeing small vessels on the coastline. However, this is a matter of personal opinion, and therefore, there is uncertainty over the effect. In terms of waste Byelaw 3 may create less waste locally but boats may take more with them if they have to go further afield because of the byelaw restrictions, which has the potential to create more waste. Byelaw 3 may decrease the number of fishing vessels, which may have a minor positive impact on the environment (mainly ecology). However, it may also increase the number of boats out at a time, which would have a minor negative impact on the amount of catch each boat brings in, therefore, effects are uncertain. The current regime has a positive effect on fishing communities and sustainable fisheries management (SEA Objective 15). In particular, Byelaw 3 has benefits for locals as it stops big boats coming in, contributing to maintaining long-term sustainability of the fishery, and thus maintaining jobs for the future. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. Issues identified during the assessment: 50 NIFCA does not assess finfish in relation to Nephrops trawl fishery (predominantly whiting); Cod-bycatch unknown. From scientific literature the indication is that they main commercial bycatch species is whiting but cod can represent in the region of 10% of the bycatch (also it should be noted that this could be more or potentially all of the bycatch). Therefore the bycatch is considered to be an unknown quantity as it is extremely variable; Nephrops caught outside the district and landed within NIFCA district - need better links with other organisations to monitor this; There is a large visiting effort of fisheries people coming from other areas to trawl in the district; Relationship between local prosecuted Nephrops (3-6mm) in district is unknown. Farne Deeps prosecuted fishery Functional Unit information is at SBL; Main trawl fishery is at Farne Deeps; Limited data collected (byelaw 13) - historical gap between previous MMO data and introduction of byelaw; Limited knowledge of stocks, boat numbers and landings – data are collected by other organisations but NIFCA don’t monitor this. NIFCA should review others data; Lack of Functional Unit management as recommended by ICES. Not an IFCA management issue but it is big picture issue which need addressing. While NIFCA couldn’t implement functional unit management, they could promote it when asked (or proactively) to contribute to sustainable fishing. This raises an important general point about the overall relationship between the duty of the NIFCA to its local stocks, and the co-related duty of Cefas, Defra and the EU to the wider stock picture; NIFCA will be looking at seals and seabirds in the district but a future project could be to look at the effects of bycatch on these and other non-target species, and bycatch rates; Anecdotal information only on bycatch (low incident rate); Main issue is seabirds; Potential to open up fishing zones for trawling in the EMS; Current vessel tracking system uses GPS. IVMS tracking uses mobile phone signal which is more accurate. However, it is expensive. Could get a free trial from an organisation such as Succofish; Trawlers from areas outside the district could bring invasive species into the NIFCA district; 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Byelaw restrictions may mean more travel to avoid the district which may increase carbon emissions outside the district; There are ship wrecks marked on the marine charter but they aren’t marked as historic. There is some spatially limited research but this could be developed. Doing a survey of archaeological sites could be a future project to help preserve and enhance historical assets; By banning trawling in certain areas, this could have a positive effect on historic and cultural assets; Under MaCAA NIFCA should be looking after archaeological assets but they aren’t currently; The effect of these byelaws on landscapes and seascapes is a matter of personal opinion. Some people like to see smaller boats. However, some people like to see lots of varied boats; Boats above 15m need health and safety certifications but smaller boats do not. No information on H&S for smaller boats. Locally there aren’t many issues with health and safety; Marine Accident Organisation – should report accidents to this organisation but many don’t; and There is uncertainty regarding long-term job creation and maintaining jobs within the district. 5.3.5 Gillnet Fishery for Lobster Table 5.8: Gillnet Fishery for Lobster SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 6. Prohibition of “V” Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Redepositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot limitations EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks ++ ++ ++ ? 0 0 + 0 ++ ++ 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4. Assess impacts on species 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 5. Assess impacts on habitats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 6. Prohibition of “V” Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Redepositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot limitations EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8. Reduce carbon emissions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 0 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 14. Maintain and enhance material assets ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7. Byelaws 6, 7, 8, EU SI minimum landing sizes and EI SI notched lobster regulations have a moderate positive effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks (SEA Objective 2) as they aim to protect lobster resources. Byelaw 13 has a minor positive effect as in theory the fisherman should have a permit and should be recoding his returns. Since the gillnet fishery for lobsters is done by one person, the effect of Byelaw 9 on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks is uncertain. It is uncertain what he uses for bait. Byelaw 10 has a minor positive effect on SEA objective 4 as it involves putting shellfish bycatch back 52 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation where it’s found. Byelaw 11 has a minor positive effect on health and safety (SEA Objective 13) because marking gear will enable other boats to know it’s there. The effect of the current regime on material assets (SEA Objective 14) is uncertain due to lack of knowledge about this fishery. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. Issues identified during the assessment: Fishery is currently one fisherman. There is a lack of knowledge about this fishery (how often does the fisherman go out, rate of bycatch, returns, is anyone else doing this type of fishery, H&S record). This could be an area for development; Vessel is checked but what happened to the data. Uncertain if it is included in reporting; Fishing effort is not directly regulated, although the fixed engine byelaw would be applicable as a partial management tool. The byelaws don’t cover effort (number of nets, area); Effects of the net on the rocky reef habitat, species in the SAC and historic areas; Gill netting is likely to have a greater negative effect with regards to bycatch as the majority will not survive. Impacts could include seals, whales, birds etc.; It is not clear where the nets used have been sourced from. Is it possible to bring in non-native species from other areas either on the boat or the nets; Part of the net could be left behind when pulling up the catch from the rocky reef; Re-use of old nets; How does the fisherman dispose of nets; Are nets left behind to ghost fish; Under the byelaw a net (singular) of 100m or less does not require a permit; and Possible increase in effort if viable and more people do it. It is unclear what the effects would be if other people took up gillnet fishery for lobster. 5.3.6 Hand Line Fishery for Mackerel Table 5.9: Hand Line Fishery for Mackerel SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) MMO Licence Minimum Landing Sizes Set by MMO + + 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks N/A N/A 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance + 0 4. Assess impacts on species + 0 5. Assess impacts on habitats 0 0 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species 0 0 7. Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change ? ? 53 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) MMO Licence Minimum Landing Sizes Set by MMO 8. Reduce carbon emissions + - 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets 0 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape 0 0 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment ? ? 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality 0 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 0 0 14. Maintain and enhance material assets 0 0 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities 0 0 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism 0 0 The current management regime has positive effects on sustainable finfish stocks (SEA Objective 1) as it provides a level of regulation. The MMO Licence regulation has minor positive indirect effects on bycatches, non-target species (SEA Objective 3), and other species (SEA Objective 4), as it regulates effort in the district. The effect of the current regime on identifying, managing, and adapting to the effects of climate change is uncertain (SEA Objective 7). The MMO Licence regulation has minor positive indirect effects on GHG emissions (SEA objective 8) because it aims to limit the number of boats. However, the MMO Minimum Landing Sizes regulations could have a potential minor negative indirect effect on GHG emissions because it may be necessary for boats to be out fishing for longer to get their quotas. The effect of the current regime on waste generation and discharges to sea (SEA Objective 11) is uncertain. Under the MMO Minimum Landing Sizes regulation boats could be out longer to get their quotas, therefore, generating more waste. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. Issues identified during the assessment: 54 Does high grading occur; The fishery consists of 10 vessels, with 10 boxes per vessel. It is a seasonal fishery; Jigging increases the likelihood of catching other animals; Possible bycatch of birds and other fish; Targeted fishery, highly selective; Pelagic activity in the water column; As ocean temperatures increase, certain fish species may migrate to outside of the district. Mackerel are more likely to move further north; and Restricted quota; fully utilised. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 5.3.7 Hand Gathering for Mussels Table 5.10: Hand Gathering for Mussels SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) NE Restrictions within Lindisfarne Nature Reserve 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the BNNC SAC N/A N/A ? ? 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance 4. Assess impacts on species ? + 5. Assess impacts on habitats 0 + 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species + 0 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt for climate change 0 0 8. Reduce carbon emissions 0 0 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets 0 0 + + 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 0 0 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality + 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 0 0 14. Maintain and enhance material assets 0 0 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities 0 0 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism 0 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape +++ - 0 Further baseline information is required to understand the number of mussels captured and therefore, determine sustainability of stock status. Mussels are used for bait and The Lindisfarne byelaws prohibit collection and removal of bait which may help sustain stocks (SEA objective 2). The current method of hand gathering for mussels has a significant positive effect on bycatch and disturbance levels (SEA objective 3) as there is little disturbance caused to the sea bed and it avoids bycatch. However, there will be short-term negative effects associated with human disturbance to surrounding species. These negative effects could be minimised by introducing a code of conduct. Byelaw 17 has minor indirect positive effects on species and habitats (SEA objectives 4 and 5) as it protects areas of seagrass. By its nature hand gathering is a low carbon fishery, however, the byelaws do not affect carbon emissions and therefore neutral was scored for SEA objective 8. The current management regime has a minor positive effect on landscape/seascape (SEA objective 10) as people enjoy seeing this type of fishing method along the shore and it protects areas of seagrass. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. 55 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Issues identified during the assessment: 5.3.8 Mussels are used as fishing bait; No historic data for the number of mussels captured by his method of fishing; Mussel fishery at Lindisfarne is managed by Natural England and privately owned; There may need to be restrictions put in place for the amounts of oysters that are in the area as these compete for food with mussels; Poor water quality as a result of algal blooms can have a minor negative effect on the hand gathering of mussels. When algal blooms are present, notices are put up not to fish for mussels as these may be of poor quality; Potential to improve knowledge on how mussels adapt to sea temperature change by gathering baseline data; and Hand gathering method is beneficial to the seabed as there is very little, if any, disturbance. Hand Gathering for Winkles Table 5.11: Hand Gathering for Winkles SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the BNNC SAC 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks N/A ? 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance 0 4. Assess impacts on species ? 5. Assess impacts on habitats + 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species 0 7. Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 0 8. Reduce carbon emissions 0 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape + 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 0 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 0 14. Maintain and enhance material assets 0 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities 0 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism 0 56 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Further baseline information is required to understand the number of winkles captured and therefore, determine sustainability of stock status. There is also difficulty in determining the difference between recreational and commercial fishing for winkles. Byelaw 17 has minor indirect positive effects on habitats (SEA objectives 5) as it protects areas of seagrass. By its nature hand gathering is a low carbon fishery, however, the byelaw does not affect carbon emissions and therefore, neutral was scored for SEA objective 8. The current management regime has a minor positive effect on landscape/seascape (SEA objective 10) as people enjoy seeing this type of fishing method along the shore and it protects areas of seagrass. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. Issues identified during the assessment: 5.3.9 Winkles are gathered for both commercial and recreational purposes; Difficulty distinguishing between recreational and commercial fishing for winkles; Price of winkles fluctuates throughout the year; Short-term negligible negative effects from waste - the main source of waste associated with this hand gathering is from tourists who leave behind litter who have picked and cooked the winkles on the shoreline for recreational purposes; Poor water quality as a result of algal blooms can have a minor negative effect on the hand gathering of winkles. When algal blooms are present, notices are put up not to fish for winkles as these may be of poor quality; Hand gathering for winkles provides a source of bait for recreational angling; Potential to improve knowledge on how winkles adapt to sea temperature change by gathering baseline data; Once baseline information is known decisions for further action can be taken which may include: permitted hand gathering of winkles, restrictions (bag limits) for personal use and a code of conduct to advice tourists of standards and etiquette when fishing for winkles; Oysters compete for food with winkles; and Hand gathering method is beneficial to the seabed as there is very little, if any, disturbance. Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel Table 5.12: Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 4. Fixed Engines Minimum Landing Sizes set by MMO (not Turbot) 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks 0 ? 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks 0 + 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance -- ++ 4. Assess impacts on species + ++ 5. Assess impacts on habitats 0 + 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species 0 0 7. Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 0 0 57 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 4. Fixed Engines Minimum Landing Sizes set by MMO (not Turbot) 8. Reduce carbon emissions 0 0 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets 0 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape 0 0 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 0 0 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality 0 - 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 0 0 14. Maintain and enhance material assets + 0 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities + + 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism 0 -- The MMO landing sizes have a minor positive effect on shellfish stocks (SEA objective 2) as it provides a level of regulation. The fixed engine byelaw has a moderate negative effect on bycatch (SEA objective 3) as larger seabirds can get caught in the nets but the majority of bycatch is generally released. However the MMO minimum landing sizes have a moderate positive effect on bycatch (SEA objective 3) as they allow fish stocks to breed and significantly increase biomass in the area (however, the minimum landing sizes are not optimal). The current regime has a positive effect on species protection (SEA objective 4) as the minimum landing sizes increase biomass and the fixed engine byelaw as there is minimal netting activity in SAC’s and it improves the level of bycatch that is released. The MMO landing sizes have a minor positive effect on biodiversity (SEA objective 5) as the number of fish being harvested before they can breed is minimised. However the MMO landing sizes have a minor negative effect on water quality (SEA objective 12) as bycatch are thrown back into the sea if they do not meet the minimum landing sizes. The fixed engine byelaw is having a minor positive effect on material assets (SEA objective 14) as in the near future this byelaw will no longer exist and the boats are likely to be sold and used for historic displays and boat trips. The current regime has a minor positive effect on the promotion of sustainable fishing (SEA objective 15) however there is potential that the fixed engine byelaw and the MMO landing sizes will no longer exist in the near future so the effect is short term. The MMO minimum landing sizes have a moderate negative effect on fishing tourism (SEA objective 16) as the minimum landing sizes for cod are currently too small and the fish stocks diminish before they have chance to breed, therefore affecting recreational fishing. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. Issues identified during the assessment: 58 Use of illegal nets can bycatch seabirds; Gillnet fisheries are minimal (approximately 30 days a year) and in a limited area; Uncertainty over current MMO landing sizes which are soon to be removed as part of the revised approach dealing with new bycatch regulations requiring all quota species to be landed; Existing fixed engine byelaw only relates to gillnets within close proximity and does not apply to those with a migratory licence; and 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Increasing the minimum landing sizes for cod would improve sustainable fishing of this species. 5.3.10 Trawl Fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other Flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish, and Catfish (Bycatch Fishery) Table 5.13: Trawl Fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other Flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish and Catfish (Bycatch Fishery) SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 3. Trawling and Size of Vessel 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC MMO Licence Minimum landing sizes set by MMO (not Turbot) 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks - +++ +++ +++ ++ 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks 0 +++ +++ +++ 0 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance 4. Assess impacts on species + N/A + + - 5. Assess impacts on habitats + N/A + + - 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species N/A + 0 0 0 7. Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 8. Reduce carbon emissions + ++ 0 0 0 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape N/A N/A 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality N/A N/A + 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety N/A 14. Maintain and enhance material assets N/A 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities N/A 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism N/A 59 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation The trawl fishery for cod, sole, turbot, other flatfish, haddock, whiting, monkfish and catfish is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops, permitted under the EU technical conservation regulation. Therefore, the byelaws and regulations are indirectly relevant through the main trawl fishery for Nephrops. The current regime has a positive effect on the sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks (SEA objective 1) and shellfish stocks (SEA objective 2), in particular byelaws 14, the new byelaw on the prohibition of mobile fishing gear and the MMO licence due to the level of regulation. However Byelaw 3 has a minor negative effect on SEA objective 1 as fishermen adapt their boats to fit the byelaw but still have large engines that can power the boat to carry large amounts of fish. The current regime has an indirect positive effect on the protection of species (SEA objective 4) and protection of habitats (SEA objective 5), in particular byelaw 3, the new byelaw prohibiting the use of mobile fishing gear and the MMO licence. The effect is indirect as they are more relevant to the trawl fishery for Nephrops and therefore have a subsequent positive effect on this fishery. The MMO landing sizes have a minor negative effect on SEA objective 4 and SEA objective 5 due to the discard of bycatch. There are indirect positive effects associated with Byelaw 14 and the prevention of the introduction of non-native species (SEA objective 6) as there will be less cross contamination as larger boats are restricted from entering the area. Byelaws 3 and14 have a positive effect on reducing carbon emissions (SEA objective 8) as byelaw 3 indirectly reduces carbon emissions through the positive effects on trawl fishing for Nephrops and Byelaw 14 reduces the number of vessels in the area. The minimum landing sizes have an indirect minor positive effect on marine pollution due to the result of increased discarding of bycatch. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. Issues identified during the assessment: 60 This fishery is a result of bycatch from trawl fishing for Nephrops; A stakeholder identified that the net mesh size needs to be adjusted to minimise the number of fish that are bycatch as a result of trawl fishing for Nephrops. However, it was then discussed that the mesh size used in the Nephrops fishery is permitted under the EU technical conservation regulation, subject to fish bycatch percentages specified in the regulation. The focus needs to be on the licensing of gear type and the number of days at sea; When bycatch occurs, if it is over the minimum landing size and is over the quota the fish is landed. If it is under the minimum size and under quota, it is discarded; Potential future shipwrecks should be considered as assets that could be affected by trawl fishing; If fish have to be landed rather than discarded as a result of bycatch, more jobs will be created; and If discards are landed, the level of infrastructure will increase. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 5.3.11 Hand Gathering Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, and Velvet Crab Table 5.14: Hand Gathering Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster and Velvet Crab SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster N/A 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks + + + + + + + 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4. Assess impacts on species + + + + + + + 5. Assess impacts on habitats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7. Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8. Reduce carbon emissions + + + + + + + 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14. Maintain and enhance material assets 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities + 0 0 0 -- ++ 0 61 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism The current management regime has a positive effect on sustainable shellfish stocks as it works well to facilitate stock replenishment. Hand gathering by its nature has a low impact on other species (SEA Objective 4) and the regime will therefore have minor positive effects on protecting species. Hand gathering is a traditional approach requiring limited motorised methods, and therefore, the management regime and fishery has a positive effect on reduction of GHG emissions (SEA Objective 8). Byelaw 6 supports the application of hand gathering and facilitates a viable hand gathering fishing industry, resulting in positive effects for fishing communities (SEA Objective 15), however, in terms of lobster conservation, the hand fishery is small and therefore effects will be minor.. Byelaw 13 has a negative effect on SEA Objective 15 as catch can only be used for personal use, therefore, the byelaw disincentives’ the uptake of hand gathering. The EU SI Minimum Landing Sizes supports SEA Objective 15 by ensuring a sustainable fishing method. Byelaw 13 may have positive or negative effects on fishing tourism (SEA Objective 16) as permits may encourage hand gathering, however, catch can only be used for personal use, therefore, the byelaw disincentives’ the uptake of hand gathering, therefore, an overall score of neutral was awarded. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. Issues identified during the assessment: The stakeholder group undertaking the assessment decided to include hand gathering divers within this category; It was noted that there were currently no commercial hand gatherers, it was all recreational; and No bycatch associated with hand gathering. 5.3.12 Pacific Oyster Farm Table 5.15: Pacific Oyster Farm SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) Regulated by Natural England (Marine and Coastal Access Act) 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks 0 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance ? 4. Assess impacts on species 62 N/A --- 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) Regulated by Natural England (Marine and Coastal Access Act) 5. Assess impacts on habitats --- 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species --- 7. Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change --- 8. Reduce carbon emissions 0 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape 0 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 0 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 0 14. Maintain and enhance material assets 0 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities ? 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism 0 This fishery is regulated by Natural England under the Marine and Coastal Access Act. The Farm will be a cultivation operation in which, normally, seed oysters are bought, laid, grown on, and then lifted as required for sale. Such operations, especially in a private fishery, are not judged on sustainability criteria (as applied to open ended natural stock), and therefore the assessment criteria for SEA Objective 2 do not apply to this operation and a neutral effect has been scored for SEA Objective 2. Further information is needed to understand the effects of the farm on the wider ecosystem. There is potential for primary and secondary impacts including potential removal of food stocks for the mussel population (SEA Objective 3). There is currently a lack of any regulations for environmental and ecosystem reasons. A scoring of major negative was awarded (SEA Objective 4) based on the potential for ecologically damaging impacts both now and in the future, and potential effects on mussel populations which are a sub-feature of the EMS. There are concerns over the lack of data and regulations surrounding the Pacific Oyster farms. No knowledge is available of the potential ecological damage to habitats, in statutory or non-statutory areas, and therefore, these were assessed as major negative due to potential for significant effects if unregulated. A lack of any monitoring regime both inside and outside the Farm could reduce the capacity of surrounding ecosystems as well as overlook natural or manmade changes occurring within the Pacific Oyster farm itself, therefore, there is potential for negative effects on SEA Objective 7. The rows of lines/beds can be seen from above (people flying over the area). However, this was considered to be a negligible effect and was therefore scored as neutral (SEA Objective 10). The effect of the Pacific Oyster Farm on fishing communities and sustainable fisheries (SEA Objective 15) depends on how it is implemented and how it is regulated. The Farm will be a cultivation operation which is not normally judged on sustainability criteria (as discussed above). The Pacific Oyster Farm could be regarded as a development with the potential to increase the local economy (resulting in positive effects), provided that the potential ecological issues are mitigated. However, to expand the farm further would probably require a full impact assessment as it is within an EMS. It would also likely impact directly upon the mussel populations which are a sub-feature of the site. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. 63 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Issues identified during the assessment: A stakeholder identified that there is evidence of no new recruitment of Mussels beds adjacent to the oyster trestles. However, the 2014 mussel survey showed good levels of recruitment; There is an opportunity to manage any potential residual effects of the Oyster farm in relation to the wider ecosystem; A management regime for wider environmental issues should be considered; Currently there is limited data/ monitoring for the Pacific Oyster Farming, such data would facilitate informed discussions as to the appropriate management regime; and Further information is needed to understand the impact of the Pacific Oyster farm on the wider ecosystem, is there potential removal of food stocks from the mussel population. 5.3.13 Beach and T-net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout Table 5.16: Beach and T-net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout SEA Framework Objective Management Regime (Byelaws and Regulations) 4. Fixed Engines 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks 3. Minimum Landing Sizes enforced by EA + + N/A N/A Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance + + 4. Assess impacts on species + ++ 5. Assess impacts on habitats 0 0 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species 0 0 7. Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 0 0 8. Reduce carbon emissions 0 0 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets 0 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seascape 0 0 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 0 0 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality 0 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety + 0 14. Maintain and enhance material assets 0 0 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities 0 0 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism 0 64 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Byelaw 4 has a positive effect on sustainable finfish stocks (SEA Objective 1) as it positively contributes to reducing bycatch and provides appropriate management regimes through licences. The EA Minimum Landing Sizes regulation also has a positive effect on SEA Objective 1 as it reduces exploitation and illegal fishing of salmon and fish trout. The current management regime has positive effects on reducing bycatch numbers and effects on other species. The current byelaws governing all fisheries contribute positively towards protecting the health and safety of people working in the fishing industry which has positive effects on SEA Objective 13. See Appendix E for full scoring explanations. Issues identified during the assessment: 65 A problem with seals as by catch was discussed during assessment although the current regime appropriately contributed to managing this. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 5.4 Cumulative Assessment Each of the fisheries assessed in Section 5.3 has a number of byelaws and regulations that govern their management. Although an individual byelaw may not have significant effects, the combination of the byelaws and regulations for a fishery may have cumulative positive or negative effects. A cumulative assessment of the overall fisheries management regime for each fishery was undertaken and the results are presented in Table 5.17. The assessment results demonstrate that the cumulative effects of the management regimes for each fishery are generally positive or neutral. The main positive effects identified were: Maintaining sustainable harvesting of finfish and shellfish stocks; Reducing effects of bycatch; Protection of habitats and species; and Maintaining sustainable fisheries and fishing communities. There were two instances where negative cumulative effects were recorded. These were: The current management regime for the gillnet fishery for cod, turbot, other flatfish, and mackerel, which has a negative effect on fishing tourism as the minimum landing sizes are having a negative effect on recreational fishing; and The current management regime may decrease the number of vessels involved in scallop dredging which can be seen as a positive or negative effect depending on viewpoints. There were uncertainties over the effects of the trawl fishery for Nephrops, hand line fishery for mackerel, hand gathering fishery for mussels, and gillnet fishery for cod, turbot, other flatfish, and mackerel for some of the SEA objectives during the assessment. Therefore, this uncertainty remains in the cumulative assessment as well. The hand gathering fishery for winkles currently only has one byelaw regulating it and therefore cumulative effects have not been assessed. The environmental effects of this fishery are recorded in Table 5.11. The Pacific Oyster Farm is regulated by Natural England under the Marine and Coastal Access Act; therefore cumulative effects have not been assessed. The environmental effects of this fishery are recorded in Table 5.15. 66 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Table 5.17: Cumulative Assessment Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops Dredge Fishery for Scallops Drift Net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout Trawl Fishery for Nephrops Gillnet Fishery for Lobster Hand Line Fishery for Mackerel Hand Gathering for Mussels Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel Trawl Fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish, and Catfish (Bycatch Fishery) Hand Gathering Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, and Velvet Crab Beach and T-net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout 1. Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks N/A + + + 0 + N/A ? +++ N/A + 2. Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks ++ + N/A + + N/A ? + +++ + N/A 3. Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance 0 0 +++ + 0 + 0 0 N/A 0 ++ 4. Assess impacts on species 0 + + + 0 + ? + + + + 5. Assess impacts on habitats ++ + 0 + 0 0 0 + + 0 0 6. Preventing the introduction and spread of nonnative species 0 0 0 + 0 0 + 0 + 0 0 7. Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 N/A 0 0 8. Reduce carbon emissions 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 ++ ++ 0 9. Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets ++ 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10. Protect and enhance landscape/seasca pe + + 0 ? 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 SEA Objective 67 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops Dredge Fishery for Scallops Drift Net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout Trawl Fishery for Nephrops Gillnet Fishery for Lobster Hand Line Fishery for Mackerel Hand Gathering for Mussels Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel Trawl Fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish, and Catfish (Bycatch Fishery) Hand Gathering Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, and Velvet Crab Beach and T-net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout 11. Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment 0 0 0 ? 0 ? 0 0 N/A 0 0 12. Ensure marine pollution does not compromise water quality 0 0 0 ? 0 0 + 0 N/A 0 0 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 N/A 0 + 14. Maintain and enhance material assets 0 0 ? ? 0 0 + N/A 0 0 SEA Objective - + 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities +++ 0 + + 0 0 0 ++ N/A + 0 16. Protect and promote fishing tourism + 0 + 0 0 0 0 -- N/A 0 0 68 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 6 Consultation 6.1 Environmental Report Consultation As required by the SEA Regulations and under stage D of the SEA process NIFCA is consulting on this Environmental Report to ensure the views and concerns of statutory and non-statutory consultees are taken into account in the SEA process. The SEA Regulations do not state a specific time period for consultation but states that ‘authorities shall be given an early and effective opportunity within appropriate timeframes for a meaningful consultation period to express their opinion’. This Environmental Report – Draft for Consultation will be issued for public consultation for a six week period from 15th August 2014 to 26th September 2014. The relevant authorities/stakeholders will be provided with a paper or electronic copy of this Environmental Report – Draft for Consultation, and the current byelaws. The documents will also be published on the NIFCA website. The responses received during the stage D consultation will be reviewed and taken into account in the final Environmental Report. Responses will be presented in the Appendix, along with how the feedback was considered in the SEA process. A separate statement of the influence of the SEA process on the plan will then be provided. In order to engage with a wider group of stakeholders including fishermen, further stakeholder consultation events were undertaken by NIFCA on the legacy byelaw review and SEA. The following meetings were held: Seahouses – 23rd June; Amble – 24th June; Berwick upon Tweed – 30th June; Cullercoats, North Tyneside – 1st July; and An ‘Open Day’ at the NIFCA office in Blyth – 8th July. In total 15 commercial fishermen, 5 recreational anglers, 2 inshore boating representatives, and representatives from DEFRA, Natural England, Northumberland Wildlife Trust, RSPB, Environment Agency, NAREC, and the MMO attended one or more of the events along with members and officers of NIFCA. The results of these consultation events will be reviewed and taken into account in the final Environmental Report. 69 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 7 Conclusions and Recommendations 7.1 Conclusions The SEA process has been carried out for the NIFCA Fisheries Management Regime. It has identified potential positive and negative effects of the current regime on environmental and socio-economic objectives, these are described below. Overall the NIFCA management regime performs well when judged using the SEA framework. The main positive effects of implementing the management regime (‘plan’) were: The current management regime positively contributes to maintaining sustainable harvesting of finfish and shellfish stocks through the byelaws and regulations that regulate minimum landing sizes, reduce effort, and limit vessel size; The current management regime helps to reduce effects of bycatch through byelaws and regulations on re-depositing shellfish, net sizes, and fixed engines; The current management regime helps protect species and habitats from damaging fishing activities through byelaws and regulations on dredging, vessel sizes, and use of mobile fishing gear within specified areas within the SAC. In particular the mobile fishing gear byelaw aims to prevent damage or deterioration to designated conservation features such as Rocky Reefs, Cobble Reefs and Seagrass in the area, through a buffer zone in which fishing with mobile gear is prohibited; and The overall current management regime helps to maintain sustainable fisheries and fishing communities through byelaws and regulations that protect sustainable levels of fish stocks whilst not putting undue restrictions on the fishing industry. Negative effects identified included: The MMO minimum landing sizes have a moderate negative effect on fishing tourism e.g. the minimum landing size for cod is currently perceived to be too small and the fish stock diminishes before it has had a chance to breed, therefore, affecting recreational fishing and conservation of sustainable stocks. If the minimum landing sizes were to be increased above the national standard this would have benefits for anglers and conservation of stocks; and The assessment identified concerns over the lack of information on the Pacific Oyster Farm and the regulations surrounding this fishery, and the potential for negative effects now and in the future. However, until further information is obtained by NIFCA the positive or negative effects of the Pacific Oyster Farm cannot be accurately identified and addressed. This has been identified as an action for NIFCA to take forward in the Action Plan presented below. The Pacific Oyster farm will be a cultivation operation in which, normally, seed oysters are bought, laid, grown on, and then lifted as required for sale. Such operations, especially in a private fishery, are typically not judged on sustainability criteria (as applied to open ended natural stock). The Pacific Oyster Farm could be regarded as a development with the potential to increase the local economy (resulting in positive effects), provided that the potential ecological issues are mitigated. However, to expand the farm further would probably require a full impact assessment as it is within a European Marine Site (EMS). It is also likely to impact directly upon the mussel populations which are a sub-feature of the site. During the assessment a number of uncertainties over effects were also identified. These included: Trawl fishery for Nephrops – uncertainties over effects on landscape and seascape; waste and discharges; pollution and water quality; health and safety; and material assets. For example, Byelaw 3 on the trawling size of vessels may have a positive visual impact, as people enjoy seeing small vessels 70 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation on the coastline. However, this is a matter of personal opinion, and therefore, there is uncertainty over the effect. In terms of waste Byelaw 3 may create less waste locally but boats may take more with them if they have to go further afield because of the byelaw restrictions, which has the potential to create more waste; Gillnet fishery for lobster – lack of information about this fishery including effects on material assets e.g. where do nets come from, are they reused. An action to monitor this fishery has been included in the Action Plan below; Hand line fishery for mackerel - under the MMO Minimum Landing Sizes regulation boats could be out longer to get their quotas, therefore, generating more waste but this is speculation and, therefore, effects remain uncertain; and Hand gathering fishery for mussels and for winkles – stock status is uncertain. Information on numbers of mussels and winkles captured needs to be undertaken by NIFCA. This can been included in the Action Plan below. The SEA has informed the legacy byelaw review by highlighting the positive and negative effects of the current byelaws. The assessment process has demonstrated that all of the current byelaws contribute to the overall sustainable management of the fisheries within the NIFCA district. It is, therefore, recommended that the legacy byelaw review does not remove any of the byelaws completely but NIFCA would seek to consolidate and update them in line with current legislation. This will help ensure that the current protection of fisheries and the environment is continued. 7.2 Recommendations As a result of the assessment undertaken as part of the SEA process a number of mitigation measures and actions were recommended by the team of environmental, sustainable development and fisheries specialists to influence the development of the NIFCA management regime and improve the sustainability performance of the management regime.. These actions have been developed into an action plan for NIFCA to implement. Following discussions and agreement with NIFCA the actions identified were given a priority ranking. The aim of the action plan is to help continue the sustainable management of fisheries and the fishing industry whilst also protecting the environment. The action plan includes actions to increase knowledge of fisheries, develop further management frameworks, and implement measures to improve sustainability. Table 7.1: Priority Key Priority Key High Action to be taken in the next 0-6 months Medium Action to be undertaken in the next 6-12 months Low Action to be undertaken in the next 1-2 years Action not taken forward Action not taken forward by NIFCA – reasons for this will be provided 71 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Table 7.2: Action Plan Ref Fishery SEA Framework Objective Issues identified during the Assessment Recommendations 1 General SEA Objective 1: Sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks Technical wording of byelaws. May be understood by seasoned fishermen but need to ensure they are fully understood by everyone using sea fisheries resources. Develop a clear and concise set of postcards or flashcards with key requirements in visual format where possible using key words. - SEA Objective 2: Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks Priority NIFCA Comments SEA Objective 3: Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance 2 SEA Objective 14: Maintain and enhance materials assets The current vessel tracking system uses GPS. In Vessel Monitoring System (IVMS) tracking uses mobile phone signal which is more accurate. However, it is expensive. Organise a free trial of the IVMS tracking system through a company such as Succorfish. The MMO are currently going through a procurement process. Therefore, at this stage NIFCA cannot take the action forward until an agreed IVMS is determined by the MMO 3 SEA Objective 9: Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets Under the Marine and Coastal Access Act (MaCAA) IFCA’s have a responsibility to protect the marine environment from, or promote its recovery from, the effects of exploiting the sea fisheries resources. This includes features of archaeological or historic interest. However, this isn’t currently being directly undertaken by NIFCA. Although there are no designated wreck sites within the NIFCA district (although this may change in the future), there are a number of wreck sites, many of which may have historic interest. Ship wrecks are marked on the marine charter but they aren’t marked as historic. There is some spatially limited research but this could be developed. Undertake a survey of ship wreck sites (and other archaeological/historic features/ areas) to identify which have archaeological or historic interest and should be monitored by NIFCA to help preserve them. This is likely to require commissioning through a third party organisation such as an Archaeological Trust. This is a low priority compared to other work, and will not be taken forward by NIFCA. 4 SEA Objective 3: Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance Seabird bycatch. Measures should be implemented to minimise numbers of birds caught in nets and associated mortality rates. Measures have been implemented effectively by netsmen in the Filey Bay gill net fishery. The RSPB is working to reduce seabird bycatch at local, national and global levels. Work with the RSPB to undertake the following measures: Medium to low priority 72 Investigate the feasibility and benefits of introducing net modifications to reduce numbers of birds caught. Undertake training for fishermen in the safe 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Ref Fishery SEA Framework Objective Issues identified during the Assessment Recommendations Priority NIFCA Comments release of seabirds and other species from nets, and the importance of net attendance (this could increase survival rates of those animals that do get caught) 5 SEA Objective 4: Assess impacts on species Bait digging is common practice along the coast. Such activity can cause effects on species such as seabirds, and may affect species within designated sites. Natural England has byelaws for the Lindisfarne National Nature Reserve which prevents the gathering of marine organisms from within the reserve; Northumberland County Council has a byelaw which prevents bait digging in areas of Boulmer Haven; and the National Trust have a bait digging byelaw at Newton Haven. 6 Investigate the effects of bait digging on protected and non-protected species. - Work with other organisations such as Natural England and Northumberland County Council to look at the effectiveness of bait digging byelaws, and whether these should be strengthened or extended based on the outcomes of the investigation into effects. SEA Objective 15: Maintain and enhance fishing communities Opportunity to realise increased socio-economic and environmental benefits through eco-labelling. Investigate opportunities to pilot an ecolabelling scheme. This is not a current priority for NIFCA and will not be taken forward at this time 7 Drift Net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout SEA Objective 2: Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks SEA Objective 15: Maintain and enhance fishing communities The MaCAA states that it is not an IFCA’s responsibility to manage migratory fish. However, DEFRA says that IFCA’s are responsible for “Marine organisms” in inshore waters (including sea fisheries resources). IFCA is meeting with DEFRA lawyers to resolve this issue. If the meeting results in NIFCA having additional responsibilities then appropriate management, recording and monitoring will need to be implemented in relation to this fishery. The Environment Agency manage and record landings data for this fishery 8 Trawl Fishery for Nephrops SEA Objective 2: Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks A large number of Nephrops are caught outside the district and landed within the NIFCA district. NIFCA do not currently monitor or record this. There is also limited knowledge of stocks, boat numbers and landings within the district. Data is collected by other organisations but NIFCA don’t monitor this. There is also uncertainty over the relationship between international advice and stocks at Farne Deeps and inside the district. Better information and links are needed with other organisations to monitor Nephrops caught outside the district but landed in the district. Activity is currently too low. Therefore, a study will not be undertaken as a priority Conduct study into Nephrops stocks biomass within the district, and compare with international advice and stocks at Farne Deeps. The MMO monitor and record this fishery There is a lack of Functional Unit management as recommended by ICES. Although this is not a direct IFCA management issue, it is a wider ‘big picture’ issue which needs addressing. It raises an important issue about the overall relationship While NIFCA couldn’t implement functional unit management, they could promote it when asked (or proactively) to contribute to sustainable fishing SEA Objective 15: Maintain and enhance fishing communities 9 SEA Objective 2: Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks SEA Objective 15: Maintain and enhance 73 Monitor and record boat numbers and landings within the district. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx This is not currently being taken forward by NIFCA Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Ref Fishery SEA Framework Objective fishing communities Issues identified during the Assessment 10 SEA Objective 3: Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance The main bycatch issue associated with this fishery is juvenile white fish, particularly cod and whiting. The bycatch of non-target species is not currently being regulated by NIFCA. Conduct a study to investigate bycatch rates, and the effects of bycatch on seals, seabirds, and other non-target species. Activity is very low and occurs outside the EMS and MCZ sites. Therefore, this is not a current priority for NIFCA. 11 SEA Objective 4: Assess impacts on species There is a knowledge gap on effects of the trawl fishery for Nephrops on habitats and species Collect data on habitats and species within the fishery area. Conduct study into the effects of this fishery on the identified habitats and species. This is not currently being taken forward by NIFCA This fishery is currently just one fisherman. The fisherman’s vessel is checked by NIFCA and the data are recorded in the database and permit return form. However, there is still a lack of knowledge about the fishery, for example: Put procedures in place to monitor this fishery to record the answers to the questions raised, and gain a better understating and knowledge of the fishery to enable better management of potential effects. - Gillnet Fishery for Lobster SEA Objective 2: Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks SEA Objective 3: Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance SEA Objective 13: Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety Priority NIFCA Comments between the duty of the NIFCA to its local stocks, and the co-related duty of Cefas, Defra and the EU to the wider stock picture. SEA Objective 5: Assess impacts on habitats 12 Recommendations How often does the fisherman go out? Rate of bycatch? Landings (unclear if he is reporting his returns)? Number and area of nets used? Health & safety procedures and records? Is anyone else doing this type of fishery? 13 SEA Objective 3: Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance SEA Objective 4: Assess impacts on species SEA Objective 5: Assess impacts on habitats Although currently this fishery consists of one fishermen (that is known), there is potential for other people to undertake this kind of fishing. Fishing effort is not regulated (i.e. there is no cap on shellfish fishing effort). The byelaws don’t cover effort (number of nets, area). The fishery mainly takes place within the SAC. Potential for effects including: Effects of nets on the rocky reef habitat and species in the SAC; and Conduct a study to investigate the effects of nets on the SAC habitat and species, and bycatch. If the results of the study show significant negative effects then development and implementation of a byelaw regulating effort e.g. number and area of nets will be considered. Bycatch issues in the SAC. 14 74 Hand Gathering Fishery for SEA Objective 2: Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks Baseline information is required to understand the number of winkles captured as there are currently no historic data. Once baseline information is Conduct study to establish baseline information on numbers of winkles captured. This information should be updated each 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx - Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Ref Fishery SEA Framework Objective Issues identified during the Assessment Recommendations Winkles SEA Objective 3: Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance SEA Objective 4: Assess impacts on species known decisions for further action can be taken. Short-term negative effect on other species from disturbance. Negative effects can be minimised through a code of conduct. year. Based on the results of the initial baseline study develop management actions as required (Action Plan).These may include: The main source of waste associated with this hand gathering is from tourists who leave behind litter who have picked and cooked winkles on the shoreline for recreational purposes. This impact is a short-term negligible negative effect and is seasonal. Effects can be mitigated through a code of conduct to communicate the requirement to remove all waste. There is currently on-going communication with the local council who is responsible for waste collection and management in the area. Permit for hand gathering of winkles; SEA Objective 11: Avoid discharges to sea / waste to the marine environment Priority NIFCA Comments Restrictions (bag limits) for personal use; and Code of Conduct (this can be prepared without the baseline information and should be done as best practice) – raise awareness to tourists, requirement to remove all waste, effects on other habitats and species from disturbance and litter. 15 SEA Objective 7: Identify, plan, manage, and adapt for climate change Potential to improve knowledge on how winkles adapt to sea temperature change by gathering baseline data. Take on an MSc student to undertake a study into how winkles adapt to sea temperature change, and use the results to determine future management requirements. Although this is relevant to adapting to climate change this research is not a current priority for NIFCA. 16 SEA Objective 9: Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets Potential disturbance/damage to archaeological or historic features as a result of human disturbance from hand gathering. Identify archaeological and historic features within hand gathering areas, and monitor potential future listed features, to identify if any action needs to be taken to protect historic assets in areas where hand gathering takes place. This could be included in the Code of Conduct. This is not currently being taken forward by NIFCA SEA Objective 3: Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance SEA Objective 4: Assess impacts on species SEA Objective 5: Assess impacts on habitats Short-term negative effect on other species from disturbance. Negative effects can be minimised through a code of conduct. Monitoring of feature. Conduct study to establish baseline information on numbers of mussels captured. This information should be updated each year Commercial fishery doesn’t exist anymore (partially due to supply problem through NE setting a quota, and market issues including a fall in quality of the mussels) SEA Objective 9: Protect and enhance historic and cultural assets Potential disturbance/damage to archaeological or historic features as a result of human disturbance from hand gathering. Identify archaeological and historic features within hand gathering areas, and monitor potential future listed features, to identify if any action needs to be taken to protect historic assets in areas where hand gathering takes place. This could be included in the This is not currently being taken forward by NIFCA 17 18 75 Hand Gathering Fishery for Mussels 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Ref Fishery SEA Framework Objective Issues identified during the Assessment Recommendations Priority NIFCA Comments Code of Conduct. 19 Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel 20 21 Pacific Oyster Farm SEA Objective 3: Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance The existing byelaw only relates to gillnets within close proximity, does not apply to those with a migratory licence. The development of a code of conduct could help reduce the negative impacts on bycatch associated with gillnet fishing, in particular for those not covered by the byelaw. Conduct study into the rates and effects of bycatch of birds. Use the results of the study to identify if a new byelaw is needed for the gillnet fishery for finfish. Potential opportunity for a health & safety assessment to be required under the new byelaw. The regulation on minimum landing sizes set by MMO will no longer exist in the near future. NIFCA want to increase the minimum landing sizes for cod to improve sustainable fishing of this species. Investigate the benefits on fish stocks if minimum landing size for cod is increased. Ensure there is a smooth and clear transition from the MMO regulation to the NIFCA regulation on minimum landing sizes through development and communication of clear guidelines and requirements. SEA Objective 2: Sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks A Crassostrea gigas (Pacific oyster) farm is located within the NIFCA district on Ross Sand. This is a private mariculture operation. At the national level, regulation of mariculture operations appears to be inconsistent. The fact that the operation at Ross Sands is a private fishery adds another layer of complexity as regulatory powers seem to be reduced in such cases. Historic consents for the operation at Ross Sands have been granted in the context of the operation lying within a SSSI. So, SSSI consent was sought and granted in 2007. Since consent was first granted in 2007, more evidence has come to light on the likelihood of natural establishment of this invasive species in relation to rising sea surface temperatures. It was previously thought, when impacts to the many nature conservation designations in the area of Ross Sands were considered, that water temperatures were too cold to pose a threat. Recent confirmation that C. gigas has naturally settled on the Solway Coast and the Firth of Forth suggest that the impacts at Ross Sands may need Agree and define NIFCA’s role in the management regime of the privately owned Crassostrea gigas operation at Ross Sands. This should be undertaken in light of MaCAA, and in consultation with Natural England, CEFAS, and the private operator. SEA Objective 4: Assess impacts on species SEA Objective 5: Assess impacts on habitats SEA Objective 6: Preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species Medium / Low NIFCA do not regulate finfish. Vessels with a migratory licence are regulated by the Environment Agency. An alternative to a new byelaw is to develop a Code of Conduct for the fishery to help reduce negative effects on bycatch, in particular for vessels with a migratory licence. SEA Objective 16: Protect and promote fishing tourism SEA Objective 3: Assess impact of bycatch, mortality rates, and disturbance 76 Illegal nets can bycatch birds. An assessment needs to be done to identify if a byelaw is needed for the gillnet fishery for white fish. The severities of any issues need to be identified so a correct level of response can be developed. If it is decided that NIFCA do have a clear role in the management of the C. gigas farm then a management framework needs to be developed and implemented. Management issues and opportunities should include (but are not limited to): There is an opportunity to manage any potential residual effects of the Oyster farm in relation to the wider ecosystem; Currently there is limited information/ monitoring for the Pacific Oyster Farm, data would facilitate informed discussions as to the appropriate management regime; and Further information is needed to 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx The Pacific Oyster Farm cannot be a priority for the NIFCA at this point. The NIFCA will continue to survey the mussel bed, and because any actual spread of C.gigas outside the farm might affect NIFCA waters it agrees that a management framework should be developed by an appropriate responsible body. NIFCA do have some jurisdiction over private fisheries (from the MaCAA) but in this case as the farm is within the Lindisfarne SSSI overall jurisdiction lies with Natural England and Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Ref Fishery SEA Framework Objective Issues identified during the Assessment to be reviewed. Consents also need to be reviewed in light of extensions to the operation since consent was first granted. The impacts to native mussel beds and the knock on effect this has to feeding birds are well documented. The mussel beds adjacent to the operation at Ross Sands are a European protected feature, as are the birds that feed on them. Recommendations understand the impact of the Pacific Oyster farm on the wider ecosystem, is there potential removal of food stocks from the mussel population. Although regulation has been provided by Natural England in the past, the MaCAA now places a clear duty on IFCAs to manage the exploitation of sea fisheries resources, including cultivated species. If the management regime for the operation at Ross Sands needs to be reviewed, then it may now fall to NIFCA to carry this out. MaCAA suggests it would for a non-privately owned fishery but the situation needs to be checked for the private fishery. 77 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Priority NIFCA Comments NIFCA cannot itself devote further resources to this issue. Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 8 Monitoring 8.1 Links to Other Plans and Programmes The NIFCA Fisheries Management Regime has been assessed at a strategic level. There are currently no specific development plans for alterations and construction of new infrastructure, buildings or sites. If NIFCA decide this is required in the future then development is likely to be subject to the formal planning process and may require an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) under the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (as amended). Requirements for EIA will be determined on a project by project basis by undertaking a formal EIA screening procedure. As part of the EIA process more detailed project specific baseline, effects and mitigation measures will be developed. The NIFCA regime supports several local, regional and national plans and programmes by contributing to sustainable fisheries that support local communities and economies, and protect the marine environment. It will have a direct link with other fisheries and marine plans and legislation, such as supporting the Marine and Coastal Access Act, Sea Fisheries Act, Sea Fish Conservation Act, and Northumberland Coast EMS Management Plan. It will also indirectly support national and local plans such as Northumberland Area Tourism Management Plan, Northumberland Economic Strategy, Sustainable Communities Strategy, and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations. The NIFCA fisheries management regime will also have links to European plans and policies (see Appendix A). In particular, implications of the new Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) should be noted. A new CFP became effective from 1st January 2014. The CFP is a set of rules for managing European fishing fleets and for conserving fish stocks. Designed to manage a common resource, it gives all European fishing fleets equal access to EU waters and fishing grounds, and allows fishermen to compete fairly. The principal aim of fisheries management under the CFP is to ensure high long-term fishing yields for all stocks by 2015 where possible, and at the latest by 2020. This is referred to as maximum sustainable yield. Another increasingly important aim is to reduce unwanted catches and wasteful practices to the minimum or avoid them altogether, through the gradual introduction of a landing obligation. The landing obligation will be introduced between 2015 and 2019 for all commercial fisheries (species under total allowable catches or under minimum sizes) in European waters. Under the landing obligation all catches have to be kept on board, landed, and counted against quotas. European Directive 2008/56/EC on establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy - known as the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) outlines a transparent, legislative framework for an ecosystem-based approach to the management of human activities which supports the sustainable use of marine goods and services. The overarching goal of the Directive is to achieve ‘Good Environmental Status’ (GES) by 2020 across Europe’s marine environment. 8.2 Monitoring Proposals 8.2.1 Introduction Monitoring the significant negative effects of implementing the plan or programme is an essential on-going element of the SEA process. Monitoring assists in evaluating the performance of the plan and as such assists in determining whether the identified sustainability objectives are being achieved; allows early identification of unforeseen adverse effects; and thus appropriate remedial action can be taken to deal with 78 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation any issues or problem areas. The DCLG guidance states that it is inappropriate to monitor everything and monitoring proposals should be focused on the following areas that: Indicate a likely breach of international, national or local legislation, recognised guidelines or standards; May give rise to irreversible environmental, economic or social damage, with a view to identifying trends before such damage occurs; and Were subject to uncertainty in the SEA and where monitoring would enable prevention or mitigation measures to be taken. In the context of the NIFCA fisheries management regime the regime has already been implemented for a number of years. The SEA has identified potential negative effects of the current regime, and it is these areas that the monitoring proposals focus on. A number of actions have been recommended as a result of the SEA process, and an Action Plan has been developed (see section 7.2). Monitoring is also focussed on the Action Plan in terms of monitoring progress of actions. Monitoring proposals for the next five to ten years have been developed for the NIFCA fisheries management regime. Monitoring will be undertaken by NIFCA and reviewed yearly. Two monitoring frameworks have been developed for the NIFCA fisheries management regime: SEA Effects Monitoring (Table 8.1) – this presents monitoring proposals that were developed as a result of negative or uncertain effects identified during the assessment process; and Action Plan Monitoring (Table 8.2) – this presents a framework for monitoring the progress of the Action Plan. 8.2.2 SEA Effects Monitoring Table 8.1 presents monitoring proposals that were developed as a result of negative or uncertain effects identified during the assessment process. Monitoring has focussed on the following: Issues that can be realistically monitored by NIFCA, or obtained easily from other organisations; Instances of negative or uncertain effects in the cumulative assessment. Monitoring is based on the overall effects of the management regime relating to each fishery rather than effects of individual byelaws and regulations because although one byelaw may have negative effects, another one in the regime may have positive effects; and Effects in relation to the Pacific Oyster Farm are not included in Table 8.1. The actions resulting from the assessment are included in the Action Plan and specific monitoring regarding these is included in Table 8.2. A lack of information on this fishery, and confusion over responsibility and management framework for the fishery make the Pacific Oyster Farm hard to monitor until actions have been undertaken to resolve these issues. 79 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Table 8.1: SEA Effects Monitoring Framework Fishery SEA Objective Issue Indicator Responsibility Timescale Dredge Fishery for Scallops 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Decrease in number of vessels % change in number of fishing vessels per annum NIFCA Annual Trawl Fishery for Nephrops 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Uncertainty in assessment Ecological status of water bodies. Environment Agency, MMO Annual Chemical status of water bodies. Estimated number of fuel spills per annum (including approximate litres spilled in each incident). E.coli standards for water classification 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Uncertainty in assessment Number and severity of reported accidents Marine Accident Organisation Annual 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Uncertainty in assessment % change in number and size of fishing vessels per annum NIFCA Annual Gillnet Fishery for Lobster 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Uncertainty in assessment % change in number and size of fishing vessels per annum NIFCA Annual Hand gathering for mussels 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Uncertainty - Baseline information is required to understand the number of mussels captured as there are currently no historic data. Estimate/record landings of mussels NIFCA Annual 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Uncertainty - Baseline data are required to determine if this fishing method is having an ecological effect on species in statutory and nonstatutory areas Number of incidents involving injury or death of protected species (including numbers affected). Natural England, MMO Annual 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Uncertainty - Baseline information is required to understand the number of winkles captured as there is currently no historic data. There is also difficulty in determining the difference between recreational and commercial fishing for winkles. Estimate/record landings of winkles NIFCA Annual 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the Uncertainty - Baseline data is required Number of incidents involving injury or Natural Annual Hand gathering for winkles 80 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Fishery SEA Objective quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Issue to determine if this fishing method is having an ecological effect on species in statutory and non-statutory areas. Indicator death of protected species (including numbers affected). Responsibility England, MMO Timescale Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Uncertainty - The effect of minimum landing sizes is uncertain as those set by the MMO will soon be removed due to the discard ban of quota species. However this is not thought to have a potential negative effect as the harvest will be managed by other regulations aimed at achieving maximum sustainable yield. Estimate population of finfish target species using CEFAS data and assessments, and estimate fishing mortality (or its proxy) to be less than the target reference point for exploitation (or its proxy). NIFCA Every five years NIFCA are to create their own minimum landing sizes. 81 Estimate proportion of stock with full reproductive capacity using CEFAS data. Assess landings of finfish species through MMO statistics. Estimate the proportion of stock or species that are harvested at close to Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY). 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 8.2.3 Action Plan Monitoring Table 8.2 presents a framework for monitoring the progress of the Action Plan (see section 7.2 for Action Plan). Action Plan Monitoring Key Priority Key High Action to be taken in the next 0-6 months Medium Action to be undertaken in the next 6-12 months Low Action to be undertaken in the next 1-2 years Progress Not Started O On-going Awaiting data from others Status On programme Action outstanding 82 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Table 8.2: Action Plan Monitoring Framework Fishery Action Priority Timescale Responsibility Interaction with other Organisations Progress General Develop a clear and concise set of postcards or flashcards with key requirements in visual format where possible using key words. Medium 6-12 months NIFCA Those relating to a technical subject should be reviewed by an appropriate expert - General Work with the RSPB to undertake the following measures: Medium 6-12 months NIFCA RSPB - 6-12 months NIFCA - Investigate the feasibility and benefits of introducing net modifications to reduce numbers of birds caught. Status Comments Fishermen Undertake training for fishermen in the safe release of seabirds and other species from nets, and the importance of net attendance (this could increase survival rates of those animals that do get caught). General Investigate the effects of bait digging on protected and nonprotected species. Medium Natural England Northumberland County Council Work with other organisations such as Natural England and Northumberland County Council to look at the effectiveness of bait digging byelaws, and whether these should be strengthened or extended based on the outcomes of the investigation into effects. Gillnet Fishery for Lobster Put procedures in place to monitor this fishery to record the answers to the questions raised, and gain a better understating and knowledge of the fishery to enable better management of potential effects. Low 1-2 years NIFCA None - Gillnet Fishery for Lobster Conduct a study to investigate the effects of nets on the SAC habitat and species, and bycatch. Low 1-2 years NIFCA Natural England - Hand Gathering Fishery for Winkles Conduct study to establish baseline information on numbers of winkles captured. This information should be updated each year. Based on the results of the initial baseline study develop management actions as required (Action Plan).These may include: Medium 6-12 months NIFCA None - 83 If the results of the study show significant negative effects then development and implementation of a byelaw regulating effort e.g. number and area of nets will be considered. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Fishery Action Priority Timescale Responsibility Interaction with other Organisations Progress Status Comments Permit for hand gathering of winkles; Restrictions (bag limits) for personal use; and Code of Conduct (this can be prepared without the baseline information and should be done as best practice) – raise awareness to tourists, requirement to remove all waste, effects on other habitats and species from disturbance and litter. Hand Gathering Fishery for Mussels Conduct study to establish baseline information on numbers of mussels captured. This information should be updated each year. Low 1-2 years NIFCA None - Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel Conduct study into the rates and effects of bycatch of birds. Use the results of the study to identify if a new byelaw is needed for the gillnet fishery for finfish. Potential opportunity for a health & safety assessment to be required under the new byelaw. Low 1-2 years NIFCA RSPB Environment Agency - An alternative to a new byelaw is to develop a Code of Conduct for the fishery to help reduce negative effects on bycatch, in particular for vessels with a migratory licence. Investigate the benefits on fish stocks if minimum landing size for cod is increased. Ensure there is a smooth and clear transition from the MMO regulation to the NIFCA regulation on minimum landing sizes through development and communication of clear guidelines and requirements. 84 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 9 References Aftergood, S. (2011) A study of recreational sea angling data and perceptions of distributions and changing abundances of certain warm water fish species along the eastern UK coast Archer, M, Watson, R., Denton, J.W. (2001) Fish Waste Production in the United Kingdom - The Quantities Produced and Opportunities for Better Utilisation. Seafish Report No. SR537 M Archer, M, Watson, R, Garrett, A, Large, M. (2005) Strategic Framework for Seafood Waste Management. Report by Seafish Browne, A.B. (2010) An Insight into the Fisheries throughout the District of the Authority’s predecessor body Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee in 2010. [on-line].[cited 19/12/2012] Browne, A.B. (2011) Combined Officers Report for the Quarter Ending 30 June 2011 Cefas (2011) Cefas Stock Status 2011: European lobster (Homarus gammarus) in Northumberland & Durham. [cited 18/12/2012] Available from World Wide Web: http://www.cefas.defra.gov.uk/media/580090/lobster%20northumberland%202011.pdf Chapman, C. J. (1982) Nephrops tagging experiments in Scottish waters 1977-1979. ICES CM 1982/K:22 Curtis, H.C., Graham, K., Rossiter, T. (2006) Operations for improving fuel efficiency in the UK fishing fleet Daan, N., Gislason, H., Pope, J.G. and Rice, J.C. (2005) Changes in the North Sea fish community: evidence of indirect effects of fishing? ICES Journal of Marine Science 62:177–188 DEFRA et al. (2005) Securing the Benefits - The joint UK response to the Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit Net Benefits report on the future of the fishing industry in the UK DEFRA (2007) Sustainable Production and Consumption of fish and shellfish Environmental Impact Analysis. Reference 9S6182/R/303383/Edin Dulvey, N.K et al. (2008) Climate change and deepening of the North Sea fish assemblage: a biotic indicator of warming seas. Journal of Applied Ecology. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01488.x Environment Agency & DEFRA (2009) Water for life and livelihoods. River basin management plan Northumbria River Basin District. [cited 10/01/2013]. Available from World Wide Web: http://a0768b4a8a31e106d8b050dc802554eb38a24458b98ff72d550b.r19.cf3.rackcdn.com/gene0910bsrw-e-e.pdf Environment Agency (2010) River Basin Management Plan, Northumbria River Basin District European Commission (2013) Energy Efficiency – Fisheries Green, J. (2007) Stock Assessment of the Littoral Mussel (Mytilus edulis) Beds on Fenham Flats (Holy Island) 85 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation IFC (2007) Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines – Fish Processing Institute for European Environmental Policy (Brown, J. and Hjerp, P.) (2006) The Application of Strategic Environmental Assessment in the UK Fisheries Sector Kaiser, M.J., Clarke, K.R. Hinz, H., Austen, M.C.V., Somerfield, P.J., Karakassis, I. (2006) Global analysis of response and recovery of benthic biota to fishing. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 311: 1-14, 2006 MCCIP (2008) Marine Climate Change Impacts Annual Report Card, 2007-2008, Marine Climate Change Impacts Partnership. [cited 22/01/2013]. Available from World Wide Web: http://www.mccip.org.uk/arc/2007/PDF/ARC2007.pdf Mott MacDonald (2013) Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment: Scoping Report Mott MacDonald (2008) Pilot Shellfish Fisheries Strategic Environmental Assessment: Scoping Report Neal, K.J. and Wilson, E. (2008) Cancer pagurus. Edible crab. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 18/012/2012] Available from World Wide Web: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/species/Cancerpagurus.htm North East health Profile (2010) [cited 18/12/2012]. Available from World Wide Web: www.healthprofiles.info Northumberland Coast AONB & Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast EMS Management Plan 2009-2014 Northumberland IFCA (J. Green and J. Royle) (March 2013) Stock Assessment of the Littoral Mussel (Mytilus edulis) Beds on Fenham Flats (Holy Island) Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee (NSFC) (2009) Response to the European Commission Green Paper on Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. [online] [cited 19/12/2012]. Available from World Wide Web: http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/reform/docs/northumberland_sea_fisheries_committee_en.pdf Northumberland Wildlife Trust (2012) Variegated Scallop. [online] [cited 18/12/2012]. Available from World Wide Web: http://www.nwt.org.uk/species/variegated-scallop Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (2005) A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit (2004) Net Benefits, a Sustainable and Profitable Future for UK Fishing Reise, K., Gollasch, S. and Wolff, W.J. (1998) Introduced marine species of the North Sea coasts. Helgoländer Meeresuntersuchungen. Volume 52, Issue 3-4, p 219-234 Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (2004) Turning the Tide: Addressing the Impact of Fisheries on the Marine Environment SNH (2005) A handbook for environmental assessment. Prepared for SNH by David Tyldesley and Associates, Edinburgh, 2nd Edition. p 277 86 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation The Journal (2009) New strategy for Northumberland coastline. [cited 21/01/2012] Available from World Wide Web: http://seahouses.journallive.co.uk/2009/10/new-strategy-for-northumberlan.html Thomas, I. (2011) The Economic Impact of Tourism in Northumberland in 2011. Newcastle Gateshead Initiative, North East England UK Parliament (2012) Wet fish and damp squids. [cited 09/01/2013]. Available from World Wide Web: http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/olympic-britain/food-and-agriculture/wet-fish-anddamp-squids/ University of Hull. dna. Towards a Sustainable Coast Walmsley S.A. and Pawson, M.G., (2007) The coastal fisheries of England and Wales, Part V: a review of their status 2005–6. Sci. Ser. Tech Rep., Cefas Lowestoft Watson, K. (2012) Safety Issues in the Commercial Fishing Industry Wilding, C and Heard, J. (2004) Gadus morhua. Atlantic cod. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 18/12/2012]. Available from World Wide Web: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesinformation.php?speciesID=3359 Wilson, E. (2008) Homarus gammarus. Common lobster. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 18/12/2012] Available from World Wide Web: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/species/Homarusgammarus.htm Wilson, E. (2008) Necora puber. Velvet swimming crab. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 18/12/2012]. Available from World Wide Web: http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesinformation.php?speciesID=3858 87 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Appendices Appendix A. Appendix B. Appendix C. Appendix D. Appendix E. 88 Plans and Programmes Review _______________________________________________________ 89 Current NIFCA Byelaws ____________________________________________________________ 110 Baseline Information _______________________________________________________________ 118 Scoping Consultation Responses _____________________________________________________ 146 NIFCA Appraisal Tables ____________________________________________________________ 174 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Appendix A. Plans and Programmes Review 89 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Table A.1: Plans and Programmes Review Plan Title Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets Implications for the Regime and SEA Ramsar Convention on wetlands of International Importance (1971) Provides the framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources. The aim is "the conservation and wise use of all wetlands through local and national actions and international cooperation, as a contribution towards achieving sustainable development throughout the world". The Convention uses a broad definition of the types of wetlands covered, including lakes and rivers, swamps and marshes, wet grasslands and peatlands, oases, estuaries, deltas and tidal flats, near-shore marine areas, mangroves and coral reefs, and human-made sites such as fish ponds, rice paddies, reservoirs, and salt pans. The Northumberland Coast and Lindisfarne are designated Ramsar sites. The Fisheries Management regime / plan should aim to protect these areas. Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change (1997) The protocol was ratified in 2004. The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement linked to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The major feature of the Kyoto Protocol is that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European community for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The Kyoto Protocol requires the EU to cut its greenhouse gas emissions to 8% below 1990 levels by 2008-2012. The Regime will need to take into account the impact of changing sea temperatures on marine environment. UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (1992) The stated objective is to achieve stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. The parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. The Regime will need to take into account the impact of changing sea temperatures on marine environment. Berne Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (1979) The aims are to conserve wild flora and fauna and their natural habitats and to promote European cooperation. Particular importance is placed on the need to protect endangered natural habitats and endangered vulnerable species, including migratory species The Regime will need to take into account the presence of protected species and designated sites. Bonn Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (1979) The Convention aims to conserve terrestrial, aquatic and avian migratory species throughout their range. The Regime will need to take into account the presence of any migratory species and their habitats. UNESCO Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and National Heritage (1972) The Convention defines the kind of natural or cultural sites which can be considered for inscription on the World Heritage List. The Convention sets out the duties of States Parties in identifying potential sites and their role in protecting and preserving them. By signing the Convention, each country pledges to conserve not only the World Heritage sites situated on its territory, but also to protect its national heritage. The States Parties are encouraged to integrate the protection of the cultural and natural heritage into regional planning programmes, set up staff and services at their sites, undertake scientific and technical conservation research and adopt measures which give this heritage a function in the day-to-day life of the community. Northumberland has rich heritage. Through its SEA, the Regime will consider potential effects arising from its implementation on heritage assets and their setting. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) The Law of the Sea Convention defines the rights and responsibilities of nations in their use of the world’s oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the environment, and the management of marine natural resources. The Convention concluded in 1982 replaced four 1958 treaties. UNCLOS came into force in 1994. To date 155 countries and the European Community have joined in the Convention. Article 303(1) of the convention sets out the duty to protect objects of an archaeological and historical nature found in all sea The project should encourage the sustainable use of resources and protect and enhance biodiversity. International 90 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets areas. Implications for the Regime and SEA United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement (UNFSA) (1995) The Agreement was adopted on 4 August 1995 by the United Nations Conference on Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks. The 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement is an elaboration of the provisions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982 UN Convention) dealing with conservation and management of straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks. In particular the Agreement provides for the implementation of Articles 63 and 64 and as appropriate the sections of Part VII of the 1982 Convention. Straddling fish stocks are those that straddle the boundary of a State's Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and the high seas (some stocks straddle ‘out’ of an EEZ while others straddle ‘into’ an EEZ) while highly migratory fish stocks are those that generally roam over large distances and may be found in numerous EEZ jurisdictions and the high seas. Highly Migratory Species are defined by a listing in Annex 1 of the 1982 UN Convention. The Agreement can be summarised as follows in that it: elaborates general principles concerning conservation and management of straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks; applies the concept of the Precautionary Approach to the conservation and management of these stocks; emphasises the special role of regional fisheries management organisations in the conservation and management of straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks; elaborates upon the obligation of states to cooperate in the conservation and management of straddling fish stocks and highly migratory fish stocks. This includes a duty upon States not to authorise vessels to fish for such fish stocks unless the State is party to, or co-operates with, any sub-regional or regional fisheries management organisation or arrangement established and which has competence to establish conservation and management measures for the stock concerned; elaborates upon the obligations of states with respect to vessels flying their flag on the high seas; introduces innovative enforcement provisions for the high seas; and introduces provisions with respect to the requirements of developing states. The project should encourage the sustainable use of resources and protect and enhance biodiversity. Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) The CBD aims to ensure the conservation of biodiversity (i.e. the complete variety of life on Earth), its sustainable use, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources. The Convention thus has a potentially huge impact, but relies heavily on action at the national level and under other related treaties and fora to achieve its objectives. The project should encourage the sustainable use of resources and protect and enhance biodiversity. National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans are the principal instruments for implementing the Convention at the national level (Article 6). The Convention requires countries to prepare a national biodiversity strategy (or equivalent instrument) and to ensure that this strategy is mainstreamed into the planning and activities of all those sectors whose activities can have an impact (positive and negative) on biodiversity (the UK Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan, and the Local BAPs are referred to under the national and local sections of this table). FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries This is a comprehensive, albeit voluntary, code of practice that is widely respected in the international fishing community. It is potentially the most helpful code for fisheries managers, because although it is voluntary, it sets out many of the desired objectives. The project will review this Code with a view to addressing relevant issues for the NIFCA district. OSPAR Convention (1992) The 1992 OSPAR Convention contains a general obligation to collaborate in regular monitoring and assessment of the state of the marine environment in the maritime area. Annex IV to the Convention provides for cooperation in monitoring programmes, joint quality assurance arrangements, the development of scientific assessment tools, such as modelling, remote sensing and risk assessment strategies, and the preparation of assessments. The project should encourage the sustainable use of resources and protect and enhance biodiversity. MARPOL 73/78 Marpol 73/78 is the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution From Ships, 1973 as modified by The regime should aim to reduce pollution 91 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets the Protocol of 1978. ("Marpol" is short for marine pollution and 73/78 short for the years 1973 and 1978.) Marpol 73/78 is one of the most important international marine environmental conventions. It was designed to minimize pollution of the seas, including dumping, oil and exhaust pollution. Its stated object is: to preserve the marine environment through the complete elimination of pollution by oil and other harmful substances and the minimization of accidental discharge of such substances. Implications for the Regime and SEA (including emissions to air and to water) from vessels which operate within the district. This sets limits on sulphur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from ship exhausts and prohibits deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances. The annex includes a global cap of 4.5% m/m on the sulphur content of fuel oil and calls on IMO to monitor the worldwide average sulphur content of fuel. European Common Fisheries Policy (2014) A new CFP became effective from 1st January 2014. The CFP is a set of rules for managing European fishing fleets and for conserving fish stocks. Designed to manage a common resource, it gives all European fishing fleets equal access to EU waters and fishing grounds, and allows fishermen to compete fairly. The principal aim of fisheries management under the CFP is to ensure high long-term fishing yields for all stocks by 2015 where possible, and at the latest by 2020. This is referred to as maximum sustainable yield. Another increasingly important aim is to reduce unwanted catches and wasteful practices to the minimum or avoid them altogether, through the gradual introduction of a landing obligation. The landing obligation will be introduced between 2015 and 2019 for all commercial fisheries (species under total allowable catches or under minimum sizes) in European waters. Under the landing obligation all catches have to be kept on board, landed, and counted against quotas. The project should encourage adherence to the CFP to conserve fisheries resources in the Northumberland area. Electronic Recording and Reporting System (ERS) Council Regulation 1224/2009 requires fishing vessels to record and report catch data electronically. This began in January 2010 for vessels of 24 metres and greater length and the rest of the fleet will follow (by Jan 2012). The Electronic recording and reporting system (ERS) is used to record, report, process, store and send fisheries data (catch, landing, sales and transhipment). The project will adhere to the Scheme to gain a better understanding of the fisheries resources in the Northumberland area. EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020: Our Life Insurance, Our Natural Capital (2011) Strategy to halt the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services in the EU by 2020. There are six main targets and 20 actions to help Europe reach its goal. The six targets cover: There are several European, national and local designated sites of nature conservation within the NIFCA district. The Regime should aim to protect these areas and where possible contribute to biodiversity. The Regime should promote biodiversity where possible by including policies which aim to protect the environment from fisheries activities both commercial, leisure and recreational. Full implementation of EU nature legislation to protect biodiversity; Better protection for ecosystems, and more use of green infrastructure; More sustainable agriculture and forestry; Better management of fish stocks; Tighter controls on invasive alien species; and A bigger EU contribution to averting global biodiversity loss. The strategy is in line with two commitments made by EU leaders in March 2010. The first is the 2020 headline target: "Halting the loss of biodiversity and the degradation of ecosystem services in the EU by 2020, and restoring them in so far as feasible, while stepping up the EU contribution to averting global biodiversity loss"; the second is the 2050 vision: “By 2050, European Union biodiversity and the ecosystem services it provides – its natural capital – are protected, valued and appropriately restored for biodiversity's intrinsic value and for their essential contribution to human wellbeing and economic prosperity, and so that catastrophic changes caused by the loss of biodiversity are avoided.” EC Directive on the 92 The main aim of this Directive is to promote the maintenance of biodiversity, taking account of economic, There are several Natura 2000 sites in the NIFCA 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Conservation of Natural Habitats of Wild Fauna and Flora (92/43/EEC) Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets social, cultural and regional requirements. While the Directive makes a contribution to the general objective of sustainable development; it ensures the conservation of a wide range of rare, threatened or endemic species, including around 450 animals and 500 plants. Some 200 rare and characteristic habitat types are also targeted for conservation in their own right. The Directive provides for a ban on the downgrading of breeding and resting places for certain strictly protected animal species. Exceptions to the strict protection rules can be granted under very specific conditions. The Habitats Directive also establishes the EU wide Natura 2000 ecological network of protected areas. For these areas it provides a high level of safeguards against potentially damaging developments. Together with the Birds Directive, the Habitats Directive forms the backbone of EU nature protection legislation. Implications for the Regime and SEA district. The Regime should aim to protect these areas and where possible contribute to their biodiversity. EC Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds (2009/147/EC) Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds (this is the codified version of Directive 79/409/EEC as amended). This Directive ensures far-reaching protection for all of Europe's wild birds, identifying 194 species and sub-species among them as particularly threatened and in need of special conservation measures. There are a number of components to this scheme: Member States are required to designate Special Protection Areas (SPAs) for 194 particularly threatened species and all migratory bird species. SPAs are scientifically identified areas critical for the survival of the targeted species, such as wetlands. They are part of the Natura 2000 ecological network set up under the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC; A second component bans activities that directly threaten birds, such as the deliberate killing or capture of birds, the destruction of their nests and taking of their eggs, and associated activities such as trading in live or dead birds (with a few exceptions); and A third component establishes rules that limit the number of bird species that can be hunted (82 species and sub-species) and the periods during which they can be hunted. It also defines hunting methods which are permitted (e.g. non-selective hunting is banned). There are several SPAs within Northumberland, and many wild bird species breed and/or feed in the area, including migratory species. The NIFCA regime could contribute towards, or be influenced by certain provisions in the Directive as stated in the adjacent column. The main provisions of the Directive, which NIFCA could contribute towards, or may be influenced by, include: The maintenance of the populations of all wild bird species across their natural range (Article 2) with the encouragement of various activities to that end (Article 3); The identification and classification of Special Protection Areas (SPAs) for rare or vulnerable species listed in Annex I of the Directive, as well as for all regularly occurring migratory species (Article 4); The establishment of a general scheme of protection for all wild birds (Article 5); Prohibition of large-scale non-selective means of bird killing (Article 8); and Encouragement of certain forms of relevant research (Article 10 and Annex V). EC Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EEC) 93 The aim of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive is to protect more effectively the marine environment across Europe. It aims to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) of the EU's marine waters by 2020 and to protect the resource base upon which marine-related economic and social activities depend. The Directive enshrines in a legislative framework the ecosystem approach to the management of human activities having an impact on the marine environment, integrating the concepts of environmental protection and sustainable use. The Directive came into force on 15 July 2008, and was transposed into UK law via the Marine Strategy Regulations 2010. Key requirements of the Directive are: An assessment of the current state of UK seas by July 2012; A set of detailed characteristics of Good Environmental Status means for UK waters, and associated targets and indicators by July 2012; Establishment of a monitoring programme to measure progress toward Good Environmental Status by July 2014; and Establishment of a programme of The project will take this Directive into account. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets measures for achieving Good Environmental Status by 2016. Implications for the Regime and SEA EC Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EEC) The WFD has the following key aims: The regime should aim to enhance rather than diminish the status of aquatic environments. Expanding the scope of water protection to all waters, surface waters and groundwater; Achieving "good status" for all waters by a set deadline; Water management based on river basins; "Combined approach" of emission limit values and quality standards; Getting the prices right; Getting the citizen involved more closely; and Streamlining legislation. There are a number of objectives in respect of which the quality of water is protected. The key ones at European level are general protection of the aquatic ecology, specific protection of unique and valuable habitats, protection of drinking water resources, and protection of bathing water. Member States must aim to reach good chemical and ecological status in inland and coastal waters by 2015. EC Directive on Bathing Water (76/160/EEC) The overall objective of the Directive remains the protection of public health whilst bathing, but the revised Directive (into force 2006) also offers an opportunity to improve management practices at bathing waters and to standardise the information provided to bathers across Europe and aims to set more stringent water quality standards and also puts a stronger emphasis on beach management and public information. The regime isn’t directly concerned with bathing waters. However, the regime should take a holistic approach and consider any wider effects. The European Community Shellfish Waters Directive 2006/113/EC (the Directive) The aim of the EC Shellfish Waters Directive is to protect or improve shellfish waters in order to support shellfish life and growth, therefore contributing to the high quality of shellfish products directly edible by man. It sets physical, chemical and microbiological water quality requirements that designated shellfish waters must either comply with (‘mandatory’ standards) or endeavour to meet (‘guideline’ standards). The Directive is designed to protect the aquatic habitat of bivalve and gastropod molluscs, including oysters, mussels, cockles, scallops and clams. It does not cover shellfish crustaceans such as crabs, crayfish and lobsters. The original Shellfish Waters Directive (79/923/EC), adopted on 30 October 1979, was repealed by the codified Shellfish Waters Directive (2006/113/EC), adopted on 12 December 2006. Codification is a routine procedure that consolidates an existing Directive, with any amendments made since its introduction, into a single, more accessible document. The codified Directive maintains all existing measures which provide for the monitoring and assessment of shellfish waters and the setting of the water quality standards they are required to achieve. Any reference to the repealed Directive should be construed as referring to the new one. DEFRA is committed to improving water quality to a level where all designated shellfish waters can support at least ‘class B’ production areas. This is regarded as an achievable interim target towards meeting the guideline faecal coliform standard for shellfish flesh quality under the Shellfish Waters Directive, providing significant environmental benefits as well as benefits to the shellfish industry. The Directive will be repealed in 2013 by the EC Water Framework Directive. The project will take this Directive into account. Shellfish Hygiene Directive Shellfish harvesting areas are monitored to see that shellfish are fit for human consumption under the European Community (EC) Shellfish Hygiene Directive (91/492/EEC). Bivalve production areas are classified according to the level of treatment they require prior to their sale. Local authorities collect this information and send it to the Food Standards Agency who compiles a national picture. Standards are set in terms of concentrations of coliform bacteria and Salmonella. Harvesting sites are classified from A to C, where grade A sites do not require pre-treatment and grade C sites require intensive purification. The project will take this Directive into account. 94 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets Implications for the Regime and SEA EU Strategy on Climate Change This document sets out concrete steps to limit the effects of climate change and to reduce the risk of massive and irreversible disruptions to the planet. The EU and its Member States have confirmed their target to limit the global average temperature increase to 2° Celsius compared with pre-industrial levels, the point beyond which the impact of climatic change is believed to increase dramatically. The regime will plan for potential future impacts caused by climate change across the NIFCA area. EU Air Quality Directive (2008/50/EC) It establishes ambitious, cost-effective targets for improving human health and environmental quality up to 2020. The EU objective on air quality is "to achieve levels of air quality that do not result in unacceptable impacts on, and risks to, human health and the environment." The regime is unlikely to affect air quality; however, the project will take this Directive into account. The European Landscape Convention (2004) Also known as the Florence Convention, - promotes the protection, management and planning of European landscapes and organises European co-operation on landscape issues. The Northumberland Coast is an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. It is unlikely that the regime will affect the Northumberland landscape; however, the regime will consider any potential effects arising from its implementation on the character and special features of these areas. Charter for the Protection and Management of Archaeological Heritage (1990) The charter lays down principles relating to the different aspects of archaeological heritage management. These include the responsibilities of public authorities and legislators, principles relating to the professional performance of the processes of inventorisation, survey, excavation, documentation, research, maintenance, conservation, preservation, reconstruction, information, presentation, public access and use of the heritage, and the qualification of professionals involved in the protection of the archaeological heritage. The Charter states that policies for the protection of archaeological heritage should constitute an integral component of policies relating to land use, development, and planning as well as of cultural, environmental and educational policies. The NIFCA area has rich heritage. Fishing and fishing-related activities have the potential to directly affect our marine landscape and cultural heritage. The regime will consider potential effects arising from its implementation on archaeological assets and their setting and should aim to help protect this heritage. Convention for the Protection of Architectural Heritage of Europe (2009) The aim of this Convention is to protect the archaeological heritage as a source of the European collective memory and as an instrument for historical and scientific study. Sources are considered to be elements of the archaeological heritage all remains and objects and any other traces of mankind from past epochs, the preservation and study of which help to retrace the history of mankind and its relation with the natural environment, for which excavations or discoveries and other methods of research into mankind and the related environment are the main sources of information, and which are located in any area within the jurisdiction of the Parties. The archaeological heritage shall include structures, constructions, groups of buildings, developed sites, moveable objects, monuments of other kinds as well as their context, whether situated on land or under water. The NIFCA area has rich heritage. Fishing and fishing-related activities have the potential to directly affect our marine landscape and cultural heritage. The regime will consider potential effects arising from its implementation on archaeological assets and their setting and should aim to help protect this heritage. Mainstreaming Sustainable Development into EU Policies (2009) including Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development (2002) and EU Sustainable Development Strategy (2006) The Renewed EU Sustainable Development Strategy (2006) deals in an integrated way with economic, environmental and social issues and lists the following seven key challenges: Climate change and clean energy; Sustainable transport; Sustainable consumption and production; Conservation and management of natural resources; Public health; Social inclusion, demography and migration; and 7. Global poverty. The principles of sustainable development will be embedded into the regime through consideration of biodiversity, climate change, etc. The SEA will ensure that all aspects of sustainability (environmental, social and economic) are considered within the regime. 95 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets Implications for the Regime and SEA Regulation (EU) No 579/2011of 8 June 2011 Amending Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms and Council Regulation (EC) No 1288/2009 establishing transitional technical measures from 1 January 2010 to 30 June 2011 The project will take this Directive into account. Commission Regulation (EC) No 517/2008 of 10 June 2008 Laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 as regards the determination of the mesh size and assessing the thickness of twine of fishing nets The project will take this Directive into account. Commission Regulation (EC) No 146/2007 of 15 February 2007 Amending Regulation (EEC) No 3440/84 as regards conditions for certain trawls for vessels operating pump aboard systems The project will take this Directive into account. Council Regulation (EC) No 1342/2008 of 18 December 2008 Establishing a long-term plan for cod stocks and the fisheries exploiting those stocks and repealing Regulation (EC) No 423/2004 The project will take this Directive into account. National DEFRA, Fisheries 2027 Fisheries 2027 aims to: explain the changes in fisheries and fisheries management over the past thirty years and what we is now trying to be achieved; set out the balance to be struck between economic, social and environmental priorities; clarify, through nine vision statements, what is considered to be needed to deliver sustainability; identify the roles and responsibilities of different stakeholders in achieving sustainability; and summarise the economic, social and environmental benefits and costs of delivering the vision. The project should encourage the sustainable use of resources and protect and enhance biodiversity. Sea Fisheries Act 1967 (as amended in 1997) The Sea Fisheries (Shellfish) Act (1967) (amended 1997) grants Several Orders (to individuals) and Regulating Orders (to companies) for the purpose of regulating the fishing opportunities of a range of shellfish species in a way designed to promote sustainable exploitation. The project will take this into consideration. Sea Fisheries Regulation Act (1966) This is the main piece of legislation relating to Sea Fisheries Committees. It replaced the 1888 Act under which the North Eastern Committee was established. The Act contains detailed powers authorising the Minister to create a Sea Fisheries District within a defined area and to create a local Fisheries Committee for the regulation of the sea fisheries centred within the District. The Act also gives the Minister the power to wind up any Sea Fisheries Committee or combine any existing Districts. The Act also authorises local Fisheries Committees to make Byelaws for: restricting or prohibiting the fishing for or taking of all or any specified kinds of sea fish during any period; restricting or prohibiting any method of fishing and for determining the size of mesh for and dimensions of any instrument of fishing; and for the regulation, protection and development of fisheries for shellfish. The powers of the Committee to appoint Fishery Officers for the purpose of observance of Byelaws are contained in the Act which lays down the powers of Fishery Officers and Penalties for obstruction and contravention of Byelaws. The Act authorises Fishery Officers in certain circumstances to enter and search premises for the purpose of detecting offences. Finally the Act contains miscellaneous powers requiring statistical returns from Committees; an annual meeting of representatives of the local Fisheries Committees and representatives of the Minister; payment of committee expenses and other general matters. The project will take this into consideration. Sea Fish Conservation Act An Act to amend the law relating to licences under sections 4 and 4A of the Sea Fish (Conservation) Act 1967. This Act is important because it contains the authority for any Fishery Officer of a local fisheries committee to board any fishing boat or enter any premises used for carrying on any activity related to the The project should encourage the sustainable use of resources and protect and enhance 96 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title (1992) Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets treatment or storage of sea fish to search, examine and seize any fish which may have been landed, sold or exposed for sale in contravention of any restriction or prohibition. There is no requirement for the owner of the premises or vessel concerned to be given prior notice of the search or to be present at the time of the search. The Act also contains provisions relating to: Restriction on commercial use of undersize fish; Size limits for fish; Regulation of nets and other fishing gear; Power to restrict fishing for sea fish; Penalties for offences and instigation of proceedings by Sea Fisheries Committee. Implications for the Regime and SEA biodiversity. The Environment Act (1995) The Environment Act 1995 amended the Sea Fisheries Regulation Act 1966 to allow Sea Fisheries Committees to make byelaws to control fisheries for environmental reasons as well as for fisheries management, and provides for people with environmental expertise to be included on their committees. It also allows Ministers and the Environment Agency to regulate fishing activities for marine environmental purposes. The project should encourage the sustainable use of resources and protect and enhance biodiversity. The Sea Fisheries (Wildlife Conservation) Act (1992) The Sea Fisheries (Wildlife Conservation) Act 1992 requires Sea Fisheries Committees to have regard to the conservation of marine flora and fauna and to endeavour to achieve a reasonable balance between that and other considerations in the discharge of their functions under the Sea Fisheries Acts. Although, with the introduction of the Environment Act 1995, Sea Fisheries Committees now have broader environmental powers, this duty remains. Thus, conservation implications must be considered for fisheries management byelaws as well as for environmental ones. Sea Fisheries Committees must also take account of the conservation implications in carrying out their responsibilities for the management of several or regulated fisheries. The project should encourage the sustainable use of resources and protect and enhance biodiversity. The Shrimp Fishing Nets Order (2002) This Order sets a) the Prohibition on fishing for shrimps without a separator trawl or sorting grid and b) details Powers of British sea fisheries officers. The fishing prohibitions are detailed and set limits for mesh sizes, net size and design; and for the capture of fish and common shrimp, i.e. shrimps (Crangon spp.), Aesop shrimps (Pandalus montagui) or a combination of the two. The powers of sea fisheries officers are granted so that they can implement and, if necessary, board fishing vessels and request the help of the master. The project will take this Order into consideration. Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006) The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 specifically established and constituted Natural England and placed an obligation on public authorities to have regard for the conservation of biodiversity. Amongst other things the legislation also empowers the Secretary of State to publish lists of living organisms or habitats thought to be of key importance to the conservation of biodiversity in England and Wales. Importantly, with regard to Sea Fisheries Committees, the NERC Act 2006 amended Section 28 of the CROW Act 2000 making SFC’s liable to prosecution and upon conviction, a fine of up to £20,000, where they continued to permit an operation which caused damage to the features of a SSSI. The project should encourage the protection of sensitive habitats and the enhancement of biodiversity The Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) Regulations (2012) The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 apply in the terrestrial environment and in territorial waters out to 12 nautical miles. The EU Habitats and Wild Birds Directives are transposed in UK offshore waters by separate regulations. The objective of the Habitats Directive is to protect biodiversity through the conservation of natural habitats and species of wild fauna and flora. The Directive lays down rules for the protection, management and exploitation of such habitats and species. The NIFCA area contains many protected habitats and species. The regime should comply with the Regulations. The regime should promote biodiversity. The Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural The 2007 Regulations apply in the 'offshore area' beyond 12 nautical miles from the UK coast. They provide protection for a variety of marine species and wild birds through a number of offences that aim to prevent The project should encourage the protection of sensitive habitats and the enhancement of 97 The interpretation of the term “sustainable use of resources” encompasses action to conserve or enhance any features of archaeological or historic interest (as Section 102(5) amends the Sea Fisheries Regulation Act 1966). 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Habitats, &c.) (Amendment) Regulations (2012) Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets damaging activities affecting protected species and habitats. For example, deliberately killing, injuring or disturbing a protected species (such as dolphins) beyond 12 nautical miles from shore is now a criminal offence. Implications for the Regime and SEA biodiversity. The Countryside and Rights of Way Act (2000) Under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 Sea Fisheries Committees are classed as '28G' authorities with powers to grant permissions to other parties to carry out proposed operations. Where such operations are likely to damage a SSSI, the legislation places a duty on Sea Fisheries Committees to consult and take advice from the Nature Conservancy Council (English Nature). The project should encourage the protection of sensitive habitats and the enhancement of biodiversity. The Registration of Fish Buyers and Sellers and Designation of Fish Auction Sites Regulations (2005) The purpose of this legislation is to record the first sale of fish landed in the UK in order to improve monitoring and control of landings. It also aims to aid secondary buyers in determining whether the fish they are buying were legitimately landed. This legislation will be particularly important to record the landings of vessels <10 m length, which have not, until recently, had to submit as detailed records as vessels >10 m length. The regime will adhere to this legislation. Marine and Coastal Access Act (2009) The Act will help to achieve clean, healthy, safe, productive and biologically diverse oceans and seas. It will provide better protection for the marine environment; sustainable use of our marine resources; an integrated planning system for managing our seas, coasts and estuaries; a robust legal framework for decision-making; streamlined regulation and enforcement; and access to the coast. The project should encourage the sustainable use of resources and protect and enhance biodiversity. The Government’s vision for the marine environment is for clean healthy, safe, productive and biologically diverse oceans and seas. This was set out in the Marine Stewardship Report in 2002 together with a package of initiatives and reviews to turn this vision into reality. The State of the Seas Report was published in March 2005. It indicated how far the government has come towards delivering its vision for the marine environment, how far is still to go and the kinds of challenges and threats that the marine environment faces. Managing the sometimes conflicting demands for energy, aggregates, shipping and fishing while also ensuring that conservation objectives are achieved is a part of that significant challenge faced. The Bill will introduce a better system for managing marine resources, so that the government can make the process by which developers get consents simpler, while ensuring that it manages potential conflicts between uses of the sea and deliver its objectives to ensure sustainability. One of the aims is on Fisheries Management and Marine Enforcement: The fishing industry is a valuable economic activity, but needs to be effectively managed to protect both stocks and broader environmental sustainability. The Government has agreed to look at a new approach across the UK for combining fisheries and marine resource management, for which the Marine Bill will provide the opportunity to take an integrated approach to changes in fisheries management and related environmental and marine resource issues. UK Marine Policy Statement (2011) This Marine Policy Statement (MPS) is the framework for preparing Marine Plans and taking decisions affecting the marine environment. It will contribute to the achievement of sustainable development in the United Kingdom marine area1. It has been prepared and adopted for the purposes of section 44 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. The MPS will facilitate and support the formulation of Marine Plans, ensuring that marine resources are used in a sustainable way in line with the high level marine objectives and thereby: Contribute to the achievement of sustainable development in the United Kingdom marine area through the promotion of sustainable fishing methods Promote sustainable economic development; Enable the UK’s move towards a low-carbon economy, in order to mitigate the causes of climate change and ocean acidification and adapt to their effects; 98 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets Implications for the Regime and SEA Ensure a sustainable marine environment which promotes healthy, functioning marine ecosystems and protects marine habitats, species and our heritage assets; and Contribute to the societal benefits of the marine area, including the sustainable use of marine resources to address local social and economic issues. National Planning Policy Framework (2012) The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) replaces a very long list of existing guidance including all Planning Policy Statements (PPS) (except PPS10 Planning for Sustainable Waste Management), all Planning Policy Guidance notes (PPG), all Mineral Planning Statements (MPS), some Mineral Planning Guidance notes (MPG) (MPG4, 8, 9 and 14 remain in force) and some Ministerial Circulars and Letters. The main change and first policy of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which it states “should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking”. The NPPF states that local authorities should adopt pro-active strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change, taking into account flood risk, coastal change, and water supply and demand considerations. Paragraphs 100-104 replace the previous advice in PPS25 on flood risk. There is associated interim technical guidance provided in a technical appendix to the NPPF, which retains the sequential test and exception test. The NPPF has changed little with regard to the principles to flood risk but the detailed analysis and guidance has been removed and will be reliant on Local Plans for local guidance. The NPPF states that local planning authorities should reduce risk from coastal change by avoiding inappropriate development in vulnerable areas or adding to the impacts of physical changes to the coast. They should identify as a Coastal Change Management Area any area likely to be affected by physical changes to the coast. Paragraphs 109-125 of the NPPF provide advice on biodiversity, contaminated land, land stability, geo-diversity, air pollution, noise pollution and water pollution. The regime should support and accord with the planning guidance contained within the new NPPF. Securing the future – Delivering UK Sustainable Development Strategy (2005) The Strategy for sustainable development aims to “…enable all people throughout the world to satisfy their basic needs and enjoy a better quality of life without compromising the quality of life of future generations.” Guiding principles: Living within environmental limits; Ensuring a strong, healthy and just society; Achieving a sustainable economy; Promoting good governance; and Using sound science responsibly. UK priorities for immediate action: Sustainable consumption and production; Climate change and energy; Natural resource protection and environmental enhancement; and Sustainable communities. The project will take this into consideration. Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) The Act makes it an offence (subject to exceptions) to intentionally kill, injure, or take, possess, or trade in any wild animal listed in Schedule 5, and prohibits interference with places used for shelter or protection, or intentionally disturbing animals occupying such places. The Act also prohibits certain methods of killing, injuring, or taking wild animals. The Act requires surveying authorities to maintain up to date definitive maps and statements, for the purpose of clarifying public rights of way. The project will take this into consideration. Climate Change Act (2008) In 2008 the UK Government passed the Climate Change Act. It was the first legislation in the world to create a legally binding framework to tackle climate change. The Act sets the legally binding target of an 80% cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, and sets a carbon budgeting system that caps emissions over five year periods. It also provides UK governments with powers regarding preparing for climate change impacts. The two key aims of the Act are to: Improve carbon management, helping the transition towards a low-carbon economy in the UK; and Demonstrate UK leadership internationally, signalling commitment to taking our share of responsibility for reducing global emissions in the context of developing international negotiations. The regime will seek to contribute to the reduction in GHG emissions, and to mitigate for and adapt to climate change. The Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) The Regulations transpose the EC WFD in UK law. They will help implement the WFD requirement in England and Wales. They aim to protect and enhance the quality of: Surface freshwater (including lakes, streams and rivers); Groundwaters; Groundwater dependant ecosystems; Estuaries; and Coastal waters out The regime will continue to protect and enhance the waters in which it operates. 99 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title (England and Wales) Regulations (2003) Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets to one mile from low-water. Implications for the Regime and SEA Water for People and the Environment – Water Resources Strategy for England and Wales (2009) The vision set out in the Strategy is - Enough water for people and the environment, “Management and use of water that is environmentally, socially and economically sustainable, providing the right amount of water for people, agriculture, commerce and industry, and an improved water-related environment.” Key themes and aims of the strategy are: Adapting to and mitigating climate change – The EA is able to manage water resources and protect the water environment in the face of climate change; A better water environment – species and habitat that depend on water are restored, protected, improved and valued; Sustainable planning and management of water resources – good water management contributes to sustainable development by supporting people and the economy in an improved environment; and Water and the water environment are valued – people value water and enjoy their water environment and how it contributes to their quality of life. The project will take this into consideration. Sea Trout and Salmon Fisheries Strategy (2008 – 2012) The Strategy sets outs key results for achievement by 2021. These are: The regime will take into consideration the need to protect the District’s salmon and sea trout at sustainable levels. Self-sustaining sea trout and salmon in abundance in more rivers; Economic and social benefits optimised for sea trout and salmon fisheries; and Widespread and positive partnerships, producing benefits. To achieve these results the Strategy sets out 16 specific aims. Aim 1 is to improve environmental conditions and increase the availability of good habitat. A set of measures and targets are also presented in the Strategy. One of the targets is: 76% of rivers outside the ‘at risk’ category for 2013. National Trout and Grayling Fisheries Strategy (2003) The strategy is founded on the Agency’s duty to maintain, improve and develop fisheries within the overall aim of contributing to sustainable development. The aim of the strategy is to conserve and improve wild stocks of trout, sea trout, char and grayling, while enhancing the environment for all types of fisheries for these species in England and Wales. It also aims to enhance the social and economic benefits derived from these fisheries. Policies are included to help ensure the conservation of wild stocks of trout and grayling. These relate to three main areas: Exploitation; Stocking; and Habitat. The project will take this into consideration. Policy 22: We will work with others to monitor, protect and improve the physical, chemical and biological quality of trout, char and grayling habitat, including work with Government to ensure that impacts on fisheries are fully considered in the development of new policies and grant schemes relating to land use; Policy 24: Obstructions - For any new structures, where the Agency’s consent is required, these must be designed to enable fish migration; and Policy 26: We will work with others to monitor, protect and improve the appearance of fisheries, consistent with our duties in relation to flood defence, conservation, recreation and other functions. Merchant Shipping Act (1995) The Act establishes requirements and procedures of merchant shipping. The Merchant Shipping (Pollution) Act 2006 amended section 178(1) of the Act. It restricts claims to being enforced within three years of the damage occurring. The project will take this into consideration. Environmental Protection Act (1990) The Environmental Protection Act 1990 establishes in England, Scotland and Wales businesses’ legal responsibilities for the duty of care for waste, contaminated land and statutory nuisance. The project will take this into consideration. Climate Change – UK Programme (2006) As the key UK document on Climate Change it contains a very broad range of issues covering the UK’s strategy for climate change, actions to reduce emissions and adaptation to climate change. The UK’s legally The regime will seek to contribute to the reduction in GHG emissions, and to mitigate for 100 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets binding target under the Kyoto Protocol to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 12.5% below 1990 levels by 2008-2012 and its domestic goal of a 20% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions below 1990 levels by 2010. Emissions reductions are focussed in the following sectors: Energy supply; Business; Transport; Domestic; Agriculture, forestry and land use; and Public sector. Implications for the Regime and SEA and adapt to climate change. Future Water: The Government’s Water Strategy for England (2008) The Strategy sets out how the Government wants the water sector to look by 2030 and the steps required to get there. The Vision for water policy and management is one where, by 2030 at the latest, the Government has: Improved the quality of our water environment and the ecology which it supports, and Continued to provide high levels of drinking water quality from our taps; Sustainably managed risks from flooding and coastal erosion, with greater understanding and more effective management of surface water; Ensured a sustainable use of water resources, and implemented fair, affordable and cost reflective water charges; Cut greenhouse gas emissions; and Embedded continuous adaptation to climate change and other pressures across the water industry and water users. The regime will take this strategy into consideration. UK Post-2010 Biodiversity Framework (2012) The purpose of the Framework is to set a broad enabling structure for action across the UK between now and 2020: To set out a shared vision and priorities for UK-scale activities, in a framework jointly owned by the four countries, and to which their own strategies will contribute; To identify priority work at a UK level which will be needed to help deliver the Aichi targets and the EU Biodiversity Strategy; To facilitate the aggregation and collation of information on activity and outcomes across all countries of the UK, where the four countries agree this will bring benefits compared to individual country work; and to streamline governance arrangements for UK-scale activity. The regime will take this framework into consideration. Water White Paper (2011) This White Paper sets out a vision for future water management in which the water sector is resilient; water companies are more efficient and customer focused; and water is valued as the precious and finite resource it is. It explains that everyone has a part to play in the realisation of this vision. The regime will take this into consideration. Natural Environment White Paper (2012) This White Paper recognises that a healthy, properly functioning natural environment is the foundation of sustained economic growth, prospering communities and personal well-being. It aims to mainstream the value of nature across society, including across government departments by: Facilitating greater local action to protect and improve nature; Creating a green economy, in which economic growth and the health of our natural resources sustain each other, and markets, business and Government better reflect the value of nature; Strengthening the connections between people and nature to the benefit of both; and Showing leadership in the European Union and internationally, to protect and enhance natural assets globally. The regime will take this into consideration. Biodiversity 2020: A Strategy for England’s Wildlife and Ecosystems (2011) The Strategy sets out the strategic direction for biodiversity policy for the next decade on land (including rivers and lakes) and at sea. The mission for this strategy for the next decade is: to halt overall biodiversity loss, support healthy well-functioning ecosystems and establish coherent ecological networks, with more and better places for nature for the benefit of wildlife and people. The Strategy identifies the key sectors that the Government will work with and the actions they will take. The sectors include Agriculture; Forestry; Planning and Development; Water Management; Marine Management; and Fisheries. For Water Management, the Strategy seeks to protect water ecosystems, including habitats and species, through a river basin planning approach; and also promote approaches to flood and erosion management which conserve the natural environment and improve biodiversity. The project should encourage the sustainable use of resources and protect and enhance biodiversity. Scallop Fishing Order (2012) The Scallop Fishing (England) Order 2012 entered force on the 1 October 2012. This Order introduces: The regime will take this order into consideration. 101 A limit on the number of dredges allowed in the 6-12nm limit, extending the previous restriction of 8 dredges per side in the 0-6nm limit; 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets Implications for the Regime and SEA A new requirement for all scallops caught on trips which cover both the Western and Eastern English Channel to comply to the higher minimum landing of 110mm; and Relaxes the rules on what attachments to dredges may be used, permitting those which increase the safety of tipping the dredge. UK Marine Strategy Regulations 2010 The Marine Strategy Framework Directive came into force on 15 July 2008 and was transposed into UK law by the Marine Strategy Regulations 2010. The regime will take this order into consideration Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 can be used to designate a wreck site as a Scheduled Ancient Monument out to 12 nautical miles. There are no wreck sites designated under this Act within the NIFCA district but it should be considered in case future designations occur Protection of Wrecks Act 1973 The Protection of Wrecks Act (1973) allows the Government to designate a wreck to prevent uncontrolled interference. Designated sites are identified as being likely to contain the remains of a vessel, or its contents, which are of historical, artistic or archaeological importance. A 'Statutory Instrument' identifies the location of the site and also the extent of the restricted area used to ensure the protection of the site. In some cases the site is indicated by a buoy, usually yellow and inscribed Protected Wreck. Suitably placed notices sometimes indicate sites close to the shore. Some are warning signs and others are public information notices giving a brief explanation of why the wreck is important and a description of the site. All protected wrecks are listed in the annual Admiralty Notices to Mariners and are marked on appropriate UK Hydrographic Office charts. There are no wreck sites designated under this Act within the NIFCA district but it should be considered in case future designations occur Regional – The North East North East Declaration on Climate Change The North East Declaration on Climate Change is an extension of the Nottingham Declaration. By signing the North East Declaration on Climate Change you acknowledge that climate change is occurring and will have far reaching effects on the region's people, places, economy, society and the environment. Signing the declaration also represents your commitment to tackling the causes and effects of a changing climate on our region. Key regional partners in the public, private and voluntary sector have already signed the North East Declaration on Climate Change. This includes: all 12 North East England Local Authorities; Association of North East Councils; Business in the Community; Confederation of British Industry; Environment Agency; Federation of Small Businesses; Government Office for the North East; Natural England; North East Chamber of Commerce; Northumberland National Park Authority; One North East; Voluntary Organisations Network North East. The regime will seek to mitigate against and adapt to the effects of climate change. Local NIFCA Byelaws By virtue of the Marine & Coastal Act 2009 (Transitional and Savings Provisions) Order 2011 these byelaws made by Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee remain effective and enforceable by Northumberland IFCA. These byelaws are critical to the fisheries management regime for NIFCA. Limits of the District; Revocation of Existing Byelaws; Application and Saving for Scientific Purposes; Trawling and Size of Vessels; 102 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets Implications for the Regime and SEA Fixed Engines; Purse Seine Net; Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters; Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus); Parts of Shellfish; Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait; Re-depositing of Shellfish; Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes; Dredges; Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns; Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining; and Pot Limitations. Two new byelaws came into force in 2014: Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Special Area of Conservation; and Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation. Northumberland IFCA Annual Plan The Northumberland IFCA Annual Plan enables the effective performance management of the Committee and the appraisal of its staff. The plan is reviewed annually and reflects improvements in performance brought about by achieved targets and also reflects the process of continuous improvement by the inclusion of new service aspirations contained in reviewed targets. The annual plan is fundamental to the success and effective performance of the regime. Northumberland and North Tyneside Shoreline Management Plan 2 Provides a large-scale assessment of the risks associated with coastal evolution and presents a policy framework to address these risks to people and the developed, historic and natural environment in a sustainable manner. The regime will take this into consideration. River Basin Management Plan Identifies the pressures facing the water environment in the Northumbria River Basin District, and the actions that will address them. This plan focuses on the protection, improvement and sustainable use of the water environment. River basin management is a continuous process of planning and delivery. The regime will take this into consideration. Solway Tweed River Basin Management Plan 2009 - 2015 The plan sets objectives for the sustainable management of the river basin district's rivers, lochs/lakes, estuaries, coasts and groundwater. The plan is based on the most comprehensive monitoring and assessment programme of the state of the water environment ever undertaken in the Solway Tweed river basin district. The results show that 49% of all water bodies are currently in good condition. The following targets have been set: target of 55% of all waters in the Solway Tweed river basin district being in good condition by 2015, increasing to 92% in 2027. The regime will take this into consideration. Catchment Flood The CFMP considers all types of inland flooding, from rivers, ground water, surface water and tidal flooding, The regime will take this into consideration. Northumbria River Basin District (2009) 103 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Management Plans (2009) River Till and Breamish CFMP Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets but not flooding directly from the sea (coastal flooding), which is covered by Shoreline Management Plans (SMPs). The role of CFMPs is to establish flood risk management policies which will deliver sustainable flood risk management for the long term. Flood risk management policies include: North East Northumberland CFMP Policy 1: Areas of little or no flood risk where we will continue to monitor and advise - This policy will tend to be applied in those areas where there are very few properties at risk of flooding. It reflects a commitment to work with the natural flood processes as far as possible; Wansbeck and Blythe CFMP Policy 2: Areas of low to moderate flood risk where we can generally reduce existing flood risk management actions - This policy will tend to be applied where the overall level of risk to people and property is low to moderate. It may no longer be value for money to focus on continuing current levels of maintenance of existing defences if we can use resources to reduce risk where there are more people at higher risk. We would therefore review the flood risk management actions being taken so that they are proportionate to the level of risk; River Tyne CFMP North Northumberland CFMP sh CFMP erland CFMP Implications for the Regime and SEA Policy 3: Areas of low to moderate flood risk where we are generally managing existing flood risk effectively - This policy will tend to be applied where the risks are currently appropriately managed and where the risk of flooding is not expected to increase significantly in the future. However, we keep our approach under review, looking for improvements and responding to new challenges or information as they emerge. We may review our approach to managing flood defences and other flood risk management actions, to ensure that we are managing efficiently and taking the best approach to managing flood risk in the longer term; Policy 4: Areas of low, moderate or high flood risk where we are already managing the flood risk effectively but where we may need to take further actions to keep pace with climate change - This policy will tend to be applied where the risks are currently deemed to be appropriately-managed, but where the risk of flooding is expected to significantly rise in the future. In this case we would need to do more in the future to contain what would otherwise be increasing risk. Taking further action to reduce risk will require further appraisal to assess whether there are socially and environmentally sustainable, technically viable and economically justified options; e CFMP d CFMP Policy 5: Areas of moderate to high flood risk where we can generally take further action to reduce flood risk - This policy will tend to be applied to those areas where the case for further action to reduce flood risk is most compelling, for example where there are many people at high risk, or where changes in the environment have already increased risk. Taking further action to reduce risk will require additional appraisal to assess whether there are socially and environmentally sustainable, technically viable and economically justified options; and Policy 6: Areas of low to moderate flood risk where we will take action with others to store water or manage run-off in locations that provide overall flood risk reduction or environmental benefits - This policy will tend to be applied where there may be opportunities in some locations to reduce flood risk locally or more widely in a catchment by storing water or managing run-off. The policy has been applied to an area (where the potential to apply the policy exists), but would only be implemented in specific locations within the area, after more detailed appraisal and consultation. Northumberland Coast AONB and Berwickshire and 104 Previously these two areas were managed separately; however, increased awareness of the importance of managing the coast and its land and sea, in a consistent and integrated way has led to the production of an integrated Plan. The Management Plan was prepared by the AONB Partnership and EMS Management The regime will seek to protect and enhance the AONB and EMS, which are important features of the District. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title North Northumberland Coast EMS Management Plan (2009-14) Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets Group on behalf of Northumberland County Council (NCC) pursuant to Sections 89 and 90 of the CRoW Act. There are four strategic management policies that apply to all themes and the entire Plan across land and sea: Implications for the Regime and SEA Integrated coastal management; Climate change adaptation and mitigation; Community involvement and engagement; and Sustainable development. Northumberland Local Biodiversity Action Plans The UK Biodiversity Action Plan recognised that biodiversity is ultimately lost or conserved at the local level. It also recognised that achieving the Plan’s goal of conserving and enhancing biodiversity would require a partnership approach. Nowhere is this more important than at the local level. 119 local biodiversity action partnerships and nine regional biodiversity fora have been established across England. Local Biodiversity Action Plans (LBAP) identify local priorities for biodiversity conservation and work to deliver agreed actions and targets for priority habitats and species and locally important wildlife and sites. The functions of LBAPs are: Of particular relevance to the NIFCA are the species and habitat action plans for: To translate national targets for species and habitats into effective action at the local level; Rocky Shore, Reefs and Islands. Coastal birds; Common seal; Grey seal; Saltmarsh and mudflats; and To identify targets for species and habitats important to the local area, reflecting the values of local people; To stimulate effective local partnerships to ensure programmes for biodiversity conservation are developed and maintained in the long term; To raise awareness of the need for biodiversity conservation and enhancement in the local context; To ensure opportunities for conservation and enhancement of biodiversity are promoted, understood and rooted in policies and decisions at the local level; and To provide a basis for monitoring and evaluating local action for biodiversity priorities, at both national and local levels. In Northumberland there are 21 species action plans and 21 habitat action plans. These are: 105 Species Action Plans Habitat Action Plans Barn Owl; Blanket Bog; Bats; Brownfield Land; Coastal Birds; Calaminarian Grassland; Common Seal; Coastal Heathland; Dingy Skipper; Fen, Marsh and Swamp; Dormouse; Gardens and Allotments; Farmland Birds; Heather Moorland; Freshwater Fish; Lowland Heathland; 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Northumberland Core Strategy Preferred Options (February 2013) Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets Freshwater Pearl Mussel; Lowland Meadows and Pastures; Garden Birds; Maritime Cliff and Slope; Great Crested Newt; Native Woodland; Grey Seal; Ponds, lakes and Reservoirs; Hedgehog; Recreation and Amenity Space; Otter; Reedbed; Red Squirrel; Rivers and Streams; River Jelly Lichen; Rocky Shore, Reefs and Islands; Upland Waders; Saline Lagoons; Violet Crystalwort; Saltmarsh and Mudflat; Water Rock-bristle; Sand Dunes; Water Vole; and Upland Hay Meadow; and White-Clawed Crayfish. Whin Grassland. When adopted, the Core Strategy will provide the strategic policies of the Local Plan, which together with adopted Neighbourhood Plans will be used to determine planning applications. The vision set out in the Core Strategy is: Implications for the Regime and SEA The regime will consider this strategy. ‘By 2030 Northumberland’s diverse communities will be healthy and resilient and set within a diverse and strong economy. The County’s significant resources will be utilised in a sustainable way and the unique and varied qualities of the natural, historic and built environment will be protected and enhanced’. To deliver this vision, whilst having regard to the Council’s Corporate Plan priorities, as well as other plans and strategies, the following eight objectives seek to provide a coherent approach to managing future development and therefore deliver the spatial elements of the Sustainable Community Strategy. Objective 1: To place sustainable development and responsible future economic growth at the heart of planning decisions in Northumberland; Objective 2: To meet Northumberland’s objectively assessed development needs and demands including: new homes, employment space, health and community services, and infrastructure; Objective 3: To maintain and create sustainable communities throughout Northumberland to support health, social and cultural well-being for all including responding to the needs and opportunities created by an ageing population; Objective 4: To facilitate investment which stimulates employment opportunities and supports job retention in a resilient and strong Northumberland economy; Objective 5: To make Northumberland resilient to climate change and contribute to mitigating against its effects, whilst also creating sustainable job opportunities in green industries; Objective 6: To protect and enhance Northumberland's distinctive and valued natural, historic and built environment; Objective 7: To manage the prudent use of Northumberland’s natural resources, including minerals, 106 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets energy, land, existing built fabric and water while producing less waste and minimising adverse impacts on communities and the environment; Implications for the Regime and SEA Objective 8: To ensure all development makes best use of, and safeguards, Northumberland’s infrastructure securing necessary up-grades and promotes sustainable modes of transport where appropriate; Policy 14: Rural Economy, promotes the growth and diversification of the rural economy where they increase productivity, add product value, or improve the environmental performance of agriculture, forestry and fishing sectors; and Policy 45: Ports, harbours and beach launch facilities supports the appropriate expansion of port facilities, development of harbour and beach launch facilities to maintain and grow the fishing industry, and appropriate leisure and tourism developments provided they do not adversely affect functioning of the fishing industry. The policy also states that any development should take account of interactions between communities, the local economy and the environment including European and national designated sites. Northumberland Consolidated Planning Policy Framework The seven local planning authorities of Alnwick, Berwick-upon-Tweed, Blyth Valley, Castle Morpeth, Tynedale, Wansbeck and Northumberland County merged together to create one single local planning authority for Northumberland. In the past, each of these local planning authorities had produced its own set of planning documents to guide development in their area. These documents have been brought together to form the Consolidated Planning Policy Framework for Northumberland. This document sets out the relevant planning policy documents, both statutory and non-statutory. The regime will consider this framework. The Consolidated Planning Policy Framework for Northumberland compromises two sections: Section A - Schedule of Statutory Development Plan Documents; and Section B - Schedule of Planning Policy Documents which do not form part of the Development Plan. Northumberland Area Tourism Management Plan (ATMaP) (2010 – 2015) The Northumberland Area Tourism Management Plan (ATMaP) 2010-2015 sets out the tourism activities and actions that tourism stakeholders in the county agree are required for the tourism sector to help make and keep Northumberland strong – economically, socially and environmentally. The document provides the framework for actions to be undertaken by a wide range of agencies, organisations and the business community. The regime will seek to promote tourism in the NIFCA District. Northumberland Economic Strategy (2010 – 2012) The purpose of the Northumberland Economic Strategy is to establish aims and priorities for promoting economic competitiveness and securing the resilience of the economy. The strategy provides the strategic context for economic development and regeneration as part of the county's community planning framework which includes the Sustainable Community Strategy, the Local Development Framework and other principal thematic strategies. The regime will take this into consideration. The strategic economic priorities are: To become a low carbon economy; To create the conditions for sustainable growth; To support resilient and diverse sectors; and To enable inclusion and enterprise. Northumberland: Resilient for the 107 The Sustainable Community Strategy sets out the long-term vision for Northumberland. Its aim is to improve the economic, social and environmental well-being of the community. Areas of focus include, but The regime will take this into consideration. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Future: Sustainable Community Strategy for Northumberland (2011) Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets are not limited to: Implications for the Regime and SEA Raising awareness as to the likely impacts and opportunities of climate change in a meaningful way; Reducing the county’s carbon footprint through a range of initiatives, incentives and compliance; Building community, business, and environmental resilience to extreme weather events; Exploiting the scope to develop enterprising climate change “response” technology and businesses; Positively applying planning policy to maintain a network of viable communities; Supporting a more mixed economy by expanding the county’s niche and supporting growth sectors; and Developing a broad purchasing culture among businesses and communities of “buy local”. Northumberland Rights of Way Improvement Plan (2007) The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 (Section 60) introduced a new duty for highway authorities to prepare and publish a Rights of Way Improvement Plan (RoWIP). The Rights of Way Improvement Plan sets out the Council’s statutory duties but also provides objectives and proposals to further improve the management, provision and promotion of a wider rights of way and access network which meets the needs of the public. The regime will take this into consideration Northumberland’s Rights of Way Improvement Plan considers: The extent to which local rights of way meet the present and future needs of the public; The opportunities provided by local rights of way for exercise and other forms of open-air recreation and the enjoyment of the council's area together with the use of the network by local people as a means to access workplaces, schools and other local facilities; and The accessibility of local rights of way to blind or partially sighted persons and others with mobility problems. The RoWIP states that there is a relatively good network of footpaths along the coast. The current bridleway network is sparse, poorly distributed and fragmented, although people also make use of the beaches for riding. There are 13 stewardship schemes providing permissive access; these include a number of links around Amble, Berwick-upon-Tweed and North Sunderland. A number of regional route cross the area and include: Coast and Castles Cycle Route; St. Cuthbert’s Way; and Northumberland Coast Path. Northumberland Joint Municipal Waste Strategy (2003) The document details the changes required to manage the County’s waste in a more sustainable way and to ensure that the European and UK Government targets are met. The seven local authorities and the Environment Agency worked together to agree the policies and recommendations which provide a framework for decision making until 2020. The regime will take this into consideration The JMWMS concludes that it is necessary to use a range of options, including waste minimisation, recycling, composting, energy recovery and the limited use of landfill disposal. It was clear that there was a need to recover energy from the residual waste that could not be recycled or composted in order to divert waste from landfill, and that the JMWMS aims could not be achieved without the participation of residents. Northumberland Coastal and River Oil 108 Nearly the entire intertidal zone of the Northumberland coast is included in Sites of Special Scientific The regime will take this into consideration 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Plan Title Pollution Contingency Plan Plan Description and Key Relevant Objectives/Targets Interests (SSSIs) or other environmental protection designations. Implications for the Regime and SEA Maritime Pollution has been identified as a potential hazard in the Northumberland Area, and the level of risk of an Oil Pollution incident ranges from “High” to “Low” in terms of the likelihood of occurrence and the impact on four main categories (environment, health, social and economic). The aim and objectives of the County Council’s Coastal and River Oil Pollution Contingency Plan are to enable the County Council, and its partners, to protect these special areas and to deal speedily, efficiently and economically with the nuisance of pollution, and oil pollution in particular, from any source and to minimise the effects of oil pollution, both short and long term. Lindisfarne NNR Byelaws Natural England has a set of byelaws for Lindisfarne NNR which prevents the gathering of marine organisms from within the reserve. Other byelaws for the NNR include, prohibiting: The regime will take this into consideration Launching of a boat (canoe/kayak) into any part of the reserve; Carrying a boat across any part of the foreshore; Camping / Bivouacking within the reserve; and No is camping allowed on Holy Island. There is also a byelaw which prohibits horse-riding on the inter-tidal area of the NNR. 109 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Appendix B. Current NIFCA Byelaws 1. Revocation of Existing Byelaws All byelaws previously in force in the Northumberland Sea Fisheries District are hereby revoked and the following byelaws are substituted therefor; provided that nothing in such revocation shall affect any penalty, forfeiture or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed against any byelaws so revoked. 2. Application and Saving for Scientific Purposes All byelaws shall apply to the whole area of the Northumberland Sea Fisheries District unless otherwise specified except: (a) in the cases to which the provisions of Section 6 of the Sea Fisheries Regulation Act 1966 apply; and (b) to any person bona fide fishing for sea fish for scientific or for stocking or breeding purposes, under the written authority in that behalf of the Committee, signed by their Clerk, or the Minister of Agriculture Fisheries and Food, and in accordance with the conditions contained in that authority. For the purposes of these byelaws “the baselines” means the baselines as they existed at 25th January 1983 in accordance with the Territorial Waters Order in Council 1964 (1965 III p.6452A, as amended by the Territorial Waters (Amendment) Order in Council (1979 II p.2866). 3. Trawling and Size of Vessels Trawling is prohibited save in the following circumstances: (1) In that part of the district within three miles from baselines this byelaw shall not apply to a vessel whose overall length does not exceed 11.59 metres (or 12.81 metres in the case of a vessel which was given an authority as hereinafter mentioned between the 9th April 1992 and 9th June 1992) and which has been granted the written authority in that behalf of the Committee signed by the Clerk and in accordance with any conditions in that authority. (2) In that part of the district between three and six miles from baselines this byelaw shall not apply to a vessel whose overall length does not exceed 24 metres. Provided that a vessel whose overall length does not exceed 26 metres may fish in such part of the district if it fished there within the twenty four months preceding this byelaw coming into force and so long as it remains in the same ownership as on the date of the byelaw coming into force. (3) In any proceedings taken against the owner of a vessel in respect of an offence under this byelaw committed by the skipper it shall be a good defence for the owner to prove that he exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of the offence. (4) In this byelaw the following expressions shall have the meanings ascribed thereto: “Overall length” means the overall length as shown in the vessel’s registration documents. “Ownership” means as recorded in the Fishing Boat Register held by the Registrar of Shipping and Seamen at Cardiff. “Trawling” means any form of trawling including but without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing otter trawling, pair trawling and beam trawling. 110 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 4. Fixed Engines (1) No fixed engine shall be placed or used for taking sea fish within that part of the district of the Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee as lies within the River Tweed as defined in the Tweed Fisheries (Amendment) Act 1859 as amended by byelaws. (2) Subject as mentioned below at no time shall a fixed engine be placed or suspended unattended for taking salmon or trout (3) During the period 26th March to 31st October inclusive, no fixed engine other than a trap for taking lobsters and crabs or a ‘T’ or ‘J’ net authorised by the Environment Agency’s Salmon Net Byelaws confirmed (save as to Byelaws 16 and 19) on 21st February 1995 and (as to Byelaws 16 and 19) on 8th June 1995, shall: (a) be placed or used in a depth of water less than 7 metres unless the position of any such fixed engine is on a rise in the sea bed separated from the shore by water deeper than 7 metres at any state of the tide; (b) be placed or used so that the headline is less than 4 metres below the surface of the water at any state of the tide; (c) be placed to the west of a line drawn: (i) between the seaward end of the south pier at South Shields and Marsden Point; and (ii) between Hauxley Point and Coquet Island Light House, thence on a bearing 355º to a point 3 nautical miles and 622 metres distant and thence due north-west to Seaton Point. (4) During the period 1st November to 25th March inclusive no fixed engine other than a trap for taking lobsters and crabs shall be placed within the following areas (known locally as the Tyne Playground, Wansbeck Playground and Coquet Playground) unless the headline shall be at least 4 metres below the water at any state of the tide: (a) Tyne Playground Those tidal waters and parts of the sea within that part of the Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee’s district as lies within an area bounded as follows: (i) on the north by a line one nautical mile in length drawn due east from Marconi Point, Cullercoats; (ii) on the south by a line one nautical mile in length drawn due east from Souter Point; and (iii) on the east by a straight line joining the eastern extremities of the northern and southern boundary lines. (b) Wansbeck Playground Those tidal waters and parts of the sea at Newbiggin by the Sea west of a straight line drawn between a point 55° 10.16´ North, 01° 31.20´ West and a point 55° 08.57´ North, 01° 31.40´West. c) Coquet Playground Those tidal waters and parts of the sea within an area bounded as follows: (i) on the north by a line drawn due west to the high water mark on the shore from a position Coquet Lighthouse bearing 355° distance 3 nautical miles and 622 metres; (ii) on the south by a line drawn due west to the high water mark on the shore from a position Coquet Lighthouse bearing 160° distance 1 nautical mile and 1024 metres; and (iii) on the east by a straight line joining the eastern extremities of the said northern and southern boundary lines. 111 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 5. Purse Seine Net No person shall within the district of the Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee use in fishing for sea fish any purse seine net or ring net or other similar net which is used for taking fish by encircling them. 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters (1) No person shall fish or take any ‘V’ notched or mutilated lobster of the species Homarus gammarus. (2) Any lobster so marked shall be returned immediately to the sea, in a position as near as possible to that part of the sea from which it was taken. (3) “’V’ notch” means an indentation or cut in the shape of the letter ‘V’ made in any one or more of the flaps of the tail fan of the lobster. (4) “Mutilated lobster” means any lobster which has any of the flaps of the tail fan missing, or is mutilated in such a manner that it could hide or obliterate a ‘V’ notch, or has been marked with any other shape of notch. (5) “Flap” means any part of the five flaps of the tail fan of the lobster. Explanatory Note This note is not part of the byelaw. The intention of this byelaw is to protect lobsters of either sex which have been marked with a ‘V’ notch or similar shaped mark, by this mark being cut into the tail fan. This is done in order that the biomass of sexually mature lobsters can be increased, therefore it may be necessary to ‘notch’ animals from either sex. 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab (Cancer pagurus) or Lobster (Homarus gammarus) No person shall remove from any fishery any edible crab (Cancer pagurus) which is soft-shelled or berried (egg-bearing) or lobster (Homarus gammarus) which is soft-shelled. 8. Parts of Shellfish Subject to the provisions of the Crab Claws (Prohibition of Landing) Order 1986 no person shall remove from any fishery any edible crab (Cancer pagurus) or part thereof, or velvet crab (Necora puber) or part thereof, or lobster (Homarus gammarus) or part thereof, which cannot be measured to ensure compliance with the Undersized Crabs Order 1986, the Undersized Velvet Crabs Order 1989, or the Undersized Lobsters Order 1993. 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab (Cancer pagurus) for Bait (1) No person shall use any edible crab (Cancer pagurus) for bait and Section 17(2) of the Sea Fisheries (Shellfish) Act 1967, which affords a defence to a person charged with an offence under Section 17(1) of that Act, shall not apply within the district. (2) Nothing in this byelaw shall prohibit the use of cooked crab offal as bait. 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish Any person who takes any shellfish, the removal of which from a fishery is prohibited by any of the byelaws, or the possession or sale of which is prohibited by, or in pursuance of, any Act of Parliament or 112 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Statutory Instrument, shall return such shellfish to the sea immediately, as nearly as possible in the place from which they were taken. 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes (1) The site of all pots, traps, keep pots and boxes, nets or long or set lines shall be clearly identified by a marker buoy or dahn fixed to both ends of the fishing gear. The marker buoys or dahns shall be clearly visible on the surface of the water. Strings of pots or traps consisting of five pots or traps per string or less shall require only one end of the string to be buoyed. (2) Each marker buoy or dahn shall have clearly displayed upon it: (a) the identification of the boat that set the gear, or (b) the owner of the gear if set from an unregistered fishing vessel, or (c) in the case where the gear has been set and does not fall into the two preceding categories the identification may be either: (i) the port letters and number of any fishing vessel registered in accordance with the Merchant Shipping Act 1995; or (ii) the owner’s name and contact telephone number in the case of any unregistered fishing vessels or of gear not set from a boat. 12. Dredges (1) No person shall use in fishing any dredge except one with a mouth which does not exceed 75 cm width overall. (2) The total number of dredges used by any vessel shall not exceed 10 at any one time. 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns (1) Byelaw 13 (Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns) made by the Committee on 11 May 2000 and confirmed by the Secretary of State on 31 August 2000) is amended as follows. (2) No person shall fish for or take any of the following shellfish, namely Prawns (Nephrops norvegicus), Lobsters (Homarus gammarus), Crabs (Cancer pagurus), Velvet Crabs (Liocarcinus (= Necora) puber), or Whelks (Buccinum undatum) within any part of the Northumberland Sea Fisheries District, except under a permit issued by the Chief Executive to the Committee and in accordance with the following conditions: (a) the permit shall be valid until the 31st December in the year of issue of the permit; (b) the permit shall not be transferable and must be surrendered to the Committee immediately if no longer required by the owner or owners to whom it was issued for the vessel named on the permit; (c) c) the holder of the permit shall by the last day of every calendar month, deliver or send to the Committee on a pre-printed form supplied by the Committee, a return showing accurate information regarding the numbers (and if available the weight in kilograms) of lobsters, crabs, velvet crabs, prawns and whelks taken from the District during the preceding calendar month, together with the types and number of fishing gear employed, the area fished and any other information which the Committee may require from time to time; (d) applications for a permit to fish under this byelaw shall be made using the printed forms available from the Committee. (e) A permit will be issued on demand, only to the owner of any fishing boat which does not exceed 12 metres overall length and which, at the time the application is made and throughout the duration of the permit, is registered in accordance with Part II of the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, and the regulations made thereunder (or any statutory modifications or 113 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation re-enactment thereof), or in the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man, and which holds a current fishing licence with an entitlement to fish for shellfish issued by the appropriate UK fisheries department at the time the application is made. (3) Any boat used in accordance with this byelaw shall clearly display the number issued with the permit. (4) The permit to fish shall be invalid if any of the above conditions are not met. (5) (a) This byelaw shall not apply (i) to any vessel which takes the shellfish specified above as a bycatch of trawling or seine netting; or (ii) to any vessel or person (subject to the conditions specified in paragraph (b) below), using five pots or fewer or a bottom set gill or entangling net of 100 metres or less. (b) The exemption provided by paragraph (a)(ii) shall only have effect if: (i) of the shellfish specified above, no more than one lobster, five crabs, twenty whelks or five prawns is taken by that vessel or person in any one day; and (ii) any of the specified shellfish which have been taken are not kept, stored or retained in a keep pot or other similar device at sea or on board for landing (or by the person) on any day other than the day of capture. 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining (1) In this byelaw: “Net” means a trawl, seine or similar towed net; “Beam Trawl” means a net or nets designed to be towed along the sea-bed and which have their mouth extended by a beam, bar or other rigid device; and “Single Trawl” means a single net towed by a two warp rig in which the net has a single bosom groundrope (the bosom being the central portion of the trawl between the lower wings) where the groundrope is attached to the towing rig at each wing-end only and does not have any further attachment, including bridles, wires or ropes connecting it to the said towing rig; (2) No person shall use any type of trawl including a beam trawl or any other type of towed net (but not including a seine net) in the district of the Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee other than a single trawl fitted with a single codend and utilising one pair of otter boards. (3) It is prohibited to use more than one vessel for simultaneously working any type of trawl including a beam trawl or a seine or other type of towed net. 15. Pot Limitations (1) No person holding a permit (hereinafter called “a permit”) as referred to in Committee byelaw 13 shall fish (including from a vessel) for any fish or shellfish (as referred to in the said committee byelaw 13) with more than 800 pots, creels, traps and cages within the Committee district. (2) No person holding a permit shall fish with any pots, creels, traps and cages without affixing thereto a yellow tag with a serial number issued by the Chief Executive to the Committee from the Committee office and no such person shall receive more than 800 tags. (3) Any vessel or person using 5 pots or fewer (in accordance with Committee byelaw 13) may not fish without affixing thereto a white tag with a serial number issued by the Chief Executive from the Committee office. 114 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation (4) Any person losing more than 10% of yellow tags or more than 2 white tags shall write to the Committee within 21 days explaining the loss and notifying the committee of the tag numbers lost and the cost of replacement tags will be paid by the owner thereof. (5) No person shall haul any other vessel’s or person’s pot, creel, trap or cage without firstly obtaining the agreement of the Committee. 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English Section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation (SAC) The Authority for the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation District in exercise of its powers under sections 155 and 156 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 makes the following Byelaw for that District. 1. Interpretation In this Byelaw(a) ‘Authority’ means the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority as defined in articles 2 and 4 of the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Order 2010 (SI 2010 No. 2197); (b) ‘District’ means the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation District as defined in articles 2 and 3 of the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Order 2010 (SI 2010 No. 2197) (c) ‘Specified Area’ means the area defined in the Schedule to this Byelaw. (d) ‘Mobile Fishing Gear’ means any dredge, trawl or similar device that is designed to be towed or pushed to take any Sea Fisheries Resources on the seabed. (e) ‘Using’ in the context of mobile fishing gear shall for the purposes of this Byelaw include any one or more of the following:I. moving, towing, pushing or dragging it on the seabed; II. moving, towing, pushing or dragging it above the seabed; III. moving, towing, pushing or dragging it on the surface of the sea; IV. anchoring it on the seabed; V. leaving it on the seabed; and in all of the above cases with or without the intention to take Sea Fisheries Resources and “use” and “used” shall be construed accordingly. (f) ‘Inboard, lashed and stowed’ means that the mobile fishing gear is stored in such a way that use cannot readily be made of it for any purpose. 2. Co-ordinates In this Byelaw co-ordinates are based on WGS 84 datum. The WGS 84 means the World Geodetic System, revised in 1984 and further revised in 2004. 3. Prohibition No person shall operate any vessel using mobile fishing gear which is designed to be in contact with the seabed, within the specified area. Any vessel transiting or steaming through the specified area must have all mobile gear inboard, lashed and stowed. 4. Scientific Exemption 115 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation This byelaw shall not apply to any person performing an act which would otherwise constitute an offence against this byelaw, if that act was carried out in accordance with a written permission issued by the Authority permitting that act for scientific, stocking or breeding purposes. 5. Schedule ‘Specified Area’ means the area:Including ‘Buffer Area’ Point 1 55°23.12'N 001°35.51'W Point 2 55°23.11'N 001°27.36'W Point 3 55°39.53'N 001°26.32'W Point 4 55°45.59'N 001°53.85'W Point 5 55°50.35'N 001°59.16'W Point 6 55°49.85'N 002°00.16'W Point 7 55°48.77'N 002°02.12'W 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English Section of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation (SAC) The Authority for the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation District in exercise of its powers under sections 155 and 156 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 makes the following Byelaw for that District. 1. Interpretation In this Byelaw(a) ‘Authority’ means the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority as defined in articles 2 and 4 of the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Order 2010 (SI 2010 No. 2197); (b) ‘District’ means the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation District as defined in articles 2 and 3 of the Northumberland Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Order 2010 (SI 2010 No. 2197) (c) ‘Specified Area’ means the area defined in the Schedule to this byelaw. (d) ‘Seagrass’ means, Genus (Zostera spp) a flowering plant with long and narrow leaves which grows in marine and fully saline environments. 2. ‘Co-ordinates’ In this Byelaw co-ordinates are based on WGS 84 datum. The WGS 84 means the World Geodetic System, revised in 1984 and further revised in 2004. 3. Prohibition 116 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation No person shall dig for, fish for or take any sea fisheries resources in or from the Specified Area where Seagrass is situated. 4. Exceptions The prohibition in paragraph 3 shall not apply to the fishing for or taking of sea fisheries resources (a) (b) (c) (d) by means of a net; by means of a rod and line; by means of a hook and line and in respect of fishing for or taking of sea fisheries resources from a vessel the prohibition shall not apply provided that no part of the vessel or its fishing gear is in contact with the seabed where Seagrass is situated. 5. Scientific Exemption This byelaw shall not apply to any person performing an act which would otherwise constitute an offence against this byelaw, if that act was carried out in accordance with a written permission issued by the Authority permitting that act for scientific, stocking or breeding purposes. Schedule ‘Specified Area’ means the area:Point 1 55°23.23'N 001°35.51'W Point 2 55°23.22'N 001°27.54'W Point 3 55°39.47'N 001°26.52'W Point 4 55°45.52'N 001°54.01'W Point 5 55°50.20'N 001°59.20'W Point 6 55°49.78'N 002°00.06'W Point 7 55°48.7'N 002°02.0'W 117 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Appendix C. Baseline Information C.1 Air Quality The environmental effects of fishing activities on air quality are intrinsically linked. A reduction in fuel usage and emissions will reduce the amount of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. In the UK as a whole, at the current level of fuel consumption, around 45,000 tonnes of CO2 is produced by the fishing fleet on an annual basis. If the improvements in efficiency of fishing activities were realised, this would save around seven percent, or over 7,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year. There are several ways the industry could reduce fuel consumption resulting in a cut in emissions and operating costs including reducing towing speed, changing fishing method and modifying gear. With the rapid rise in oil prices, fuel consumption has become a significant component of operating costs as well as an environmental concern. Exhaust gas emissions (CO2, nitrogen oxides [NOX] and carbon monoxide [CO]) in the fish processing sector result from the combustion of gas and fuel oil or diesel in turbines, boilers, compressors and other engines for power and heat generation; however, quantities are currently unknown. The emissions to air from the fishing fleet and infrastructure in the NIFCA District are not known at present; however, the contribution to the UK fishing industry total will be small, based on the small fleet size. The majority of local vessels are small and their operations are undertaken by low capital businesses. In addition, the landings of small coastal boats are, in all likelihood, collected from beach stations and delivered to an outlet by either the fishermen’s trucks, or by a lorry supplied by a processor/outlet (e.g. Burgons of Eyemouth). However, these emissions will likely play only a very small part of the total emissions of vehicles in Northumberland. Odour is a significant form of air pollution and can potentially reduce air quality. Odour is most common in areas surrounding fish processing facilities. Major sources include storage sites for processing waste, cooking by-products during fish meal production, fish drying processes, and odour emitted during filling and emptying of bulk tanks and silos. Fish quality may deteriorate under the anaerobic conditions found in on-board storage on fishing vessels and in the raw material silos of fish processing facilities. This deterioration causes the formation of odorous compounds such as ammonia, mercaptans, and hydrogen sulphide gas. Particulate emissions are generally not a serious problem in the fish processing sector. C.2 Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna The fishing industry is now a shadow of its former self, with most fishing effort directed towards potting for crab and lobster; however, trawling activities for Nephrops and pelagic and demersal fish also take place in the District. A small amount of salmon and sea trout netting still occurs on the site. Netting occurs during a limited season (licensed, but not regulated by NIFCA), but this is also in decline. Bait digging, mostly for lugworm and ragworm, is a relatively common practice along the coast. Bait digging is commonly carried out by amateur anglers; however, some small-scale commercial digging does occur. On rocky shores the collection of periwinkles for human consumption occurs all year round, with peak effort coinciding with the Christmas period, although most of this production is now exported to France, Belgium and Spain. Intertidal collection of lobsters takes place all year round, commercially and recreationally. The biodiversity, flora and fauna impacted by fisheries can be classified under three main categories: target species being removed; non-target species being impacted through, for example, bycatch; and 118 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation aquatic habitats, biodiversity and ecosystems impacted during fishing operations, or by controlled and abandoned, lost or discarded fishing gear. In addition, a section on bio-safety has been included for consideration. Bio-safety is the introduction of marine alien species into an environment. The state of these biological features in the NIFCA District is described in the following sections. C.2.1 Target Species With continual declines in white fish stocks the existing fishing industry is experiencing a decline in vessels, fishers and landings. Fishing activity is now focused mainly on crabs, lobsters and prawns and limited processing of local salmon and other fish.5 C.2.1.1 Shellfish Species Nationally, the North East Coast contains some important shellfish waters in the UK. Information about the state of stocks of these species is largely limited to those targeted in commercial, and to a lesser extent, recreational fisheries. The District supports important shellfish fisheries for lobster, brown or edible crab and velvet crab. Lobster: Lobsters (Homarus gammarus) are most commonly found in rocky substrata, living in holes and excavated tunnels from the lower shore to about 60 m depth. 6 They are widely distributed along the NIFCA coast wherever there is suitable habitat to shelter the various life history stages. Lobster is the main target species for inshore vessels working out of the local ports throughout Northumberland, the main season runs from July through to January with catch rates falling as the season progresses. This decline may reflect a combination of depletion, but also reduced foraging activity for food as water temperature declines though the autumn and into winter. During 2007 in excess of 130,000kg of lobsters were landed into the region. CEFAS (Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science) report that the status of the stock of lobster in the Northumberland (and Durham) area, assessed by analysing size distributions using length based methods, is very low and that females are below the minimum recommended level.7 In addition, the report explains that the exploitation level of lobster is very high and is significantly above the maximum recommended level; the assessments therefore raise concerns about sustainability in the long term. However, NIFCA report that, since the start of the lobster v-notching scheme, the Authority has had positive feedback throughout the district (and beyond supporting the scheme) from fishermen claiming that numbers of immature lobsters have increased, the v-notching scheme intends to future-proof the fishery by maintaining and enhancing healthy lobster stocks within the Authority’s district. Brown Crab: The Brown crab (Cancer pagurus) is found on bedrock including under boulders, mixed coarse grounds, and offshore in muddy sand. It occupies the lower shore, shallow sublittoral and offshore 5 The Journal. 2009. New strategy for Northumberland coastline. [cited 21/01/2012] Available from World Wide Web: http://seahouses.journallive.co.uk/2009/10/new-strategy-for-northumberlan.html 6 Wilson, E. (2008). Homarus gammarus. Common lobster. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 18/12/2012] Available from World Wide Web: <http://www.marlin.ac.uk/species/Homarusgammarus.htm> 7 Cefas. 2011. Cefas Stock Status 2011: European lobster (Homarus gammarus) in Northumberland & Durham. . [cited 18/12/2012] Available from World Wide Web: <http://www.cefas.defra.gov.uk/media/580090/lobster%20northumberland%202011.pdf> 119 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation to about 100m. It is mainly, but not exclusively, a nocturnal species; an active predator that consumes a variety of crustaceans and molluscs.8 Historical tagging studies show that hen crabs carry out reproductive migrations believed to be within distinctive inshore and offshore stocks. These self-sustaining populations would effectively be ‘manageable’ as separate stocks, and would respond separately to management measures.9 The stock considered in this assessment is inshore stock. The status of the stock of brown crab in the Central North Sea is low and is around the minimum recommended level. Exploitation level is moderate on females and, although likely to be sustainable is above the level required for Maximum Sustainable Yield. There is a trend of increasing exploitation rate on males and this is likely to be unsustainable in the long term. Reported landings and fishing effort increased substantially following the introduction of Buyers and Sellers legislation and the Restrictive Shellfish Licence Scheme in 2006 (an increase which is likely due to better recording rather than an increase in effort). Since this period fishing activity data are thought to be generally more reliable but the integrity of the time series, especially fishing effort, is uncertain. Velvet Crab: The velvet crab (Necora puber) is a fast moving swimming crab that grows to about 8cm. It is found on stony and rock substrata intertidally and in shallow water, most abundant on moderately sheltered shores.10 Information on the structure of the stocks supporting the new velvet crab fishery is limited. However, Walmsley and Pawson11 noted that velvet crabs have attracted more interest as markets have opened up They are caught in pots set in the shelter of the coast, often as a bycatch to lobsters, and provide an important resource during the winter when they have a higher survival rate when stored prior to being taken in vivier lorries to Europe, where they are sold live. Nephrops: The Nephrops, (Nephrops norvegicus), also called the prawn, Norway lobster, Dublin Bay prawn, langoustine, scampi or Nephrops is a pale orange crustacean that can grow up to 25cm in length but is often much smaller. Nephrops live in shallow often branching burrows in soft stable mud at depths ranging from 20m to 800m. Although small planktonic Nephrops larvae are transported by the currents and may be carried from one part of the North Sea to another, it is believed that there is very little exchange of adults between functional units. Adult Nephrops are relatively sedentary, seldom moving more than a few hundred metres from their burrows.12 Nephrops landings from the North Sea have progressively increased over the years and the implementation of the “buyers and sellers” regulations in 2006 considerably tightened up the levels of reporting for Nephrops. Since 2006 the landings figures are considered to be more reliable and recent increases in landings and landings per unit effort (LPUE) may have resulted from the increase in reporting levels, not necessarily actual changes to the stock. However, it could also be argued that effort in Nephrops fisheries has increased due to a number of finfish fishermen choosing to opt for Nephrops that can be fished with a smaller mesh than in the finfish fisheries. 8 Neal, K.J. and Wilson, E. (2008). Cancer pagurus. Edible crab. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 18/012/2012] Available from World Wide Web: <http://www.marlin.ac.uk/species/Cancerpagurus.htm> 9 Mott MacDonald. 2008. Pilot Shellfish Fisheries Strategic Environmental Assessment: Scoping Report 10 Wilson, E. 2008. Necora puber. Velvet swimming crab. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 18/12/2012]. Available from World Wide Web: <http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesinformation.php?speciesID=3858> 11 Walmsley S.A. and Pawson, M.G., 2007. The coastal fisheries of England and Wales, Part V: a review of their status 2005–6. Sci. Ser. Tech Rep., Cefas Lowestoft. 12 Chapman, C. J. 1982. Nephrops tagging experiments in Scottish waters 1977-1979. ICES CM 1982/K:22 120 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Nephrops are the only shellfish stocks that are assessed by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). The stock are assessed at the individual stock level (called functional units), but are managed by much wider TAC areas. Nephrops stocks at FU (functional unit) level appear to be fairly stable in terms of abundance and size composition. Notable exceptions have been observed on the Fladen ground which showed a marked increase in abundance and on the Farn Deeps where the population size of Nephrops dropped in 2007 and unusual changes in the seasonal sex-ratio pattern occurred following increased fishing effort in 2006. In 2010, it was reported that effort was becoming limiting (due to the days at sea restrictions) for Nephrops vessels with the result that vessels were remaining in port for longer periods during strong tides or periods or poor weather when catches were expected to be low. Mussels: The edible mussel (Mytilus edulis) is one of the most common shore animals. It is a gregarious species commonly found around the coast on the rocky shores of open coasts attached to the rock surface and in crevices, and on rocks and piers in sheltered harbours and estuaries, often occurring as dense masses.13 Whilst there is considerable knowledge about the general biology and life history of mussels, and a detailed knowledge about the mussel stocks in some parts of the UK, there is little scientific knowledge about those stocks of these species that are exploited in the NIFCA District. Mussel beds are a listed attribute of the sand and mud flats, which are a qualifying feature of Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SPA, and a sub-feature of the Lindisfarne SPA. A survey of the natural population of mussels on the large bed located on Fenham Flats, part of the Lindisfarne Nature Reserve, adjacent to Holy Island, was undertaken in order to estimate the size of the mussel stock. This stock assessment has revealed that as of March 2012, there was an estimated 3,460 tonnes of mussel biomass within a 43.80 hectare (ha) mussel bed – both of which are comparable with the 2011 results of 3864 tonnes of mussel biomass and a 45.65ha of mussel bed. The overall number of mussels on the beds, however, is significantly down on all previous years. The overall number of mussels estimated on the beds now stands at 262 million, well down on the high in 2010 when there was an estimated 486 million mussels on the beds. The main factor in this reduction would appear to be the absence of juveniles, particularly below 20mm in size. The reason for the reduction in the number of juveniles may be: Due to poor spat (e.g. the spawn or larvae of shellfish) production over the last few years. This may very well be linked to the poor condition of the mussels in general that has been observed for some time; Because mussel stocks fluctuate markedly, and spawning success is episodic, unpredictable, and unreliable. There has been a run of poor years for reasons that are not known. Mussel beds are sometimes prone to catastrophic losses when bio-deposits build up under the animals, which are then washed away in winter storms; and It is possible that Crassostrea gigas, which is grown nearby on trestles surrounding the mussels might be affecting mussel spat settlement, possibly by competing for food. Whelk: The common whelk (Buccinum undatum) grows up to 10 cm in length; it is occasionally intertidal but mainly subtidal down to 1,200 m. It is found on muddy sand, gravel and also rock and is sometimes present in brackish waters. Masses of lentil shaped eggs are often found attached to subtidal rocks, stones or shells. Empty egg masses, known as 'sea wash balls', are often found on the strandline and are sometimes mistaken for sponges. There is no commercial targeting of whelk in the NIFCA district and information on fishing activity for whelks is unknown. 13 Green, J. 2007. Stock Assessment of the Littoral Mussel (Mytilus edulis) Beds on Fenham Flats (Holy Island). 121 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Scallops: The local scallop species is King Scallop (Pectin maximus). These scallops live on rocky and gravelly shores and seabeds, and can be widely found across the Northumberland coast. 14 There is little information on the scale of landings or levels of fishing activity for scallops within the NIFCA District area; however, it is reported that two trawlers in the Northern district were scallop dredging over the quarter: one was from Amble working full-time and the other from Seahouses working periodically and having varying degrees of success.15 Although scallop dredging within the NIFCA district usually only occurs 3-4 weeks a year, with only a few boats, it can be a potentially damaging activity to the environment, and it can occur within the EMS. Cockle: The cockle (Cerastoderma edule) inhabits the surface of a variety of sediments, burrowing to a depth of < 5 cm. It is found on clean sand, muddy sand, mud or muddy gravel from the middle to lower intertidal, sometimes sub-tidally. Cockles are periodically abundant in estuaries and sheltered bays, and population densities of 10,000 per m² have been recorded. The general principles of cockle dynamics, harvesting and management are well known and well established in other areas (e.g. the Wash, Thames Estuary and the Burry Inlet, Wales). No commercial fishing of cockles takes place in the district and there is no scientific information on the detailed distribution of the local stocks or their dynamics. Oyster: The Pacific Oyster (Crassostrea gigas) is an oyster native to the Pacific coast of Asia. It has become an introduced species in many areas including Europe. It is currently farmed at Fenham Flats within the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast EMS. Given the species invasive propensities, and it’s location within this sensitive protected site, there is potential for environmental issues to develop on qualifying features, sub-features and attributes of the designation, particularly if sea water temperatures continue to increase. C.2.1.2 Finfish Species Capture fisheries are widely acknowledged to result in significant impacts on marine ecosystems, in particular on the target stocks. Such extractive fisheries are known to have fundamental long-term impacts on the age structure of fish stocks, shifting the age distributions towards smaller and faster growing individuals.16 This shift reduces the proportion of the older, larger fish in the stock, thus reducing sustainable yield and, in the long term, endangering reproductive dynamics. Such stocks are generally less productive and there can be quite profound knock-on effects to dependent and associated habitats and species within the marine ecosystem.17 In the last decade there has been a notable decline in traditional finfish fisheries, particularly those targeting cod. This decline, combined with increasing restrictions and controls on fishing activity has driven changes in both the species targeted and the methods of fishing employed by the local inshore fishing industry. In the District, finfish are caught both as a bycatch in the Nephrops fishery and in a directed fishery. The Farn Deeps, a deep-water trench some 10–20 miles offshore, has traditionally provided good catches of haddock, cod and whiting for most of the year, although these fish are also caught closer inshore, particularly in the winter months. Northumberland SFC byelaws prohibit the use of purse seines, ring nets 14 Northumberland Wildlife Trust. 2012. Variegated Scallop. [on-line] [cited 18/12/2012]. Available from World Wide Web: <http://www.nwt.org.uk/species/variegated-scallop> 15 Browne, A.B. 2011. Combined Officers Report for the Quarter Ending 30 June 2011. 16 Daan, N., Gislason, H., Pope, J.G. and Rice, J.C. 2005. Changes in the North Sea fish community: evidence of indirect effects of fishing? ICES Journal of Marine Science 62:177–188. 17 Kaiser, M.J., Clarke, K.R. Hinz, H., Austen, M.C.V., Somerfield, P.J., Karakassis, I. 2006. Global analysis of response and recovery of benthic biota to fishing. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 311: 1-14, 2006. 122 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation or similar encircling nets and trawlers over 11.6m in length operating within 3 miles of the coast. Flatfish, such as lemon sole and turbot, command a high market price and form an important part of the mixed demersal trawl fishery. Plaice are landed in greater quantities during the warmer months of the year. Boats <10 m principally set gill nets and trammel nets for cod, which move inshore from autumn through to spring. Cod (Gadus morhua) can grow to approximately 120 cm in length, weighing around 12kg. Atlantic cod are commonly found on sandy bottoms. Atlantic cod is one of the UK's most popular commercial species and as a result has been fished extensively in UK waters. They can often be found in large, dense shoals, making them an easy target for fishermen. Extensive over fishing has resulted in this once prolific species becoming commercially rare. Spawning occurs between February and April when 3 to 6 million buoyant eggs are released, often forming great swarms that can be transported miles by ocean currents before hatching after 12 days.18 Gill and trammel nets also take whiting, pollack, saithe and crustacea. Each net measures 75–100 m in length and 1.5–2 m in depth and up to 6 nets are joined together to form a ‘fleet’. In order to prevent the illegal capture of salmon and sea trout, NIFCA have only authorised the use of nets (other than licensed salmon T-nets) in areas where the depth of water exceeds 7 m, and netting is prohibited around the mouths of the Rivers Tyne, Wansbeck and Coquet. Tangle and trammel nets are used to catch flatfish, principally plaice and turbot. Nets used to catch plaice generally have a mesh size of 100–120 mm, whereas nets used for turbot and monkfish can have a mesh size of up to 300 mm. Boats under 10m may set over 5,000m of netting, though most set between 1,000 and 2,500m. Gill netting activity has decreased notably in the last 5 years, principally due to a scarcity of cod during the winter. As a result, fishermen are not investing in new nets. C.2.2 Non-target Species C.2.2.1 Effort In the past, trawlers and seiners targeted herring on well-known spawning grounds off the Farne Islands. Following the re-opening of the herring fishery in 1983, fishing effort has been minimal as local stocks have failed to recover and demand is low. Herring are now occasionally caught in drift nets close inshore and they are sometimes exploited for pot bait. Salmon migrating to spawn in rivers on the east coast of Scotland and the north-east coast of England are believed to enter the North Sea from the north, to move south and then inshore, before swimming north along the English coast to their home rivers. Sea trout originating from these same rivers are thought to migrate southwards to feed in the southern North Sea and are also exploited as they migrate north to spawn. Drift nets up to 550 m in length take a greater proportion of salmon than Northumbria T-nets, and the mesh varies between 120 and 135 mm, depending on the area and time of year. Following the buy-out of 53 drift net licences in 2003, 7 licences were issued in 2006 for fishing for salmon and sea trout with drift or T-net in the Northumberland region from Holy Island down to Souter Point (3 miles south of the River Tyne), 7 for ‘stell’ net only and 20 for T -net only. Fishing for salmon and sea trout in the 'Tweed Box' at the mouth of the River Tweed and which extends into England as far south as Holy Island (as defined by the Tweed Fisheries Acts 1857–1969) is subject to Scottish law, and drift nets are banned. The fishing season for drift nets in the whole of the North East Coast fishery starts on 1 June and 18 Wilding, C and Heard, J. 2004. Gadus morhua. Atlantic cod. Marine Life Information Network: Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme [on-line]. Plymouth: Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. [cited 18/12/2012]. Available from World Wide Web: <http://www.marlin.ac.uk/speciesinformation.php?speciesID=3359> 123 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation ends on 31 August. The T/J-net fishery for sea trout starts on 26 March. Closed areas (known as ‘playgrounds’) have been established around the mouths of the Rivers Coquet, Wansbeck and Tyne, although T-nets are permitted in some of these areas. T-nets used between Boulmer and Hauxley (within private stell fisheries) and close to the River Tyne are set at fixed berths and fishermen operate under a rota system. In the Druridge Bay, Beadnell and Holy Island areas, there are no formal rotas or rigidly fixed stations for T-netting. C.2.2.2 Bycatch The ecosystems in the NIFCA District include a diverse range of marine species including cetaceans, birds, fish and a myriad of invertebrates, including commercial and non-commercial species. Bycatch of these marine species occurs where non-target fish and other organisms are also caught. Species known to be caught in the NIFCA District fisheries bycatch include brown crab and velvet crab, caught as bycatch in the lobster fishery.19There is no systematic data gathering for other species. In addition, as mentioned above, some finfish are caught as bycatch in the Nephrops fishery. Some species of cetaceans (e.g. dolphins) are known to be accidentally caught in fishing gear and either killed or damaged as a result. Any increases in seabird populations represent an transient high and the curbing of discards is an important means of helping to restore fish stocks and rebuild a more sustainable food web for seabirds and other marine wildlife. Releasing discards and offal can attract seabirds. Therefore, these practices should only take place when seabirds are not at risk of bycatch (i.e. when fishing nets are not in the water). It should also be noted that not all species of seabirds feed on discards. Fishing activities can also negatively impact on birds through competition for food and destabilisation of the food chain. For shellfisheries and bait collection, there may also be disturbance impacts (e.g. on wading birds) which could lead to displacement and competition for food. C.2.2.3 Discards Lobster pots are hauled on-board across roller systems to a handling area where the pots are emptied. Inevitably, there is some proportion of the catch that is discarded as not all species caught are desirable to fishers. Discards from potting have a high survival rate; however, there is no quantifiable or verifiable information on the species discarded from the shellfish or finfish fisheries in the NIFCA District. More details about discarding will be presented in Section 5.9 on Waste below. C.2.3 Other Species C.2.3.1 Birds Numerous species of seabirds and migrant and wintering waterfowl have been recorded in the district. In particular Lindisfarne SPA, Farne Islands SPA, Northumbria Coast SPA, and Coquet Island SPA support a variety of bird species. Table C.1 presents the bird species present in the district. Some key species are noted in further detail below: Golden plover (Pluvialis apricaria) overwinter at Lindisfarne in internationally important numbers, where they feed on a range of invertebrates in permanent pastures near the SPA. As night falls however, they return to feed and roost on the intertidal sandflats and mudflats within the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast European marine site. 19 Browne, A.B. 2010. An Insight into the Fisheries throughout the District of the Authority’s predecessor body Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee in 2010. [on-line].[cited 19/12/2012]. 124 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Whooper swan (Cygnus cygnus) arrive from Iceland in early-mid October and spend the winter at Lindisfarne until March. During this period the swans forage in areas with emergent and submerged plants, such as saltmarshes and eelgrass beds. During the summer months little tern (Sterna albifrons) breed at Lindisfarne, feeding on small fish and crustaceans in the shallow intertidal waters of within the Lindisfarne SPA. Nesting occurs on the beach above the mean high water mark. Internationally important populations of seven regularly occurring migratory species can be found at Lindisfarne including Greylag goose (Anser anser), and Light-bellied Brent goose (Branta bernicla hrota). Nationally important numbers of wigeon (Anas penelope), bar-tailed godwit (Limosa lapponica), redshank (Tringa totanus), ringed plover (Charadrius hiaticula) and grey plover (Pluvialis squatarola) also overwinter at Lindisfarne. The eelgrass, invertebrate and saltmarsh communities, supported by the extensive intertidal sandflats and mudflats, provide an important food source for these species. Little Tern (Sterna albifrons) breed at within the Northumbria Coast SPA in summer , whilst in winter the mixture of rocky and sandy shore supports large number of Turnstone and Purple Sandpiper. 90% of the UKs roseate tern population can be found at Coquet Island. Roseate tern is one of our rarest nesting seabirds. Several thousand nesting Sandwich, Arctic and common terns accompany the roseates in May, June and July, and thousands of puffins occupy the main part of the island During summertime around 150,000 breeding pairs of seabirds can be found on Farne islands. Around 23 different varieties of birds can be spotted here, including razorbills, guillemots, eider ducks and colourful puffins. Table C.1: Bird Species found in the District Seabirds Migrant and wintering waterfowl Fulmar Eider Grey plover Cormorant Shag Oystercatcher Shelduck Mallard Common scoter Black-headed gull Lesser black-backed gull Teal Mute swan Goldeneye Dunlin Herring gull Kittiwake Lapwing Redshank Knot Golden plover Sandwich turn Roseate tern Common tern Ringed plover Bar-tailed godwit Wigeon Turnstone Curlew Purple sandpiper Arctic tern Little tern Light-bellied brent goose Greylag goose Snipe Red-breasted merganser Guillemot Razorbill Whooper swan Sanderling Puffin Source: Coasts and Seas of the United Kingdom – Region 5: North-East England: Berwick-upon-Tweed to Filey Bay (Joint Nature Conservation Committee, 1995) C.2.3.2 Mammals A number of mammals are found along the coast within the district including: the otter, red squirrel, and five species of bats – Brandt’s bat, Natterer’s bat, Noctule, Pipistrelle, Brown long-eared bat. All the British 125 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation bats, the otter and the red squirrel are listed under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act and Annex II of the Bern Convention (except for the red squirrel, which is on Annex III). Grey seals can be seen regularly throughout the region, and there is a major breeding colony on the Farne Islands. The islands support a population of approximately 4000 individuals, with around 1000 pups produced each year, providing 3% of the annual pup production for the UK (the largest breeding colony in England). Seals also use relatively inaccessible rocky beaches to the north of Fast Castle Head, on Coquet Island, south of Alnmouth and the sand flats of Lindisfarne for breeding and hauling out, while the whole EMS is used as a passageway between colonies. Common seals are not abundant in this region. There are only two established colonies: a very small one on Holy Island Sands and a slightly larger one in the mouth of the River Tees. Twelve species of cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) have been recorded since 1980 along the coast or in nearshore waters (within 60km of the coast) of the region. Of these, five species are either present throughout the year or are recorded annually as seasonal visitors to the region. These include: Minke whale, Harbour porpoise, White-sided dolphin, White-beaked dolphin, Bottlenose dolphin, and Killer whale. The harbour porpoise is listed in Annex II of the EC Habitats Directive as a species whole conservation requires the designation of Special Areas of Conservation. C.2.3.3 Amphibians and Reptiles Nine species of amphibians and terrestrial reptiles and one species of marine turtle have been recorded in the region. These are: common frog, common toad, smooth newt, palmate newt, great crested newt, slowworm, common lizard, grass snake, adder, and leatherback turtle. C.2.4 Habitats and Designated Areas The seabed substrate throughout the north east coast, both inshore and offshore, provides a good matrix of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ ground, supporting diverse ecosystems and a wide range of marine species, including a wide range of commercially valuable shellfish and finfish species. The North East coast is biodiversity rich and is characterised by its vegetated cliffs and submerged or partly submerged sea caves of international importance, together with underwater reefs teeming with colourful marine life. There are several sensitive areas in the NIFCA District that have been afforded international protection. These areas include: Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast (BNNC) Special Area of Conservation (SAC), OSPAR Marine Protected Area (MPA) and European Marine Site (EMS) - contributes towards the important European network of Annex I habitats and Annex II species listed in the 1992 EU Habitats Directive. Special features of the SAC include reefs, caves, mudflats, large shallow inlets and bays and grey seals. It should be noted that the BNNC EMS also includes the bird interest features and intertidal area of the Lindisfarne Special Protection Area (SPA) (as described below); Lindisfarne Special Protected Area (SPA) and Ramsar Site – supports an internationally important assemblage of waterfowl, high numbers of migratory species (e.g. greylag goose) and internationally important populations of rare birds as identified in Annex I of the 1979 EC Birds Directive (e.g. golden plover, whooper swan). The Lindisfarne SPA is also designated under the Ramsar Convention as a wetland of international importance; Northumbria Coast SPA and Ramsar Site - includes much of the coastline between the Tweed and Tees Estuaries in North-East England. In summer, the site supports important numbers of breeding 126 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Little Tern (Sterna albifrons), whilst in winter the mixture of rocky and sandy shore supports large number of Turnstone and Purple Sandpiper; North Northumberland Dunes SAC – qualifying features include embryonic shifting dunes, shifting dunes along the shoreline with Ammophila arenaria (white dunes), shifting dunes with marram, fixed dunes with herbaceous vegetation (grey dunes), dune grassland, dunes with creeping willow, humid dune slacks and Petalwort; Farne Islands SPA - a group of low-lying islands between 2-6 km off the coast of Northumberland. The islands are important as nesting areas for sea birds, especially terns, gulls and auks; Tweed Estuary SAC – the qualifying features include estuaries, and mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide. The Tweed Estuary is a complex estuary, which discharges into the North Sea, with a variety of intertidal mudflats and sandflat communities. It is a long narrow estuary, which is still largely natural and undisturbed, with its water quality classified as excellent throughout. It supports a wide range of habitats compared with other estuaries in north-east England. Fish species include the rare anadromous 1102 Allis shad (Alosa alosa), which runs in the estuary, migratory 1106 Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), and occasional records of 1099 river lamprey (Lampetra fluviatilis) and 1095 sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus); and Coquet Island SPA - Coquet Island is located 1 km off the coast of Northumberland. It is a small, flattopped island with a plateau extent of c. 7 ha. The peaty soil of the plateau supports short turf grassland, although where nutrient input from seabird colonies is greatest, there are dense stands of taller species, including nettles (Urtica spp). These provide cover for some of the nesting terns. The island is of importance for a range of breeding seabirds, including four species of terns, auks and gulls. The seabirds feed outside the SPA in the nearby waters, as well as more distantly in the North Sea. Coquet now holds 90 per cent of the UK's roseate tern population, one of our rarest nesting seabirds. Several thousand nesting Sandwich, Arctic and common terns accompany the roseates in May, June and July, and thousands of puffins occupy the main part of the island. The island was designated as a bird sanctuary (declared 1978) and as such it is not permitted for the public to land on the island. In addition, there are a number of other designations in the NIFCA District, including: Aln Estuary MCZ - predominantly coastal saltmarsh and saline reedbed with sheltered muddy gravels and estuarine rocky habitats, all of which are UK Biodiversity Action Plan priority habitats. The inner part of the Aln Estuary at Coquet supports sprat and flounder nurseries. Juvenile migratory species including plaice, flounder, brown trout, Atlantic salmon, European eel and sand eel have been found close to the estuary; The Northumberland Coast is designated as an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). It covers an area of 138 square km along 64km of coastline from Berwick to the Coquet estuary. The AONB contains a tremendous variety of natural and historical interest; St. Mary’s Island Local Nature Reserve – a small island made of sandstone near the seaside resort of Whitley Bay. The island is opposite Curry's Point (recorded on the HER as an execution site) on the mainland and is connected to the coast at low tide by a rocky causeway. The main feature of the island is St. Mary's Lighthouse which was built in 1898; The BNNC includes the St Abbs and Eyemouth Voluntary Marine Reserve (VMR), which has a special assemblage of marine life that and is fished by local fishermen using traditional lobster pots to catch shellfish. It was established in 1984, the first of its kind in the UK. The VMR is not within the NIFCA district but the EMS (which the VMR sits within) is a cross border site that is partly within the NIFCA district. It should be noted that NIFCA have no statutory powers cross border; and There are a number of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) within the District including: – Alnmouth Saltmarsh and Dunes; – Coquet Island; – Cresswell and Newbiggin Shores; – Cresswell Ponds; – Hadston Links; 127 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation – – – – – – – – – – – – – Low Hauxley Shore; Northumberland Shore; Tynemouth to Seaton Sluice; Warkworth Dunes and Saltmarsh; Tweed catchment rivers – England: Lower Tweed and Whiteadder; River Coquet and Coquet Valley Woodlands; Lindisfarne; Bamburgh Coast; Farne Islands; Newton Links; Castle Point to Cullernose Point; Bamburgh Dunes; and Howick to Seaton point. Although the Swallow Sand MCZ is outside the NIFCA limits it may still be relevant due to summer foraging bird species found there. This site was designated to protect the sediment habitats found in the area. It is located within the northern North Sea, 99km off the Berwickshire coast. The seafloor consists of sand, coarse sediment, gravel and mud and is home to burrowing worms and bivalve molluscs. Within the western region of the site is an important geological feature, the Swallow Hole. This glacial tunnel valley supports high numbers of commercial fish species, including Sprat and Mackerel. The north-eastern region of Swallow Sand is an important area for summer foraging birds including Atlantic puffins, black kittiwakes, common guillemots, northern fulmars, and northern gannets. Whilst existing protection is likely to continue for existing designated sites within the district, there are a number of sites which may be designated in the future such as Coquet to St Mary’s rMCZ, SPA marine extensions to the Farne Islands SPA and Coquet Island SPA, and the potential future designation of the Aln Estuary as a SAC. Although outside the NIFCA limits the Farne East rMCZ and the Fulmar rMCZ may also be relevant. Therefore, NIFCA should be mindful of fishing activity that could cause damage to sites yet to be designated. Coquet to St Mary's recommended Marine Conservation Zones (rMCZ) - Coquet to St Mary's stretches for 198.75km2 along the Northumberland coastline and includes both Coquet Island, important for breeding and foraging seabirds and grey seals, alongside St Mary's Island, important for its rocky reefs and crustaceans. The seafloor consists of a mosaic of habitats including three different rocky habitats, interspersed with mixed sediments, unique shoreline underboulder communities and estuarine rocky habitats. All of these support thousands of seabirds and marine mammals, including 90% of the UK Roseate tern population, harbour porpoises, white-beaked dolphins, and species of whale; Farnes East rMCZ - Farnes East is located 11km offshore from the Berwickshire coast and within close proximity to the Farne Islands, making it an important foraging area for seabirds, such as guillemots and razorbills. The mud within this site is an important fishing ground for Nephrops. This area also has a high level of pelagic ecological importance, and supports diverse marine life communities. With burrowing mega fauna proliferating, a variety of worms, sea snails and paired-shelled bivalves are present; and Fulmar rMCZ - Fulmar is located 224km offshore from the Northumberland coast. The seafloor consists mostly of sand and gravel with some patches of coarse sediment which provides an ideal home for creatures to bury themselves, such as the ocean quahog. The undulate ray is also frequently found here. Fulmar is an important area for seabirds providing foraging grounds for northern fulmars and northern gannets. Certain species such as seabirds are mobile species and are wide ranging, with some capable of travelling more than 200km from their nest sites in search of food. Gannets do not nest within the NIFCA district, but can be found in these waters and may be travelling from Flamborough Head and Bempton Cliffs SPA and/or the Firth of Forth Islands SPA. Therefore, European designated sites 100km outside the NIFCA 128 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation boundaries have been identified. European designated sites up to 100km outside the NIFCA district boundaries along the coast include: St. Abb’s Head to Fast Castle SPA; Forth Islands SPA; Firth of Forth Ramsar Site and SPA; Teesmouth and Cleveland Coast SPA and Ramsar; Flamborough Head and Bempton Cliffs SPA; Durham Coast SAC; Castle Eden Dene SAC; and Beast Cliff – Whitby (Robin Hood’s Bay) SAC. Figure C.1: Ecological Designated Sites Source: www.magic.gov.uk 129 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation C.2.5 Bio-safety Shipping and aquaculture are responsible for approximately 90% and 10%, respectively, of the introductions of marine alien species in Europe (WWF-Germany, 2004). About 80 non-indigenous species are assumed to have been introduced into the North Sea by transoceanic shipping and aquaculture. The number is certainly underestimated as most small organisms receive insufficient attention at the species level.20 More commonly, alien species have been introduced, intentionally or accidentally, as a result of mariculture activities. Some species of finfish, shellfish (molluscs, crustaceans, and echinoderms) and aquatic plants (including seaweeds) are imported from other sea areas specifically for cultivation, either extensively for commercial reasons or otherwise for the aquaria trade or research. Some, such as mussels and oysters, are deliberately introduced to a location in the wild; others, such as farmed salmon, occasionally escape into the wild and establish themselves. Introduced species compete with their native counterparts for food, vital space, may also interbreed with the local species altering their genetic makeup. Introduced species may also potentially alter habitats and the balance of existing communities, resulting in changes to the structure and function of entire marine ecosystems. Species of concern in the District are cord grass (Spartina spp.), that has colonised mudflats particularly at Lindisfarne, the Chinese mitten crab (Eriocheir sinensis) currently present in the River Tyne, and the Pacific oyster which is currently farmed at Fenham Flats. There are a number of species that have recently been found, and new species ranges are being discovered as on-going data are gathered. Although NIFCA may not have the tools to manage these (as the vector for introduction may not be associated with fishing activities), they may have a role to play as NIFCA’s boats and equipment could be regarded as potential vectors for spread and introduction. Species include Caprella mutica (Japanese skeleton shrimp), Botrylloides violaceus, and Codium fragile. Other non-native species are also being discovered on an on-going basis but their invasive impact is unknown, such as Tectura testudinalis (Tortoise shell limpet) and Calliostoma zizyphinum (Painted topshell). It should be noted that this is not an exhaustive list of marine non-native species in the NIFCA district. C.2.6 Bait Digging Collection of intertidal animals takes place from both sediment and rocky shores on the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast. Bait digging in the area, mainly for lugworms, has been the subject of extensive study and legal regulation in the Lindisfarne National Nature Reserve and Boulmer Haven. Additionally, virtually every accessible intertidal reef is exploited by commercial and recreational users who collect winkles, mussels and crabs by hand. Bait digging has been carried out in the Lindisfarne National Nature Reserve (NNR) since at least the 1960s, and probably much earlier. This activity is concentrated in the winter months which is the period of greatest demand for lugworm as angling bait. Bait digging in Boulmer Haven has been a source of concern to local fishermen launching their cobles across the beach for many years. The holes and rocks left on the shore by bait diggers make launching difficult, and are potentially damaging to boats and tractors. For this reason, the Northumberland Estates (owners of the foreshore) placed notices prohibiting bait digging in the launching area, but permitted bait digging anywhere else on foreshore owned by the Duke of Northumberland. 20 Reise, K., Gollasch, S. and Wolff, W.J. 1998. Introduced marine species of the North Sea coasts. Helgoländer Meeresuntersuchungen. Volume 52, Issue 3-4, pp 219-234 130 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation The National Trust leases land and foreshore at Newton Haven, where a small beach has attracted bait diggers in the past. Numbers increased following the introduction of controls at Budle Bay in 1982, to up to 15 diggers at a time (a significant number in such a small area) travelling 20 to 50 miles to the site. A ban using standard National Trust byelaws in 1983 and an attempted prosecution reduced the number of diggers to an average of about four. These bait diggers worked below the level of low water of spring tides (outside the original limits of the leased area) where damage was caused to populations of burrowing sea urchins, razor shells and associated fauna that were of scientific interest. The National Trust subsequently applied successfully to the Crown Estates Commissioners for a lease of the seabed in order to control yacht moorings in the Haven and bait digging carried out at the bottom of the shore. A small amount of bait digging still occurs in the Haven, where policy is now for National Trust wardens to approach bait-diggers, explain that the byelaws exist, that the low shore areas are of scientific interest, and ask them to dig elsewhere. No recent attempts have been made to prosecute bait diggers because of the expense of prosecutions and potential difficulty of success. Recently, a meeting has been held with a number of anglers’ representatives, and a proposal for management has been received. The National Trust will consider this in consultation with anglers and with other recreational, nature conservation and local authority representatives. C.3 Climate Marine air and sea surface temperatures have been rising at a similar rate to land air temperature but with strong regional variations. Since the 1980s, the rate of rise has been about 0.2 - 0.6ºC per decade.21 In the UK, warming has been faster in the English Channel and southern North Sea than in the Scottish continental shelf waters. The functioning of the marine ecosystem is strongly influenced by ocean climate and acidification, whilst storms, extreme wave events, sea-level rise and coastal erosion pose threats to human life, built structures and shipping. The environmental effects of climate change on the marine environment can be far reaching and include changes to community structure as species colonise warmer environments. Therefore, adaptation and mitigation for climate change has become imperative. The adoption of flexible nature conservation that focuses holistically on the environment, allowing the development and migration of habitats and species, is critical to managing the effects of climate change. Key climate change risks may include: Changes to sea level, storms and wave climate - Increase in sea level causes flooding in coastal areas that are undefended, causing loss or damage to property, agriculture and habitats. A potential changed wave climate and storminess may cause damage to coastal and marine infrastructure as well as disruption to shipping and ferry services; Changes to temperature, salinity and water circulation - Increased temperature causes shifts in the type of species and numbers, affecting ecosystem structure as well as fish and shellfish catches. Warmer temperatures may provide new habitats for invasive non-native species, diseases and pathogens. Changes to salinity may disrupt ocean currents which can have devastating consequences for climate as a whole. Increased temperatures may also present some opportunities as arctic shipping lanes open for transport and UK tourism may be enhanced; Fisheries and Aquaculture - Shifts in species distribution would have economic consequences for UK fisheries as traditional target species become less abundant or move out of fishing areas, but new species may move in and present new opportunities. Increased seawater temperatures could allow the culturing of new species but may encourage diseases and invasive non-native species which could 21 MCCIP. 2008. Marine Climate Change Impacts Annual Report Card, 2007-2008, Marine Climate Change Impacts Partnership. [cited 22/01/2013]. Available from World Wide Web:< http://www.mccip.org.uk/arc/2007/PDF/ARC2007.pdf> 131 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation displace native species or cause unsuitability for human consumption. Cod stocks and other cold water fish are likely to move northwards replaced by warmer water species; The shellfish industry may be able to adapt, by realising opportunities for developing specialist fisheries for those species dependent on higher temperatures. Additionally, harvestable areas may be extended and growing seasons may lengthen or shorten. The impacts on traditionally fished species are likely to be less favourable; Human health - Increased temperatures may increase incidence of certain diseases and pathogens (including Vibrios and certain toxic algae). Increased precipitation and flash-flooding may increase incidence of sewer flooding and release of sewage-borne pathogens; Animal health - Fish immune systems are very sensitive to temperature change. Increased temperatures may shift the balance between hosts and pathogens causing irreparable damage to fish and shellfish stocks; Invasive non-native species - Increased temperatures may accelerate the spread of dangerous or harmful invasive non-native species, causing displacement and/or destruction of native species, shellfish stocks and damage to coastal sea defences (mitten crab). Of particular concern in the NIFCA district is the potential for impact on the ecosystem if Pacific Oysters spread from the Farm at Fenham; Eutrophication - Intense precipitation and associated flash flooding may suddenly increase the nutrient composition of coastal waters causing decline in water quality, eutrophication and harmful algal bloom events; Distribution of marine species –- Temperature change may result in the northward and southward shift of marine animal populations (fish, marine mammals, seabirds, zooplankton, inter-tidal invertebrates etc.) and may also result in a shift towards deeper waters. A southward shift is caused by warmer waters coming over the top of Scotland as a result of the Gulf Stream; Temperature change may result in the northward shift of marine animal populations (fish, marine mammals, seabirds, zooplankton, inter-tidal invertebrates etc.) and may also result in a shift towards deeper waters. Potential for issues from the Pacific Oyster farm with warming sea temperatures; Changes in the timing of biological events (phenology) - Changes in the timing of spawning, larval life cycles, zooplankton availability etc. as a consequence of changes in weather, temperature, ocean currents or stratification, could impact on successful recruitment of commercial fish or benthic invertebrates – i.e. ‘match-mismatch’ of key prey resources; and Nutrient cycles and ecosystem function - Changes in temperature, salinity and pH may impact nitrogen and carbon cycles as well as oxygen content of coastal waters. This could have consequences for pelagic and benthic production – with wider consequences for ecosystem functioning and commercial fisheries. Climate change impacts have been observed on individual species and species subsets; however, it remains to be seen whether there are systematic, coherent assemblage-wide responses to climate change that could be used as a representative indicator of changing biological state.22 Changes in species composition could offer new possibilities for the fisheries in the NIFCA District; however, they could also bring about undesirable consequences to the established fisheries in the district. In the North Sea, most species have deepened over time. The deepening of North Sea bottom-dwelling fishes in response to climate change is the marine analogue of the upward movement of terrestrial species to higher altitudes. The deepening of the demersal fish assemblage in response to temperature could be used as a biotic indicator of the effects of climate change in the North Sea and other semi-enclosed seas. 22 Dulvey, N.K et al. 2008. Climate change and deepening of the North Sea fish assemblage: a biotic indicator of warming seas. Journal of Applied Ecology. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2008.01488.x 132 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation C.4 Energy Fishing is one of the most energy-intensive food production methods in the world and it depends almost entirely on fossil fuels. In 2000, the world’s fishing fleets were responsible for about 1.2% of total global fuel consumption, which corresponds to approximately 0.67 litres of fuel per kg of fish and shellfish landed. In 2008, the EU fleet consumed 3.7 billion litres of fuel, representing 25% of the value of landings. 23 Seafish estimates that the entire UK fishing fleet consume around 300 million litres of fuel per year 24 and at the current level of fuel consumption, around 45,000 tonnes CO 2 is produced by the UK fishing fleet on an annual basis. There are a significant number of vessels working in the shellfish, and to a lesser extent finfish, fisheries in the NIFCA District that contribute to this consumption. The nature and extent of the emissions to air resulting from the operation of the fishing fleet in the NIFCA District are not known at present. There are several ways the industry could reduce fuel consumption resulting in a cut in emissions and operating costs including reducing towing speed, changing fishing method and modifying gear. With the rapid rise in oil prices, fuel consumption has become a significant component of operating costs as well as an environmental concern. Fish processing facilities use energy to produce hot water, steam, and electricity for process and cleaning applications. Electricity is used for electrical equipment, air conditioning, cooling, freezing, and ice production. C.5 Historic Environment The historic environment makes an important contribution to the character, quality, environment and economy in the NIFCA District. The District’s designated cultural heritage, summarised in Table C.2 below, has been shaped by a combination of factors, including the quality of agricultural and natural resources, distinctive landscape features and location (i.e. the position as a national and maritime frontier). The rich cultural heritage has left a legacy of well-preserved archaeological sites, historic buildings and other assets - many of national and international importance. These sites represent a valuable resource for both local communities and visitors. Table C.2: NIFCA District’s Designated Cultural Heritage Designation Number of assets World Heritage Site 1 Scheduled Monuments 957 Grade I listed buildings 176 Grade II* listed buildings 272 Grade II listed buildings 5,138 Conservation Areas 69 Registered Parks and Gardens 18 Registered Battlefields 4 Note: Definition of listing: Grade I – the building is of “exceptional interest” Grade II – the building is of “special interest, warranting every effort to preserve them” 23 European Commission. 2013. Energy Efficiency – Fisheries. 24 Curtis, H.C., Graham, K., Rossiter, T. 2006. Operations for improving fuel efficiency in the UK fishing fleet 133 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Designation Number of assets Grade II* - the building is of “particularly importance, of more than special interest” The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 can be used to designate a wreck site as a Scheduled Ancient Monument out to 12 nautical miles. Currently, there are no designated wreck sites under this Act in the NIFCA district. However, English Heritage is currently considering the designation of three wrecks which lie off the Farne Islands. Therefore, this legislation may have relevance in the future. Wrecks can also be protected under The Protection of Wrecks Act 1973, which allows the Government to designate a wreck to prevent uncontrolled interference. However, there are currently no wreck sites protected under this legislation in the district. There is a huge number of undesignated historic wreck sites in the NIFCA District and further offshore. There are over 1000 undesignated wreck sites in Northumberland listed in the English Heritage National Inventory (National Monument Record), and there are 16 undesignated wreck sites on the Northumberland Historic Environment Record (HER). These are described in the Table C.3 below. Table C.3: Undesignated Wreck Sites in the Northumberland Historic Environment Record (HER) Name Description Beal Sands shipwreck NU 083430. Beal Sands shipwreck. 19th/20th century. Some 13m length of timbers lie exposed in mud, with timbers 0.3m wide. It lies below mean high water mark and is covered with seaweed; the shore is a gentle gradient. Cheswick Sands shipwreck NU 052463. Cheswick Sands shipwreck. 19th/20th century. A 4m length of a decayed wooden hull and iron bolts are visible. It lies below mean high water mark and is at risk from vehicles driven on the sand. Crag End Beal Point shipwreck NU 080433. Crag End, Beal Point shipwreck. 19th/20th century. A c.5m stretch of hull lies at mean high water mark, very decayed Forfarshire Steamer (NU 23773844) The Forfarshire Steamer wrecked here 7th September 1838(?) 43 persons lost. French Trawler Fleet shipwrecks At the south end of St Mary's Bay, or New Haven, are two areas of wreckage on the Fills. The remains may be those of a French Trawler Fleet. Hanseat shipwreck A 20m length of metal hull lies below mean high water mark, south of Birling Carrs. Possibly 20th century wreck. The Hanseat, a 400 ton coaster, was driven aground on 2nd December 1980 at Birling Carrs. Nova Scotia shipwreck site A shipwreck lies amongst boulders at Nova Scotia south of Dunstanburgh Castle. 20th century remains. Possible shipwreck at Embleton Bay An apparent shipwreck lies at Embleton Bay. Two timbers show through the sand. Ross Links shipwreck NU 149372. Ross Links shipwreck. Wooden hull with several starboard ribs showing; c.20m length visible. Metal (?rudder) fastening surviving at the stern. Lies below mean high water mark. The shipwreck has been highly salvaged, but the remaining parts are quite intact. There is some potential for recovering its plan. There is no indication that it is of any great age, certainly not Viking. Submarine Longhoughton Submarine wreck [c.NU 261178] reputed to be a German 'prize' ship en-route to Rosyth. Some wreckage is visible above high water. Tadorne shipwreck The wreck of the Tadorne lies just off the boulders in Howick Haven [c.NU 263166]. A French trawler which sank in 1928. The Ballycotton shipwreck NU 2524 The Ballycotton wrecked on Emblestone Rock. Built 1880 by W Simons and Co. Iron two-deck ship of 888 tons. The Mindle shipwreck The Mindle, a wooden barque, lies off Cullernose Point, where it sank in a storm on 18th November 1916. Wreckage is spread over a wide area of the seabed. The Mistley shipwreck The scattered remains of The Mistley lie on the south side of Beadnell Point at a depth of 7m. The propeller is visible above mean high water mark at c.NU 239286. The Yewglen shipwreck Wreck of The Yewglen, 1000T, 220ft motor vessel, ran aground in February 1960. Now lies in 8m of water on the north side of Beadnell Point. Much has been salvaged. Boilers, plating, girders, mast and hatches still to be found. 134 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Name Description Wreck of Annie Walker The wreck of the Annie Walker, a British steam trawler, lies off Marden Rocks - Lat 55 23' 43" Long 01 35' 22". Built 1890, wrecked 17th March 1928. The archaeological resource does not consist entirely of discrete sites such as intact wrecks. Many sites are scattered, and palaeo-environments (the landscapes of history and prehistory) can be extensive, crossing between terrestrial, inter-tidal and sub-tidal zones. Palaeo-environments, surviving as water logged peat and forest have been recorded on the foreshore at Huxley and Cresswell. There are numerous other locally significant historic assets recorded in the HER. These include locally significant buildings, pillboxes, gun emplacement, sea walls, trenches (WWI or WWII coastal defensive positions), iron wheel, harbour limekilns, and coastal defence battery, amongst others. C.6 Landscape/Seascape The Northumberland Coast AONB and Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast EMS are two facets of the NIFCA District coastline. The primary purpose of the AONB and EMS designations is to conserve and enhance the beauty and the special and qualifying features of the natural environment. The coastline is characterised by long sand beaches, high rock cliffs and extensive reefs, clustered settlements, heritage sites (such as castles), extensive sea and inland views, abundant wild bird populations, grasslands and many other elements, all of which contribute to the visual amenity of the coast.25 Combinations of these elements result in land and seascapes with an individual, local character. With much of the UK’s coastlines designated under either conservation objectives or specific landscape designations, any development within the coastal zone will need to be in keeping with the scale and nature of the surrounding countryside and seascape. C.7 Soils Soils occupy a rather unique position in earth heritage environmental assessment because they are not explicitly covered by any of the existing designated area legislations in Britain. Because soils do not fit neatly into a site-based framework, they can be overlooked in environmental assessment.26 Soils provide an important interface between the geosphere, biosphere and hydrosphere and play an important part in biodiversity conservation. The fisheries sector has the potential to affect soils, mainly through the development of terrestrial sites for land-side facilities in port areas as well as the construction of buildings, such as fish processing facilities, on green field sites; however, the potential impacts are considered low. Key issues include the potential contamination of “clean” sites, remediation of sites with existing contamination issues, and in some cases, the preservation of important or rare soil types. C.8 Waste The catching and processing of fish generates a significant amount of waste. Of a total UK fish and shellfish resource it is estimated that approximately 43% ends up as products for human consumption and the remainder is classed as waste.27 Waste is produced from the processing plants but this is a low overall 25 Northumberland Coast AONB & Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast EMS Management Plan 2009-2014. 26 SNH. 2005. A handbook for environmental assessment. Prepared for SNH by David Tyldesley and Associates, Edinburgh 27 Archer, M, Watson, R., Denton, J.W. 2001. Fish Waste Production in the United Kingdom - The Quantities Produced and Opportunities for Better Utilisation. Seafish Report No. SR537 M 135 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation tonnage compared to the tonnage of discards and waste cumulatively thrown over the sides of vessels over a year. The details of each waste “type” are provided below. In addition, a section on material waste (fishing equipment, nets, etc.) has been included. C.8.1 Discards It is estimated by the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) that between 17.9 and 39.5 million tonnes of whole fish are discarded worldwide each year in commercial fisheries. Seafish have estimated the weight of discarded demersal, pelagic fish and shellfish, shown in Table C.4 below. Table C.4: Estimate of fish discarded at sea from UK vessels landing into the UK Type Landings (tonnes) Demersal Discards per catch (%) Discards (tonnes) Min Max Ave Min Max Ave 236,398 40 60 50 94,559 141,839 118,199 Pelagic 107,277 5 20 12.5 5,364 21,455 13,410 Shellfish 110,929* 5 20 12.5 5,546 22,186 13866 Total 448,604 105,470 185,480 145,475 Source: Seafish Estimated discards in the NIFCA District are currently unknown. C.8.2 Waste at Sea Most demersal fish are processed, to some extent, at sea before landing. The resultant waste consists of guts, liver and other viscera which are removed during the gutting operation. The ratio of gutting waste varies according to the species, fishing grounds and season. For cod, it varies between 8-22% of the whole weight of the fish but is typically 16%. It is not typical for pelagic fish and shellfish to receive any processing at sea, with the exception of a proportion of the Nephrops catch. It is currently not known how much waste is discarded at sea in the NIFCA District. C.8.3 Onshore Processing The very great majority of fish and shellfish processing operations are carried out in shore-based processing facilities. In general, fish processing can utilise high volumes of water and most water consumed at fish processing plants ultimately becomes effluent. Fish processing effluent contains high levels of organic matter due to the presence of oils, proteins and suspended solids. It can also contain high levels of phosphates and nitrates. Effluent quality is highly dependent upon the type of fish being processed. Pollution loads generated from the processing of oily fish species are much higher than from white fish species, due to the high oil content and the fact that these species are usually not gutted or cleaned on the fishing vessel. Fish processing effluent contains scraps of flesh, blood and soluble substances from entrails, as well as detergents and other cleaning agents. Effluent from the processing of oily fish can also contain very high levels of oil. At present there is no information on the consumption of water by fish processing facilities in the NIFCA District. 136 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation The seafood processing industry generates a significant amount of solid waste. It is estimated that approximately 312,875 tonnes of seafood processing waste is produced each year in the UK. Approximately 80% (249,950 tonnes) of this is finfish waste whereas 20% (62,925 tonnes) is shellfish. 28 It is not been possible to estimate the quantities of waste produced by other sectors of the industry. 29 The majority of waste is produced in the on-shore processing sector (35% of the resource) whereas discards and processing waste at sea produce smaller quantities (17% and 5% respectively of the resource). There is currently no information on solid waste produced in the NIFCA District. C.8.4 Material Waste Derelict fishing gear, defined as gear that has been lost or abandoned in the marine environment, presents a threat to marine organisms and the environment through impacts such as entanglements and ghost fishing. It consists of any items used for recreational or commercial fishing activities, such as nets, pots, ropes, and fishing line. Details of this waste type are not currently known in the NIFCA District. C.9 Water Quality Environment Agency (EA) and Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) use standards and targets to protect and improve water quality. Water Framework Directive (WFD) governs water quality and is implemented by the EA in Northumberland and SEPA in Berwickshire. It is designed to improve and integrate management of inland and coastal water bodies. It was transposed into UK law in 2003 and aims to have good chemical and ecological status for all water bodies by 2015. The chemical and ecological status for rivers, lakes, and estuarine and coastal waters for the NIFCA District has been presented in Figure C.2 below. According to the Environment Agency, the chemical status of the coastal waters is “good” and the ecological status ranges from “good to bad”. The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) aims to protect more effectively the marine environment across Europe. It aims to achieve good environmental status of the EU’s marine waters by 2020 and to protect the resource base upon which marine-related economic and social activities depend. There are strong links between the MSFD and WFD. The WFD relates to improving and protecting the chemical and biological status of surface water throughout a river basin catchment from rivers, lakes and groundwaters through to estuarine (transitional) and coastal waters to one nautical mile out to sea (three nautical miles in Scotland) and overlaps with MSFD in coastal waters. The main difference between the Directives is that the scope of Good Environmental Status under MSFD is broader, covering a greater range of biodiversity components and pressures which are not included for coastal water bodies under the WFD. These include noise, litter, most commercial fish species and some other aspects of biodiversity (e.g. marine mammals)30.Furthermore, 93% of England’s bathing waters met the minimum European water quality standard, with over 58% meeting the tighter guideline standard. In Northumberland and Berwickshire, the bathing water regulations are implemented by EA, SEPA and the local authorities. Eight out of nine bathing beaches in Northumberland and Berwickshire consistently achieve ‘guideline’ water quality; however, Spittal suffers from poor quality due to the influence of the River Tweed. 28 DEFRA. 2007. Sustainable Production and Consumption of fish and shellfish Environmental Impact Analysis. Reference 9S6182/R/303383/Edin 29 Archer, M, Watson, R, Garrett, A, Large, M. 2005. Strategic Framework for Seafood Waste Management. Report by Seafish. 30 Links between the Marine Strategy Framework and Water Framework Directives (HM Government, December 2012) 137 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Figure C.2: Source: Chemical and ecological status for rivers, lakes, estuarine and coastal waters 31 Environment Agency 2009 The European Shellfish Waters Directive (79/923/EEC) aims to protect shellfish populations. It sets water quality standards in areas where shellfish grow and reproduce. The Directive requires that certain substances are monitored in the water in which the shellfish live. These substances can threaten the survival of shellfish or inhibit their growth. The EA and SEPA are responsible for monitoring these substances at specific points. The directive will be replaced in 2013 by the WFD. This must provide equivalent protection of shellfish waters as the Shellfish Waters Directive. C.10 Human Health Although there are many aspects to human health and fisheries, this section will focus on: a) the overall health of the region; b) the benefits of consuming seafood; c) the health and safety of the District’s fishermen; d) the indirect benefits from recreational fishing; and e) the impacts of discarded fishing gear. C.10.1 Health in the North East The health of people in the North East is generally worse than England as a whole. Levels of deprivation are high (see Figure C.3) and life expectancy for both men and women is lower than the England 31 Environment Agency & DEFRA. 2009. Water for life and livelihoods. River basin management plan Northumbria River Basin District. [cited 10/01/2013]. Available from World Wide Web:< http://a0768b4a8a31e106d8b050dc802554eb38a24458b98ff72d550b.r19.cf3.rackcdn.com/gene0910bsrw-e-e.pdf> 138 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation average.32 This represents a huge burden in human and economic costs, holding the region back from achieving its potential. Figure C.3: Source: Index of Multiple Deprivation 2007 by Lower Super Output Area in the North East Region North East Health Profile 2010 C.10.2 Seafood Consumption Nationally, four out of five households consume seafood at least once a month and in 2011 households purchased 356,000 tonnes seafood products. Seafood has recognised health benefits in terms of cardiovascular disease prevention (coronary heart disease, sudden death, stroke, etc.), neurodevelopment (foetal, infant, child development and adult cognitive function) as well as other health outcomes (cancer prevention, improved mental health and behaviour, muscular and skeletal development and improved immune system performance). In particular, there is evidence that suggests association between EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid) and DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) omega-3 fatty acids in fish and reduced risk of coronary heart disease (23005 Dietary Guidelines). Recent research from the Avon Longitudinal Study Group has shown that omega-3 fatty acids contained in fish – particularly oily fish – are associated with boosting children’s future brain power and social skills. The figures for seafood consumption in the NIFCA District are unknown. C.10.3 Health and Safety of Fishermen The commercial fishing industry has significant dangers. For every 1,000 fishing boats, there are 55 accidents.33 The UK’s Maritime Coastguard Agency (MCA) regards safety on fishing vessels as a vital part of its work. The health and safety of fishermen in the District is currently unknown. 32 North East health Profile. 2010. [cited 18/12/2012]. Available from World Wide Web: <www.healthprofiles.info> 139 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation C.10.4 Discarded Fishing Gear Discarded fishing gear and other equipment is deposited in harbour areas, at sea or is washed up on beaches and intertidal areas causing a hazard to human health and local flora and fauna. Ghost fishing is a term used for lost or abandoned fishing gear that continues to catch fish. It is environmentally detrimental and the fish caught is wasted. However, the problem of consequential ghost fishing can be solved by building into traps a biodegradable panel that will later allow fish or crustacea to escape if they are ‘ghost fished’. In the case of the pot fisheries some gear losses are inevitable, usually in bad weather conditions. Generally fishers try to minimise this because the gear is very expensive. For trawlers gear loss is hugely expensive, so efforts are made to avoid losses or to retrieve lost gear by grappling. C.11 Material Assets The key material assets maintained by the capture fisheries sector in the NIFCA District include: a) vessels and equipment; b) fishing ports and harbours; c) processing facilities; and d) training / educational facilities. C.11.1 Fishing Vessels In 2012 there were 112 registered potting vessels, 12 drift net licences, 27 beach net licences and 44 trawlers. In addition, there are 65 local and visiting boats with permits to trawl within the 3 mile limit and three scallop dredgers. The fleet size of vessels in the NIFCA District has declined over the last decade. C.11.2 Ports and Harbours There are 16 ports and harbours in the District. Blyth is a modern port, handling up to 1 million tonnes of cargo each year and offering a first class handling, storage and distribution service. It is the second largest Northumbrian port, handling in excess of 150,000 tonnes of cargo, with capacity to handle significant additional tonnage and around 250 shipping movements annually. C.11.3 Processing Facilities Since 2012, the number of UK sea fish processing units has continued to fall, albeit at a slower rate than between 2008 and 2010. The number of sea fish processing units now stands at 325 (see Table C.5 below), a decrease of 15% on the 384 units recorded in 2010. Employment in the industry has also reduced since 2010. Table C.5: Processing Facilities UK Region Primary Mixed Secondary Total Humberside 37 18 11 66 Grampian 23 33 7 63 North England 16 20 11 47 South/Midlands/Wales 12 23 7 42 Other Scotland 6 27 4 37 S W England 14 17 3 34 Highlands and Islands 6 12 1 19 33 Watson, K. 2012. Safety Issues in the Commercial Fishing Industry. 140 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Region Primary Mixed Secondary Total N. Ireland 5 9 3 17 Grand Total 119 159 47 325 From the table above it is clear to see that seafish processing plays an important role in the North of England. Information on the number or types of processing facilities is not widely available. C.11.4 Educational Facilities Fishermen now have access to a wide range of vocational qualifications – within the Marine Vessel Operations NVQ/SVQ framework – which enable them to train to nationally recognised industry standards. Details on training and educational facilities in the District are currently unknown. C.12 Socio-Economics C.12.1 Population Details of the population in Northumberland have been provided in Table C.6 below. Table C.6: Population Summary – Northumberland (ONS Mid-2010 Population Estimates) All People Density (all people) Males Females Source: Northumberland North East Region England 312,000 2,606,600 52,234,000 Ha 0.62 3.04 4.01 Sq. km 62 304 400 Count 152,800 1,279,100 25,757,600 % 49 49.1 49.3 Count 159,100 1,327,500 26,476,400 % 51 50.9 50.7 Know Northumberland Facts and Figures (Northumberland County Council, updated March 2012 Table C.7 and Figure C.4 display county level Full Time Employment (FTE), broken down by sub-sector for each of the five‐yearly increments of the projection period. Table C.7: Year Northumberland FTE Workers Agriculture, Forestry & Fishing Industry inc. energy an construction Services Total 2010 572 0.6% 19,915 21.8% 70,768 77.5% 91,256 100% 2015 570 0.6% 18,487 20.3% 71,826 79.0% 90,884 100% 2020 567 0.6% 17,929 19.5% 73,571 79.9% 92,067 100% 2025 559 0.6% 17,722 19.1% 74,542 80.3% 92,823 100% 2030 558 0.6% 17,599 18.8% 75,436 80.6% 93,594 100% Source: Long-Term Sectoral and Employment Projections for Northumberland (NCC, April 2010) 141 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Figure C.4: Source: Projected Full Time Employment by sub-sector (2010-2030) (Northumberland County Level) Long-Term Sectoral and Employment Projections for Northumberland (NCC, April 2010) The findings of the Northumberland County Council study show that the agriculture, forestry and fishery sub-sector is relatively stable, only declining slightly. However, the split between the three areas is not provided. The MMO has identified that the numbers of fishermen in the UK fishing industry is declining. The number of regular and part-time fishermen has fallen from 47,000 in 193834 to approximately 12,000 today (see Figure C.5), and landings in 2010 were a quarter what they were 50 years ago. However, it must be noted that, although there are declining fishermen and vessel numbers, on the whole effort has remained the same for a number of years, due to an increase in pots (for example) per vessel. 34 UK Parliament. 2012. Wet fish and damp squids. [cited 09/01/2013]. Available from World Wide Web: <http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/olympic-britain/food-and-agriculture/wet-fish-and-damp-squids/> 142 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Figure C.5: UK Fishing Effort - 2001 to 2011 16,000 14,000 Number 12,000 10,000 8,000 Vessels 6,000 Fishermen 4,000 2,000 0 Year Source: Marine Management Organisation 2012 Jobs lost on the boats also have a knock on effect further down the supply chain, affecting the fish processors, the net makers, the equipment suppliers, the market sellers and the transport companies whose livelihoods also depend on the industry. C.12.2 Economy Seafood is a multi-billion pound industry in the UK. Four out of five households consume seafood at least once a month and in 2011 households purchased 356,000 tonnes seafood products worth £2.89bn. In 2010, UK vessels landed 411,000 tonnes of seafood worth £549 million. Compared with 2009, this is an increase of 5% in quantity and a 5% increase in value. By volume the UK catch is spread fairly equally between demersal, pelagic and shellfish species. Shellfish, such as langoustine and scallops, account for almost half of all landings by value, followed by demersal species such as monkfish, and then pelagic species, such as mackerel. The fishing industry in Northumberland is of crucial social and cultural importance to local communities and the economy throughout the District. This sector remains an important economic activity for some ports and harbours on the North East and is an important component in the vitality of some of the county’s coastal communities. Some 75 vessels currently work out of the 16 ports and harbours in Northumberland alone, with more than half operating out of Amble and Blyth. Thus, the sector has a strong presence in particular localities and supports processing and secondary businesses. Moreover, the fisheries sector contributes to the tourism offer of the county (discussed in more detail in Section 5.14: Tourism). Agriculture and forestry are also of huge social and cultural significance to the distinctiveness of the county’s communities, heritage and natural environment, and to the visitor economy. They are an integral part in the management of the county’s natural resources and shape the county’s landscape and communities. C.12.3 Recreation The importance of water sports and water-based leisure in the region is related to the unspoilt environment in Northumberland. The main infrastructure developments include marinas, yacht moorings, dinghy parks 143 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation and launching slips. Many are concentrated in and near the larger conurbations, where new and proposed water sports centres are sometimes a part of schemes to regenerate run-down waterfronts. Limited facilities, primarily recreational craft moorings, are also found in most of the small harbours along the coast, and there are facilities for water sports around the main estuaries. The main sailing and yacht clubs in the area include Coquet Sailing Club and Coquet Yacht Club, Royal Northumberland Yacht Club, and River Blyth Sailing Association. There are also several smaller clubs situated along the coast.35 Recreational boat fishing takes place along most of the coastline, and shore fishing is also important, particularly at Amble Harbour. Recreational fishing occurs on various levels throughout the NIFCA area including potting, netting and hand gathering for a wide range of species. The recreational sea angling sector has over 1 million participants and the sector is an important market for the north-east coast of the UK. There is growing awareness that the recreational fisheries are highly significant in terms of the number of people participating in them, the total catch and their economic impacts. Commercial fishing in the UK, in 2004, was worth £300 million while it is estimated that £1 billion is spent by anglers on recreational fishing every year. This makes the recreational sector’s economic contribution to the UK more significant than the commercial fishing sector. The most important scuba diving area is around the Farne Islands. Other important water sports using the basic recreational infrastructure or simply access to the coast include jet-skiing, water skiing, canoeing, wind surfacing, surfing, and bathing. The coastline is well served by footpaths, but there are no designated coastal paths. There is a ten mile coastal path from Beadnell to Howick Haven. Bird watching is popular in the Lindisfarne NNR and Budle Bay. Boat trips are available to the Farne Islands to watch the seals. C.13 Tourism The economy is now changing to one where tourism is one of the most important sectors. Tourism generates more than £706 million in direct and indirect expenditure for Northumberland and it is estimated that approximately 9.1 million people visited Northumberland in 2011; this was an increase of 2% on 2010.36 The largest proportion of visitors travelled to Northumberland between the months of July and September. The natural environment, seascapes and marine species (e.g. the Farne Islands, Coquet Island) can play a key role in attracting visitors and supporting local economies. Tourism is an important element of the rural economy, supported by some of the most valuable natural resources and cultural assets in England, with many historic buildings and settlements. These include, Hadrian’s Wall, a World Heritage site which crosses the region and some of the largest areas of uninterrupted space and tranquillity in England. The majority of the upland areas, and some of the northern coastal areas, are of national and international environmental importance; many of the region’s rivers also fall into this category.37 The villages and towns along the coast are popular tourist destinations during the summer months, with the population of Seahouses, Berwick, Craster, Holy Island and Amble increasing during this season. Moreover, angling is an important touristic activity for the District, and there are a large number of local anglers throughout the District both with Clubs and unaffiliated (recreational angling is discussed further in 35 Coasts and Seas of the United Kingdom – Region 5 North-East England: Berwick-upon-Tweed to Filey Bay (JNCC, 1995) 36 Thomas, I. 2011. The Economic Impact of Tourism in Northumberland in 2011. Newcastle Gateshead Initiative, North East England 37 Environment Agency. 2010. River Basin Management Plan, Northumbria River Basin District 144 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Section C.12.3 Recreation). Angling is also particularly important for tourism and related businesses/communities, for example, hotels, public houses, bed and breakfast establishments and restaurants in fishing communities at the coast and nearby will all rely to an extent on visiting sea anglers.38 C.14 Transport Transport associated with the fishing industry mainly involves the distribution of landed fish to their point of sale. This will be concentrated around harbours and ports and could potentially cause congestion and environmental impacts. In addition to transport in the locality, there is important transport of shellfish to distant markets, e.g. lobsters, edible crabs and velvet crabs to Ireland, France and Spain. At present, the transport fleet in the NIFCA District is not large, and even during the peak fishing season, there are no predicted problems associated with the transport of shellfish or finfish from the area. 38 The Northumberland Sea Fisheries Committee (NSFC). 2009. Response to the European Commission Green Paper on Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. [on-line] [cited 19/12/2012]. Available from World Wide Web: <http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/reform/docs/northumberland_sea_fisheries_committee_en.pdf> 145 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Appendix D. Scoping Consultation Responses 146 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Table D.1: NIFCA Consultee Responses Consultee Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) Question 1 Are there any additional plans or programmes at the international, national, regional or local level which have been excluded from Appendix A, which your organisation thinks are relevant to the NIFCA Fisheries SEA? RSPB 1 The RSPB notes that the EU Birds Directive provides a framework for the conservation and management of, and human interactions with, wild birds in Europe1. The main provisions of the Directive, which the NIFCA could contribute towards, or may be influenced by, include: (1) The maintenance of the populations of all wild bird species across their natural range (Article 2) with the encouragement of various activities to that end (Article 3). (2) The identification and classification of Special Protection Areas (SPAs) for rare or vulnerable species listed in Annex I of the Directive, as well as for all regularly occurring migratory species (Article 4). (3) The establishment of a general scheme of protection for all wild birds (Article 5). (4) Prohibition of large-scale non-selective means of bird killing (Article 8). (5) Encouragement of certain forms of relevant research (Article 10 and Annex V). It is agreed that NIFCA could directly or indirectly contribute or influence the identified Directive provisions. This has been updated in the Appendix A Plans and Programmes review table. It has also taken into account during the assessment process. ~ RSPB 2 In relation to the Convention on Biological Diversity, BAP species and habitats must be considered. It is agreed that relevant BAP species and habitat should be considered. This has been updated in the Appendix A Plans and Programmes review table. ~ RSPB 3 The RSPB supports the inclusion of ‘scoped in’ issues including climate change, biodiversity, landscape/seascape, water quality and waste. The RSPB particularly notes the inclusion of both climate change mitigation and adaption and specific mention of bycatch of seabirds and other non-target species. It is also appropriate to consider non-native species. The baseline and key issues sections have been updated to include consideration of nonnative species. This has also included in the SEA Framework and has been taken account in the assessment process. ~ RSPB 4 Threats to seabirds from fishing activity include indirect effects through the extraction of fish (e.g. competition for prey, effect on the food chain and the risk of exacerbating the effects of climate change on fish stocks) and direct mortality from seabird bycatch in fishing nets. During the breeding season, the loss of adults as bycatch is likely to also result in the death of chicks at the nest. The key issues have been updated to include the identified threats to seabirds. This has also considered in the assessment under the objectives on species and bycatch. ~ Question 2 147 Do you agree with the review of the current key environmental issues in the NIFCA district? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref Question 3 Do you think the environmental and socio-economic baseline data collected for the NIFCA district is appropriate and relevant? RSPB 5 The report notes, on page 39, that “from an initial review of baseline data it is likely that the following trends will continue: Please see comments below. ~ (1) Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna - habitats and species are likely to continue to be protected through European and UK legislation. However, continued overfishing and unsustainable fishing practices may put pressure on these ecological areas. Future climate change effects and a rise in sea temperature may also affect ecosystems, habitats and species. (2) Climate – future climate change effects are likely to include sea level rise, higher temperatures and more severe weather conditions”. 148 RSPB 6 The RSPB welcomes the consideration of protected areas, including MCZs, however several protected areas are missing from the list on page 24 (see response to question 4). Please see comment on Question 4. ~ RSPB 7 It should be noted that whilst existing protection is likely to continue, the designation of Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) for harbour porpoise is incomplete, and the designation of marine SPAs is substantially behind. Furthermore, there are currently no Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) in the district area and no clear timetable as to the designation of future tranches beyond the 31 proposed across England for designation in 2013. So in addition to the consideration of pressures on existing sites, the NIFCA must be mindful of fishing activity that could cause damage to those sites yet to be designated, including MCZs and SPA marine extensions to the Farne Islands SPA and Coquet Island SPA. The biodiversity baseline has been updated to include the issue of designation and protection of SACs, SPAs, and MCZs. However, it is not known when these will come into force or how much will be designated. Therefore, only reference to potential future designations can be made. The Aln Estuary is also considered likely to be designated as a SAC. RSPB 15 RSPB 8 The description of climate change effects could include higher sea temperatures and associated impacts on marine species. The future baseline trends for climate change effects has been updated to include higher sea level temperatures and associated impacts on marine species. NCC19 EMS 25 RSPB 9 In relation to socio-economics and tourism, it is worth bearing in mind that the natural environment, seascapes and marine species (e.g. the Farne Islands, Coquet Island) can play a key role in attracting visitors and supporting local economies. This issue was added to baseline section on tourism and also added in the key opportunities ~ 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee 149 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref Question 4 Is any environmental or socio-economic baseline information currently missing? RSPB 10 Coquet Island SPA does not feature in the list of protected areas provided on page 24 of the report. This site is within the district’s area and is used by more than 90% of the UK’s breeding population of the rare roseate tern. In the past, puffin bycatch has been recorded in the Druridge Bay area; these puffins were most likely linked to Coquet Island or another SPA. Coquet Island SPA should be included in future assessments. The list of protected areas has been updated to include Coquet Island SPA and information about the site has been added. NCC 14 EMS 20 RSPB 11 It should also be noted that Coquet Island is a bird sanctuary (declared in 1978) and as such it is not permitted for the public to land on the island. The seabirds nesting here are sensitive to disturbance and any activity that causes adults to take flight leaves eggs and chicks vulnerable to weather conditions and predation. Coquet Island is managed by the RSPB for the benefit of seabirds. As above ~ RSPB 12 Several SSSIs have been omitted from the list on page 24 and should feature in future assessments including: (1) The Farne Islands SSSI (2) Lindisfarne SSSI (3) Newton Links SSSI (4) Tweed Catchment Rivers - England: Lower Tweed And Whiteadder SSSI (5) Castle Point To Cullernose Point SSSI The list of SSSI’s in the baseline has been updated to include those identified as missing. NCC 15 EMS 21 RSPB 13 The Farne Islands SSSI citation details the important seabirds, as well as the grey seal colony. As above ~ RSPB 14 Furthermore, whilst the report lists protected areas within the district, those beyond the boundaries that protect mobile species are not considered. Seabirds are wide ranging, with some species capable of travelling more than 200km from their nest site in search of food. Gannets do not nest within the NIFCA district, but can be found in these waters and may be travelling from Flamborough Head and Bempton Cliffs SPA and/or the Firth of Forth Islands SPA. Therefore, protected areas outside the NIFCA district may require consideration. Puffins, auks and terns travel to the NIFCA area to feed and nest. Details about protected sites beyond the NIFCA district and links with migratory species in the NIFCA area have been updated in the baseline. ~ 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee 150 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref RSPB 15 As noted in response to question 3, in addition to existing European MPAs and national MCZs, the SEA should consider new marine SPAs and SACs that are yet to be designated to avoid damage and deterioration. Examples include marine extensions to the Farnes SPA and Coquet Island SPA which are likely to extend 2km seaward from the terrestrial site. Terrestrial sites designated for marine species, such as seabirds, are functionally linked to the areas of sea that those species rely on and this should be considered in the SEA. The baseline was updated to include new marine SPAs and SACs that are yet to be designated. However, it is not known when these will come into force or how much will be designated. Therefore, only reference to potential future designations can be made. The Aln Estuary is also considered likely to be designated as a SAC. RSPB 7RSPB 10NCC 14EMS 20 RSPB 16 With regard to socio-economic considerations and the environment, future assessments could consider opportunities for eco-labelling and associated benefits. The key issues and opportunities were updated to include socio-economic opportunities such as eco-labelling, and subsequently considered in the assessment process. ~ RSPB 17 Recreation is mentioned throughout the report (e.g. section 5.11.4), but does not clearly feature in the baseline topics. Increased clarity may be required for future assessments and consultations. Recreational fishing/angling is already covered in the baseline. However, the baseline has been updated and a separate section on recreation has been added that also includes other water-based recreational activities, e.g. diving, sailing, jet skiing etc. ~ RSPB 18 The RSPB recommends that the following data sources are also considered: (1) BirdLife International Seabird factsheets http://seabird.wikispaces.com/ (2) European Seabirds at Sea (ESAS) database, hosted by JNCC: www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1547. (3) RSPB: Inshore fisheries and environmental protection http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/Fisheries_environmental_ protection_tcm9-280342.pdf RSPB: (4)Inshore fisheries and breeding seabird conservation http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/Fisheries_seabird_conser vation_tcm9-280343.pdf RSPB (5) Shellfisheries and seabirds http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/Shellfisheries_seabirds_tc m9-280345.pdf Investigating the use of voluntary marine management http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/RSPB_Voluntary_Marine_ Management_2011_tcm9-291744.pdf (6) The local value of seabirds http://www.rspb.org.uk/Images/seabirds_tcm9-262584.pdf The identified data sources have been reviewed and relevant information (particularly on bird species) updated in the baseline. ~ 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee 151 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref Question 5 Is there any inaccurate environmental or socio-economic baseline information? RSPB 19 Section 5.3.2.2 (page 23) states “In addition, fishing activities have the potential to impact negatively on seabirds: a) by accidentally catching and killing seabirds in fishing gear (in general, bycatch of seabirds tends to be highest in the vicinity of major breeding colonies); and b) by reducing the amount of food provided to seabirds through discards and offal discharge; however, this effect has not been quantified and it is extremely difficult to prove a link between fish stock reductions caused by fisheries and changes within populations of seabirds.” See comment below ~ RSPB 20 The reference made to discards and seabird populations should be re-worded; any increases in seabird populations represent an artificial high and the curbing of discards is an important means of helping to restore fish stocks and rebuild a more sustainable food web for seabirds and other marine wildlife. It should also be noted, that as releasing discards and offal can attract seabirds, these practices should only take place when seabirds are not at risk of bycatch (i.e. when fishing nets are not in the water). It should also be made clear that not all species of seabirds feed on discards. Furthermore, reference should be made to the potential of fishing activities to impact negatively on birds through competition for food and destabilisation of the food chain. For shellfisheries and bait collection, there may also be disturbance impacts (e.g. on wading birds) which could lead to displacement and competition for food. The reference in the report to discards and seabird populations has been re-worded to reflect the issues identified ~ Question 6 Are the SEA objectives and associated assessment criteria and indicators suitable for the fisheries SEA? RSPB 21 The RSPB supports the range of topics included in table 7.1 (page 49). The objectives should reflect positive steps that fisheries within the district could take to reduce their impact on the environment, including bycatch. No action required ~ Question 7 Does the wording of any existing objectives need to be changed, added or removed? RSPB 22 The objectives and their indicators would benefit from increased clarity and detail for example: (1) In reference to biodiversity (table 7.1, page 49), this should include both impacts on habitats and species and the NIFCA must ensure that the grouping of target and non-target species is encompassing all relevant species. (1) A separate objective on species, and separate objectives for finfish and shellfish have been updated in the SEA Framework NCC 23 EMS 29 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question 8 152 Question Do the draft SEA indicators provide a relevant measure for the objective? If not can you suggest appropriate alternatives? Response Ref Response Action Crossref RSPB 23 (2) Under the same topic and habitats, habitat creation is detailed under the assessment criteria and indicators. Clarity is required on whether or not the IFCA and/or fisheries in the district will be undertaking habitat creation or if this is intended to mean restoration through reductions in or the removal of damaging activities. In relation to habitat creation and/or restoration, for example following damage to the seabed and associated species from bottom trawling, consideration must be given to the time that recovery would take (2) This should be habitat restoration and has been amended. However, habitat restoration is unlikely to be undertaken by NIFCA and therefore, reduction of or the removal of damaging activities is the most relevant. ~ RSPB 24 (3) The RSPB welcomes an objective to reduce mortality from bycatch (table 7.1, page 49) and recommends that this objective be made clearer to ensure that it includes non-target fish species, seabirds and cetaceans. Furthermore this should be reworded to include ‘reduce bycatch and associated mortality’ to ensure that there is an onus to reduce bycatch in the first place not just the resulting mortality. (3) Objective has been amended and clarified NCC 22 EMS 28 RSPB 25 (4) Under bio-security non-native fish species are mentioned, this could be broader to consider other relevant non-native marine creatures (e.g. invertebrate species). (4) Bio-security has been broadened to consider other relevant non-native marine creatures NCC 24 EMS30 RSPB 26 It is not clear at this stage how objectives will be monitored in relation to their indicators. Full consideration must be given to this to ensure that indicators (e.g. bycatch levels) are measurable, including how they will be recorded, monitored and reported. What to monitor depends on the results of the assessment where significant adverse effects were identified or there were uncertainties over effects. The indicators set out in the SEA Framework form the basis for monitoring but these were refined and amended as appropriate following the outcomes of the assessment stage. Monitoring proposals are described in the Environmental Report ~ 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Northumber land County Council 153 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref Question 9 Do you have any other comments on the Scoping Report? RSPB 27 In relation to seabird bycatch, it may be possible to minimise the number of birds caught through net modifications. Training in the safe release of seabirds and other species from nets could also increase the survival rates of those animals that do get caught. Both these measures, along with net attendance, have been implemented effectively by netsmen in the Filey Bay gill net fishery. The RSPB is working to reduce seabird bycatch at local, national and global levels and would be happy to support the NIFCA in any related work. These opportunities have been included and considered within the assessment process, and NIFCA would welcome support in this area if taken forward. However, it is considered that this issue has less implications in the NIFCA district because of the NIFCA fixed engine byelaw and salmon net restrictions ~ RSPB 28 Regarding the compatibility of objectives, as shown in table 7.3 (page 53), the RSPB suggest that marine conservation is linked to cultural assets including links to maritime history and the historical presence of seabird populations. Following this logic, avoiding discharges would also be linked to cultural assets. It is agreed that there could be linkages between the objectives and the compatibility matrix was updated accordingly ~ RSPB 29 Section 5.3 (page 17) refers to bait digging being common practice along the coast. Such activity can cause disturbance for wading birds foraging in these areas and may need to be considered in the SEA in relation to SPAs, SSSIs and Ramsar sites. The key issues and baseline were updated to include the issue of bait digging. A byelaw on bait digging already exists from another organisation. There is a possibility of bringing in a new bait digging byelaw to put restrictions in place. However, there could be issues with enforcement with NE and NCC. NCC 6 EMS 8 RSPB 30 The RSPB welcomes the consideration of cumulative and in-combination impacts in the SEA. No action required ~ NCC 1 Since the abolition of many regional bodies, many of their plans and programmes are no longer valid. The following should be removed as they are no longer in use:- The integrated regional framework: Achieving a better quality of life (2004)- Regional Spatial Strategy for the North East of England (2008) - the RSS for the East was revoked on April 15th 2013- Regional Economic Strategy for North East England (2008)- North East Strategy for the Environment (2008)- North East England Tourism Strategy 2005-2010 (2005) The regional plans and programmes have been updated and revoked plans have been removed EMS 5 NCC 2 The North East Declaration on Climate Change may still be in place as the North East Climate Change Partnership is in place. It would be advisable to check the status with the Partnership. The North East Declaration on Climate Change is still in place and is included within the Plans and Programmes review. ~ Question 1 Are there any additional plans or programmes at the international, national, regional or local level which have been excluded from Appendix A, which your organisation thinks are relevant to the NIFCA Fisheries SEA? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee 154 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref NCC 3 The following regional plans / programmes should be added: - The SEA may need to consider the various Catchment Flood Management Plans - Till and Breamish, Wansbeck & Blythe, Tyne and the North Northumberland; as well as the Solway Tweed River Basin Management Plan, and that which covers the River Tyne catchment. - Northumberland Area Tourism Management Plan (20102015) The additional plans and programmes identified have been added to the plans and programmes review. ~ NCC 4 Local - Northumberland Consolidated Planning Policy Framework - The description and key relevant planning objectives / targets for this work state that: "The Northumberland Consolidated Planning Policy Framework is the local plan which sets planning policies in a local authority area". This is incorrect: The NCPPF is not the local plan for the area - it brings together the planning documents, both statutory and non-statutory, for each of the former seven local planning authorities into one place for ease of reference. The statutory development plan for Northumberland comprises policy S5 of the Adopted Structure Plan, recently adopted Local Development Framework documents which form part of the Statutory Development Plan, and local plan policies under Section A - Schedule of Statutory Development Plan Documents in the Northumberland Consolidated Planning Policy Framework. The description of the Northumberland Consolidated Planning Policy Framework has been updated. ~ NCC 5 The following local plans and programmes should be added: - Northumberland Core Strategy Preferred Options Feb 2013 - Northumberland LTP 2011-2026 - Northumberland RoW Improvement Plan 2007 - Northumberland Environmental Sustainability Programme - Northumberland Joint Municipal Waste Strategy 2003 - Northumberland Oil Pollution Plan The additional local plans and programmes identified have been added to the plans and programmes review where relevant. However, transport has been scoped out of the SEA and therefore the LTP is not relevant. ~ The Northumberland Environmental Sustainability Programme could not be found. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee 155 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Question 2 Do you agree with the review of the current key environmental issues in the NIFCA district? NCC 6 Biodiversity We understand that bait digging is a common activity along the coast within Northumberland and would query why this does not appear to be scoped into the SEA. Anecdotal information suggests that this activity may have an impact on protected species and species within Northumberland; although, formal evidence has yet to be presented for the local area. Action Bait digging has been added to the key issues table under the biodiversity topic and considered during the assessment process. However, legislation is already in place and NIFCA does not have responsibility for it Crossref EMS 8 RSPB 29 NCC 7 We would also query why the Pacific Oyster aquaculture operation at Fenham Flats has not been scoped into the SEA, and why it receives little attention on the Scoping Report despite it being an invasive species. This activity should be considered if the SEA objective to prevent the introduction of invasive species is to be fully met. The Pacific Oyster aquaculture operation at Fenham Flats has been added to the baseline and key issues, and was included in the assessment process as a fishery. It should be noted that NE control consents and any issues arising. It is a private fishery. It can affect mussels and further partnership with NE will be required to ensure any issues are addressed EMS 7 NCC 8 We believe that the scoping report does not go far enough in acknowledging the potential environmental issues associated with Grey seal (protected as part of the Berwickshire & North Northumberland Coast SAC and EMS), or the many internationally significant seabirds within the district. The report focuses on marine habitats, but more emphasis could be placed on protected species. Although seals are mentioned as causing problems for the salmon fishery, the report does not acknowledge the potential impact that fishing activity may have on seals. We believe that the SEA should seek to achieve a better balance towards assessing the impact towards the Grey seal. The baseline, key issues and SEA Framework were updated so that equal emphasis was given to protected habitats and species. Further details on species such as seabirds and Grey seals was added to the baseline and key issues and considered in the assessment process. It was also be noted that seals are an important part of tourism for the area, particularly at Farne Islands EMS 9 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question 3 156 Question Do you think the environmental and socio-economic baseline data collected for the NIFCA district is appropriate and relevant? Response Ref Response Action Crossref NCC 9 Historic Environment In Table 6.1, the evidence column for the historic environment only acknowledges architectural heritage and wrecks; however, there are also archaeological sites within the district, both onshore and offshore. Archaeological remains and deposits should also be acknowledged and considered in the SEA There are too many archaeological sites to name individually. However, the historic environment baseline was updated to provide a summary of the archaeology found within the district. It should be noted that archaeology on land is the responsibility of NCC and archaeology more than 6 nautical miles out is the responsibility of the MMO. EMS 12 NCC 9 NCC 10 More emphasis could be placed on protected species within the district, particularly those which are covered by international, European and national legislation The baseline has been updated to give more emphasis to protected species. EMS 13 NCC 11 The report goes into some detail regarding the Protection of Wrecks Act 1973 and wrecks designated under this legislation, yet there are no protected wrecks within the district, the closest example is at Hartlepool. The report does not, however, discuss wrecks in the context of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979, which is used to designate wrecks as a Scheduled Monument. Although we have no scheduled wrecks within Northumberland at present, English Heritage is currently considering the designation of three wrecks which lie off the Farne Islands. If these wrecks are Scheduled in the future, then the 1979 act will have relevance to the SEA Information on wreck sites in the context of Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 was updated and added to the baseline. It was also noted that there are no protected or designated wreck sites in the NIFCA district EMS 14 NCC 17 NCC 12 The Scoping report is ambiguous when discussing invasive species. It is not clear whether the SEA will look at the species regarded as posing most concern to NIFCA (as discussed in Table 6.1), or whether it will look at invasive fish only (as stated in indicators of Table 7.1). We would welcome greater clarity on which issues will be considered as part of the bio-security elements of the SEA The SEA has been updated to look at invasive species which are of importance in the NIFCA district (not just fish). A list of invasive species is included in the baseline, and the indicators updated to reflect this EMS 15 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref Question 4 Is any environmental or socio-economic baseline information currently missing? NCC 13 Grey seal should be fully acknowledged as a European protected species. Grey seal is a qualifying feature of the B&NNC SAC and EMS, and the Farne Islands support and internationally important breeding colony. Fishing activity has the potential to cause both harm and disturbance. In addition to bycatch of non-targeted species, we would welcome an additional consideration in section 5.3.2 which acknowledges the potential for disturbances to protected species, in particular Grey seal and protected bird species. The baseline and key issues were updated to include information on Grey Seals. ~ NCC 14 Section 5.3.3 The following internationally designated sites are missing from the list: - Tweed Estuary SAC - Coquet Island SPA The list of internationally designated sites has been updated to include those identified as missing. RSPB 10 RSPB 15 EMS 20 NCC 15 The following SSSIs are missing: - Tweed Estuary - Lindisfarne - Bamburgh Coast - Farne Islands - Newton Links - Castle Points to Cullernose Point - Druidge Bay - Beacon Point to Blythe - Bamburgh Dunes - Howick to Seaton Point The list of SSSIs has been updated to include those SSSIs identified as missing. Details on St. Mary's Island have also been added. St Mary's Island and Curry's Point is a LNR situated on the coast at Whitley Bay and forms part of the much larger Northumberland Coast SSSI. The seabed around the island and cliff tops at Curry's Point are designated as a Voluntary Marine Nature Reserve EMS 21 RSPB 12 Information on heritage assets within the local HER were obtained and a brief summary updated in the baseline. NCC9 Missing SSSIs south of the County of Northumberland have not been assessed in this response. NCC 16 157 Section 5.6 Table 5.1 should also acknowledge the many heritage assets that are not covered by statutory designations, but which may of local significance. Records of these are included in the local Historic Environment Record (HER) held by NCC and can be provided by consulting the HER manager Liz Williams (charging policy may be required). 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question 5 Question 6 158 Question Is there any inaccurate environmental or socio-economic baseline information? Are the SEA objectives and associated assessment criteria and indicators suitable for the fisheries SEA? Response Ref Response Action Crossref NCC 17 The scoping report gives a thorough and helpful explanation of the PoWrecks Act under this section, yet, as discussed above, we have no protected wrecks off Northumberland. The SEA should consider the application of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979. This piece of legislation allows EH and the Secretary of State to designate SMs out to 12 nautical miles. It should be noted that information about undesignated historic wrecks in the Co. Northumberland can be obtained from the HER manager at NCC. The baseline has been updated to include this information. The legislation was acknowledged but it should also be noted that there are no protected or designated wreck sites in the NIFCA district. NCC 11 EMS 14 NCC 18 Section 5.10 The SEA may also want to consider targets set by the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. The Marine Strategy Framework Directive is reviewed in the plans and programmes review. More specific targets within the Directive have been added. EMS 24 NCC 19 In relation to CC adaptation, we also see a southern shift of species distribution, not only northwards, as stated in Table 6.1. This is caused by warmer waters coming over the top of Scotland as a result of the Gulf Stream. The situation on the North East Coast is interesting with regards to species movement related to climate change, as native species may get squeezed between a northern and southern migration of cold water species. The statement has been updated to include southern shifts in species as well as northern, and the reason behind this. EMS 25 NCC 20 Under Biodiversity, within the Bio-security issues and opportunities (p.42), the evidence Colum contains inaccurate information on the pacific oyster. The text states that oysters are "currently legally farmed at Fenham and not a problem in Scotland but are not native and if not managed appropriately could pose a problem if temperature rises". Text has been updated. EMS 26 NCC 21 Table 7.1 (p49) Biodiversity Non-target: The NIFCA SEA objective should also include a statement relating to the avoidance of disturbance to NT-species. Even where gear measures are appropriate, disturbance may still be an issue, particularly for birds and seals. Objective has been re-worded. EMS 27 NCC 22 The indicators of estimated morality rate of bycatch and estimated population of non-target species should include sea birds (particularly those protected by SSSI and SPA), as well as Grey seal (protected by B&NNC SAC) Additional indicators have been added on non-target species including sea birds and Grey seal. RSPB 24 EMS 28 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref NCC 23 There should be a section dealing specifically with species. As it stands, the second column of the table (7.1) only acknowledges habitats. If species were to be added, this would cover all species that are protected under SPAs, SACs and SSSIs A separate objective on species has been added. RSPB 22 EMS 29 NCC 24 Bio-safety: The wording of the SEA objective is very positive, but would require pacific oysters to be included in the SEA if it is to be achieved. Additional assessment criteria should be added stating - will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and non-native marine species? The current indicator is a little confusing (estimating number of non-native fish species identified). Earlier in the scoping report it specifies that the main species of concern to NIFCA are Spartina spp. and Eriocheir sinensis. Pacific oyster is also mentioned. None are fish, yet in the table it only mentions fish. The assessment criteria has been updated to cover more than just fish The indicators were updated with those suggested. EMS 30 RSPB 25 Following indicators suggested: - Estimated number of non-native marine species records within the district: or - Estimated abundance and distribution of non-native marine species within the district. The second indicator is suggested as the impact is very difficult to tell from presence alone Question 7 159 Does the wording of any existing objectives need to be changed, added or removed? NCC 25 Historic Environment there should also be an indicator for locally significant heritage assets which are not covered by national designations. An additional indicator on locally significant heritage sites has been added. ~ NCC 26 Landscape: the Northumberland Coast AONB Management plan covers the coastal protected landscape within the NIFCA district. Suggest an additional assessment criteria stating - will support/contradict policies within the landscape and seascape management plans. The additional assessment criterion on management plans has been added. It should be noted that NIFCA would have due regard in management of its activities on landscape/habitats. If an issue is noticed NIFCA would inform NCC and NE ~ NCC 27 Objective 2: should also include a line relating to the avoidance of disturbance to non-target species. Even where gear measures are appropriate, disturbance can still be an issue, particularly for birds and seals which are protected under EU law. This would also fit in a standalone objective. Objective has been re-worded EMS 31 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee BERWICKS HIRE & NORTH NORTHUM BERLAND COAST EUROPEA N MARINE SITE 160 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref NCC 28 Objective 4: may also wish to consider the impacts of aquaculture fisheries, particularly given the preventative role of NIFCA regarding the introduction of non-native species, outlined in objective 5 Objective has been re-worded EMS 32 NCC 29 Objective 5: should read - conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment. As NIFCA has its own vessels, it can follow best practice for boat owners in helping the spread of species. Objective has been re-worded EMS 33 NCC 30 Objective 11: relates to targets established by the WFD. The SEA may also wish to consider an objective which relates to targets established under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, which requires the achievement of Good Environmental Status of our seas. The NIFCA management regime will play a direct role in helping to achieve some of the high level descriptors and UK level indicators. The SEA may also wish to consider Bathing Water Directive targets. SEA Objective 11 has been re-worded to make it more general about achieving good environmental status of waters. The assessment criteria under the objective were expanded to add the detail and include assessment criteria relating to the MSF Directive targets. Bathing Water Directive targets in relation to nutrient levels were also considered. It should be noted that NIFCA have no direct role regarding the WFD, as this is the responsibility of the EA. But NIFCA acknowledge that its activities have the potential to affect WFD targets EMS 34 ~ Question 8 Do the draft SEA indicators provide a relevant measure for the objective? If not can you suggest appropriate alternatives? NCC 31 See Q7. See response to Question 7 Question 1 Are there any additional plans or programmes at the international, national, regional or local level which have been excluded from Appendix A, which your organisation thinks are relevant to the NIFCA Fisheries SEA? EMS 1 International The 1992 OSPAR Convention is listed in Figure 4.1 (page 15), yet it does not appear in the table in Appendix A. We would welcome the inclusion and consideration of this particular instrument due to its focus on marine protected areas. The 1992 OSPAR Convention is included in the table in Appendix A, However, it has been mistakenly been put under European. It has now been moved to under the International plans and programmes. EMS 2 Appendix A lists the 1971 Ramsar Convention on wetlands of international importance. Under the column entitled ‘Implications for the Regime and SEA’ only the Northumberland Coast Ramsar Site is acknowledged. Lindisfarne should also be listed as a designated Ramsar Site. ~ Lindisfarne Ramsar site has been added under the implications column for the 1971 Ramsar Convention on wetlands of international importance. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx ~ Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref EMS 3 European In Figure 4.1 (page 15) ‘Directive 2008/56/EC of the European Parliament and of The Council of 17 June 2008’ appears in the ‘National’ section but it is a European Directive. We believe Directive 2008/56/EC is the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, which currently does not appear in the list of European items within this figure. We would recommend adding this Directive to the European list. National The following national legislation should be added to the national list in Figure 4.1, and to the table in Appendix A: - UK Marine Strategy Regulations 2010 - Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 - Protection of Wrecks Act 1973. Directive 2008/56/EC is the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. It has been included twice (in the National list and the European list) in Figure 4.1 by error. It has now been removed from the National list and kept on the European list. It was also stated twice in the table in Appendix A. The reference to it under National plans and programmes has now been removed. ~ The National legislation identified has been reviewed and added to Figure 4.1 and the table in Appendix A. ~ EMS 5 Regional Since the abolition of regional governance, many plans and initiatives at this level are no longer current. Plans and programmes reviewed at the regional level have been re-examined to determine which were still current and which had been revoked, and they have been updated accordingly. NCC 1 EMS 6 Local The ‘Local’ list in both Figure 4.1 and Appendix A should maybe also consider byelaws already in place with other agencies, which manage fishing activities - i.e. Natural England byelaws for the Lindisfarne National Nature Reserve which prevent the gathering of marine organisms from within the reserve; or the Northumberland County Council byelaw which prevents bait digging in areas of Boulmer Haven. Northumberland County Council’s Oil Pollution Plan should also be included. The identified local plans and byelaws have been reviewed and added to Figure 4.1 and the table in Appendix A. ~ EMS 4 161 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee 162 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref Question 2 Do you agree with the review of the current key environmental issues in the NIFCA district? EMS 7 A key environmental issue for the Berwickshire & North Northumberland Coast European Marine Site is the potential impact that the Crassostrea gigas (Pacific oyster) farm at Fenham Flats is currently having, and may have in the future on the qualifying features, sub-features and attributes of this designation. Given the known invasive nature of this species, the sensitivity and protection given to the surrounding habitats, and the potential ability of NIFCA to regulate this type of operation, we believe it would weaken the results of the SEA should it not be scoped into the next stage. Not including it could mean that Objective 3 (….protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems) and Objective 5 (Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction of non-native species to the marine environment…) will not be fully met. As warming sea surface temperatures will also influence the environmental impact of the Crassostrea gigas (Pacific oyster) farm, it also has relevance to Objective 6 (Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment…). The Crassostrea gigas farm should also be considered under section 3.3 Shellfish and Finfish Management Regime as a current fishery within the district. Although NIFCA does not currently have a management regime in place for this operation, it may have the ability and remit to contribute towards the management of this activity in the future and the present nil management should be taken into account. The baseline and key issues have been updated to include the Pacific Oyster aquaculture operation at Fenham Flats. However, it should be noted that until a study is carried out and more information is known, the positive or negative effects of the Pacific Oyster Farm cannot be confirmed. The Pacific Oyster Farm has also subsequently been assessed as a fishery during the assessment process. It should be noted that NIFCA do not have the authority to regulate this type of operation, as consent is given by NE but they can contribute towards management through byelaws if appropriate NCC 7 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee 163 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref EMS 8 Another potential environmental issue that does not appear to have been addressed in detail by the Scoping Report is bait digging within the district. Anecdotal information suggests that this activity may cause disturbance to internationally protected bird species, as well as depleting their food source, although no evidence suggests that this is the case at present. Some areas where bait digging occurs within the district are also protected as part of the Berwickshire & North Northumberland Coast European Marine Site (i.e. sand and mud flats; large shallow inlets and bays). Given this potential pressure on internationally protected sites, and given that NIFCA has the ability to manage this activity, we would welcome its inclusion in the SEA if Objective 3 (….protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems) is to be achieved. It may be helpful to consider bait digging under section 3.3 Shellfish and Finfish Management Regime as an existing operation, as NIFCA has the ability to manage this activity in the future. The biodiversity topic in the key issues table has been updated to include bait digging. It has also been considered during the assessment process. A byelaw on bait digging already exists from another organisation. There is a possibility of bringing in a new bait digging byelaw to put restrictions in place. NCC 6 RSPB 29 EMS 9 Section 6 Key Environmental Issues and Opportunities (Table 6.1) Biodiversity, flora and fauna SEA Topic This section does not acknowledge the potential impact that fishing may have on the Grey seal (a European protected species under the Berwickshire & North Northumberland Coast SAC and European Marine Site), nor the many internationally protected birds within the district. Although the table does consider the impact on European Marine Sites, this tends to focus on habitats, not species. The only acknowledgement of seals is to say that they cause problems for the salmon fishery. We believe that the SEA should seek to not only acknowledge the impact that seals have on the fisheries, but also the impact that the fisheries may have on the seals. The key issues have been updated to include further details on Grey Seals. NCC 8 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question 3 164 Question Do you think the environmental and socio-economic baseline data collected for the NIFCA district is appropriate and Response Ref Response Action Crossref EMS 10 Climate Change Adaptation SEA Topic Under the ‘key issues and opportunities’ column, the Fisheries and Aquaculture section makes no reference to the potential problems caused by C. gigas in light of rising sea surface temperature, despite this species being acknowledged as a problem if water temperature rises under the ‘Biodiversity, flora and fauna’ SEA Topic (evidence column). The SEA needs to be clear on the current and future impact of this operation, and offer clear justification if the operation is to be scoped out at this stage. The Scoping Report currently presents an ambiguous case regarding the impact posed by the operation. Although there is no current NIFCA management regime in place for the operation, we would welcome its inclusion, with a nil management regime taken into account in order to support Objective 5 – prevent the spread of non-native species. Further details on this issue have been added. ~ EMS 11 Crassostrea gigas should also be acknowledged under the Invasive non-native species issues and opportunities within the ‘Climate Change Adaptation’ SEA topic. The issues and opportunities were updated to include this issue. ~ EMS 12 Historic Environment The evidence column only acknowledges architectural heritage and wrecks; however, there are also archaeological sites within the district, both onshore and offshore. Archaeological deposits should also be included in the SEA. There are too many archaeological sites to name individually. However, the historic environment baseline was updated to provide a summary of the archaeology found in the district. NCC 9 EMS 13 The Scoping Report does not place enough emphasis on protected species within the district, particularly those which are covered by international, European and national legislation. The impact to species associated with Special Areas of Conservation, Special Protection Areas and Sites of Special Scientific Interest within the district should be considered. The baseline has been updated to include more emphasis on protected species. NCC 10 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question 4 165 Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref relevant? EMS 14 The Scoping Report focuses on the Protection of Wrecks Act 1973 and wrecks designated under this legislation, yet there are no Protected Wrecks within the district, the closest example being located at Hartlepool. More attention should be paid to Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979, which can be used to designate a wreck as a Scheduled Ancient Monument and will be more applicable in the future to wrecks within the district. English Heritage is currently considering the designation of three wrecks which lie off the Farne Islands. If these wrecks are Scheduled in the future then the 1979 Act, mentioned above, will have more relevance to the SEA. Information on wreck sites in the context of Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 has been added to the baseline. It was also be noted that there are no protected or designated wreck sites in the NIFCA district NCC 11 NCC 17 EMS 15 The Scoping Report is ambiguous when discussing invasive species. It is not clear whether the SEA will look at the species regarded as posing most concern to NIFCA (as discussed in Table 6.1 under the Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna SEA topic), or whether it will look at invasive fish only (as stated in the indicators of Table 7.1, again, under the Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna SEA topic). We would welcome greater clarity on which issues will be considered as part of the biosecurity elements of the SEA. The SEA has been updated to look at invasive species which are of importance in the NIFCA district (not just fish). A list of invasive species was included in the baseline, and the indicators updated to reflect this NCC 12 EMS 16 Section 5.3 Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna (page 17) does not acknowledge scallop dredging, yet this is one of the most potentially damaging activities to the environment. The Crassostrea gigas farm should also be acknowledged here, as the farm is potentially having an environmental impact now, and may do so in the future. More research and monitoring is an essential requirement as part of the management regime for the operation and NIFCA may be able to contribute towards management in the future. The baseline has been updated to include scallop dredging and the Crassostrea gigas farm. Scallop dredging usually only occurs 34 weeks a year and there are only a few boats. It can occur within the EMS ~ Is any environmental or socio-economic baseline information currently missing? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee 166 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref EMS 17 Section 5.3.1.1 Target Species - Shellfish – Mussels (page 20). The Scoping Report specifies possible reasons why there has been a reduction in the number of juvenile mussels in recent years. A potential cause which has not been captured by the report is the possibility that the adjacent Crassostrea gigas, which are grown on trestles surrounding the mussels, could be affecting mussel spat settlement. This possibility must be explored as part of the management regime for the mussels. It should also be noted that the mussel beds are a listed attribute of the sand and mud flats, which are a qualifying feature of Berwickshire & North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation, and a sub-feature of the Lindisfarne Special Protection Area. Baseline and key issues have been updated to include the issue mentioned ~ EMS 18 Section 5.3.1.1 Target Species - Shellfish – Oyster (page 21). The native oyster (Ostrea edulis) receives its own section in the report, yet there is not an existing Ostrea edulis fishery within the district as far as we are aware. Crassostrea gigas only receives a short mention at the end of the Ostrea edulis section. Given the size of the C. gigas operation, its location within a sensitive European protected site, its invasive nature, our limited understanding of its impact now and into the future, could we please ask that C. gigas receives greater consideration and discussion in the SEA process? The SEA has been updated to provide greater consideration to Crassostrea gigas. Reference to Native oysters in the baseline has now been removed because there is no fishery within the district ~ EMS 19 Section 5.3.2.2 Bycatch (page 23). Grey seal should be fully acknowledged as a European protected species. Grey seal is a qualifying feature of the Berwickshire & North Northumberland Coast Special Area of Conservation and European Marine Site, and the Farne Islands support an internationally important breeding colony. Fishing activity has the potential to cause both harm and disturbance. In addition to bycatch of non-targeted species, we would welcome an additional consideration in section 5.3.2 which acknowledges the potential for disturbance to protected species, in particular Grey seal and protected bird species. The baseline and key issues have been updated to include further information on protected species including Grey seal. ~ 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee 167 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref EMS 20 Section 5.3.3 Aquatic habitats, biodiversity and ecosystems The following internationally protected sites are missing from the list (page 24) - Tweed Estuary Special Area of Conservation - Coquet Island Special Protection Area The list of internationally protected sites has been updated to include those identified as missing. RSPB 10 RSPB 15 NCC 14 EMS 21 The following nationally protected Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) within the County of Northumberland are missing from the list (page 24) - Tweed Estuary - Lindisfarne - Bamburgh Coast - Farne Islands - Newton Links - Castle Point to Cullernose Point - Druridge Bay - Beacon Point to Blyth - Bamburgh Dunes - Howick to Seaton Point Please note that missing SSSIs south of the County of Northumberland have not been assessed in this response. Further research may be required to ensure all sites have been captured. The list of SSSIs has been updated to include those identified as missing. RSPB 12 NCC 15 EMS 22 Section 5.3.4 Bio-safety. The role of aquaculture in the introduction of marine non-native species is a welcome acknowledgement in the report, yet this section fails to acknowledge the presence of the Crassostrea gigas farm at Fenham Flats, despite this species being regarded as a marine invasive. For reasons already discussed above, the Crassostrea gigas farm should be acknowledged under bio-safety and NIFCAs role in helping to manage the operation from this perspective should be included in the SEA. The baseline and key issues have been updated. ~ 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question 5 168 Question Is there any inaccurate environmental or socio-economic baseline information? Response Ref Response Action Crossref EMS 23 Spartina spp. and Eriocheir sinensis are acknowledged as invasive species within the district. There are, in fact, a number of species that have recently been found, and new species ranges are being discovered as on-going data is gathered. Although NIFCA may not have the tools to manage these, as the vector for introduction may not be associated with fishing activities, the SEA may still wish to consider these. NIFCA may have a role to play as its boats and equipment could be regarded as potential vectors for spread and introduction. Species include Caprella mutica (Japanese skeleton shrimp), Botrylloides violaceus, Codium fragile, and a possibility of juvenile Crassostrea gigas (Pacific oyster) at St Abbs (in Scotland and still to be confirmed). Other non-native species are also being discovered on an on-going basis but their invasive impact is unknown, such as Tectura testudinalis (Tortoise shell limpet) and Calliostoma zizyphinum (Painted topshell). If the SEA is to look at specific species, it should be explicit that the species covered by the SEA is not an exhaustive list of marine non-natives in the district. The baseline and key issues have been updated to include further information on invasive species. ~ EMS 24 Section 5.10 Water Quality The SEA may also wish to consider targets set by the Marine Strategy Framework Directive in relation to water quality. The Marine Strategy Framework Directive is reviewed in the plans and programmes review. More specific targets within the Directive have been added. NCC 18 EMS 25 Table 6.1 – Climate Change Adaptation SEA Topic In relation to climate change adaptation, we also see a southern shift of species distribution, not just a northwards shift as the report states in Table 6.1 (page 44). This is caused by warmer waters coming over the top of Scotland as a result of the Gulf Stream. The situation on the North East coast is interesting with regards to species movement related to climate change, as native species may get ‘squeezed’ between a northern and southern migration of cold water species. The statement has been updated to include southern shifts in species as well as northern, and the reason behind this NCC 19 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question 6 169 Question Are the SEA objectives and associated assessment criteria and indicators suitable for the fisheries SEA? Response Ref Response Action Crossref EMS 26 Table 6.1 – Biodiversity, flora and fauna SEA Topic Bio-security issues and opportunities (page 42) - the evidence column contains inaccurate information about Crassostrea gigas. The text states that Crassostrea gigas is ‘currently legally farmed at Fenham and not a problem in Scotland but are not native and if not managed appropriately could pose a problem if water temperature rises.’ The text has been updated NCC 20 EMS 27 Table 7.1 SEA Framework (page 49) Biodiversity, flora and fauna Non-target species : The NIFCA SEA objectives should also include a line relating to the avoidance of disturbance to non-target species. Even where gear measures are appropriate, disturbance can still be an issue, particularly for birds and seals. Objective has been re-worded NCC 21 EMS 28 The indicators of estimated mortality rate of bycatch and estimated population of non-target species should include sea birds (particularly those protected by SSSI and SPA designations within the district), as well as Grey seal (as protected under the Berwickshire & North Northumberland Coast SAC). Additional indicators have been added on non-target species including sea birds and Grey seal RSPB 24 NCC 22 EMS 29 There should also be a section dealing specifically with species. As it stands, the second column of the table (7.1) only acknowledges habitats. If species were to be added, this could deal with all species that are protected under SPAs, SACs and SSSIs. A separate objective on species has now been included RSPB 22 NCC 23 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref EMS 30 Bio-safety: The wording of the SEA objective is very positive but would require Crassostrea gigas to be included in the SEA if it is to be achieved. An additional assessment criterion could be added stating – will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and nonnative marine species? The current indicator is a little confusing (Estimated number of non-native fish species identified). Earlier in the Scoping Report it specifies that the main species of concern to NIFCA are Spartina spp. and Eriocheir sinensis. Crassostrea gigas is also mentioned. None of the three species are fish, yet the indicator in table 7.1 only mentions non-native fish with no acknowledgement of other species. Could we please suggest the following two indicators as an alternative: 1) Estimated number of non-native invasive marine species records within the district 2) Estimated abundance and distribution of non-native invasive marine species within the district. The assessment criteria were updated to cover more than just fish The indicators were updated with those suggested NCC 24 RSPB 25 The second indicator is suggested due to the fact that impact is very difficult to assess from presence data alone. Question 7 170 Does the wording of any existing objectives need to be changed, added or removed? EMS 31 Objective 2 would be more robust if it included the avoidance of disturbance to non-target species, particularly those which are protected through international, European and national legislation. Disturbance would also fit into a stand-alone objective. Objective has been re-worded NCC 27 EMS 32 Objective 4 would be stronger if it included the impacts of aquaculture fisheries, particularly given the preventative role of NIFCA regarding the introduction of non-native species, which is outlined in Objective 5. Objective has been re-worded NCC 28 EMS 33 Objective 5 would have more impact if it read – ‘Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment….’ As NIFCA has its own vessels, it can follow best practice for boat owners in helping to prevent the spread of species. Objective has been re-worded NCC 29 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee Marine Manageme nt Organisatio n 171 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref EMS 34 Objective 11 relates to targets established by the Water Framework Directive. The SEA may also wish to consider an objective which relates to targets established under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), which requires the achievement of Good Environmental Status of our seas. Although in its infancy, the UK contribution towards achievement of the MSFD will receive greater attention in the near future. The NIFCA management regime will play a direct role in helping to achieve some of the high level descriptors and UK-level indicators. The SEA may also wish to consider Bathing Water Directive targets. SEA Objective 11 has been re-worded to make it more general about achieving good environmental status of waters. The assessment criteria under the objective were expanded to add the detail and include assessment criteria relating to the WFD targets, Marine Strategy Framework Directive targets, and the Bathing Water Directive targets. NCC 30 Question 8 Do the draft SEA indicators provide a relevant measure for the objective? If not can you suggest appropriate alternatives? EMS 35 Please see comments for question 7 above. See comment under Question 7. ~ Question 1 Are there any additional plans or programmes at the international, national, regional or local level which have been excluded from Appendix A, which your organisation thinks are relevant to the NIFCA Fisheries SEA? MMO 1 No comment No action required ~ Question 2 Do you agree with the review of the current key environmental issues in the NIFCA district? MMO 2 Yes. This is a useful assessment which should assist NIFCA in fulfilling duties under section 153 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. It summarises the fisheries and environmental issues in the district in one clear document. No action required ~ 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee 172 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref Question 3 Do you think the environmental and socio-economic baseline data collected for the NIFCA district is appropriate and relevant? MMO 3 Yes. See response to question 2. See response to Question 2 ~ Question 4 Is any environmental or socio-economic baseline information currently missing? MMO 4 No comment No action required ~ Question 5 Is there any inaccurate environmental or socio-economic baseline information? MMO 5 No comment No action required ~ Question 6 Are the SEA objectives and associated assessment criteria and indicators suitable for the fisheries SEA? MMO 6 Yes. Perhaps most usefully the SEA scoping report identifies gaps in knowledge and information for the NIFCA (e.g. waste in section 5.9). This should help NIFCA to identify and prioritise areas of work over the short, medium and long term in relation to the impact of fishing activities on obligations arising from other policies and legislation which impact on the marine environment, as identities in figure 4.1 of the assessment. Noted. This was considered when undertaking the assessment, and developing future monitoring proposals or further work ~ Question 7 Does the wording of any existing objectives need to be changed, added or removed? MMO 7 No comment No action required ~ Question 8 Do the draft SEA indicators provide a relevant measure for the objective? If not can you suggest appropriate alternatives? MMO 8 The SEA indicators appear to be relevant. However, much of the information appears to be beyond the scope of the NIFCA to provide (e.g. CO2 emissions). This raises questions of practicality and resource impacts for the NIFCA and any other organisations on which they may rely for the information. Turning to the information which it is within the scope of NIFCA to provide (e.g. fisheries and landings information) the IFCA will need to consider the resource implications for their work. There is limited information available on NIFCA CO2 emissions ~ 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Consultee 173 Question Number Question Response Ref Response Action Crossref Question 9 Do you have any other comments on the Scoping report? MMO 9 No comment No action required ~ 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Appendix E. NIFCA Appraisal Tables 174 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops SEA Objective 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Assessment Criteria Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? Management Regime Other Issues NIFCA Byelaws Other Regulation UK, EU 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot Limitation EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cumulative Effects N/A Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? +++ Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Significant perceived positive effect but there is a lack of scientific data to fully quantify it. 0 Too few berried crab are caught to contribute positively. ++ Soft lobsters and crabs have no market value so don’t get landed. Not a common offence but does help with recovery of stocks ++ Minor + Also, there is no legal definition of “soft shelled” so it is hard to enforce. Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Up to 40,000 pots can be in the sea and if all were baited with 1 crab then there would be a negative impact on the crab stocks. The byelaw prohibits use of edible crab for bait and will therefore have positive effects of crab stocks. + Minor positive 0 Helps to maintain stocks. + This byelaw + This helps with policing and links with byelaw 15 +++ Minor positive 0 Most Important +++ Most Important +++ However, the limit is at the top end of the production scale and is not really limiting production (people fish around 400 pots, or even buy a second boat) Important as it allows animals to mature and breed before being caught. +++ Has come in after the IFCA byelaw 6, but not as restrictive because can land once growing out Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 3. Using 175 Will it suitably 0 This byelaw 0 This byelaw + 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx This byelaw + Minor positive 0 This 0 This Some marginal negative effects from dredging (note: most lobster grounds too rocky for dredging) Paradox in that CEFAS (weak data) indicates overfished, but already implementi ng the three main tools to protect them (6,7, and 15) No other ++ 0 Moderate positive effect from conservation of stocks. Negligible Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on nontarget species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. Other Issues identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to nontarget species (fish, birds, mammals)? 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster has no effect on this objective. 8. Parts of Shellfish has no effect on this objective. 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait positive effect but not quantified. 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish effect as it stops people from keeping small crab. 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes has no effect on this objective. Other Regulation UK, EU 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns effect but not quantified. 15. Pot Limitation has no effect on this objective. EU SI minimum landing size effect but not quantified. Cumulative Effects EU SI V notched lobster regulation has no effect on this objective. regulation has no effect on this objective. issues were identified. This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. overall effect. Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. 176 Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or nonstatutory areas? 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. + Pot limitation may have a minor effect as it does not restrict total number of pots being fished i.e. all vessels 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 0 No overall effect. Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or nonstatutory areas? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species. Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or nonnative marine species? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? 177 Other Issues 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes Other Regulation UK, EU 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot Limitation EU SI minimum landing size Cumulative Effects EU SI V notched lobster 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. + Pots on the sea floor may damage the sea bed and they are removing a species. +++ Significant positive effect to prevent over-fishing of lobster. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. ++ 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. Moderate positive effect from protection of lobster stocks. Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to nonstatutory habitats? Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and nonnative marine species? Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? Other Issues 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 +++ Significant positive effect because it protects the fishery and maintains the traditional industry and its supporting infrastructur e. +++ 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes Other Regulation UK, EU 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 Significant positive effect because it protects the fishery and maintains the traditional industry and its supporting infrastructure. + Minor positive effect from maintaining the fishery. + Minor positive effect from maintaining the fishery. + Minor positive effect from maintaining the fishery. ++ Moderate positive effect because it protects the fishery and maintains the traditional industry and its supporting infrastructure. +++ 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. + Minor positive effect from maintaining the fishery. 0 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 15. Pot Limitation Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seasca pe quality and character? 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing 178 Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? EU SI V notched lobster 0 Potential for both minor positive and negative effects. Limiting pot numbers may limit fuel consumption. However, the limit of pot numbers is within the district, therefore, if pots are fished outwith the district this may increase fuel consumption. Therefore an overall neutral has been scored. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 +++ Significant positive effect because it protects the fishery and maintains the traditional industry and its supporting infrastructure. ++ Moderate positive effect because it protects the fishery and maintains the traditional industry and its supporting infrastructure. +++ Significant positive effect because it protects the fishery and maintains the traditional industry and its supporting infrastructure. No other issues were identified. ++ Overall moderate positive effect from protecting the fishery and supporting local fishing. This byelaw has no effect on this objective. + Minor positive effect from maintaining the fishery. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. + Minor positive effect from maintaining the fishery, but less so than for other objectives. This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this 0 This regulation has no effect on this 0 No overall effect. This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Will it increase/decreas e generation of greenhouse gases? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area EU SI minimum landing size Significant positive effect because it protects the fishery and maintains the traditional industry and its supporting infrastructure. Will it enhance landscape/seasca pe quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Cumulative Effects The small size of vessel helps maintain the traditional landscape and seascape. Visual quality of pots and Dahn buoys may detract from the seascape. No other issues were identified. No overall effect. Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters environment from vessels and fishing operations Other Issues waste? 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish objective. 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish objective. 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes Other Regulation UK, EU 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot Limitation EU SI minimum landing size objective. Cumulative Effects EU SI V notched lobster objective. objective. Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain Will it promote 179 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. + Minor positive effect from making gear more traceable and hence reducing ‘clutter’. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 The byelaw will act to limit the potential for accidents from shooting and hauling. However, it may encourage fishing outwith the district. Therefore, neutral has been scored. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. - Byelaw is beneficial but people can use additional vessels to get around it. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. Significant No other +++ Significant Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? +++ Significant +++ Significant +++ Significant +++ Significant +++ Significant +++ 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Significant +++ Significant +++ Significant +++ Significant +++ Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Pot Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster, Velvet Crab, and Nephrops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster positive effect because maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws. Will the regime create jobs in the community? Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? ++ Moderate positive effect in protecting lobster stocks and hence the fishing industry, without which there could be no fishing tourism. 8. Parts of Shellfish positive effect because maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws. + Minor positive effect on fishing tourism. No effect on recreational angling. 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait positive effect because maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws. + Minor positive effect on fishing tourism. No effect on recreational angling. 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish positive effect because maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws. + Minor positive effect on fishing tourism. No effect on recreational angling. 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes positive effect because maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws. + Minor positive effect on fishing tourism. Other Regulation UK, EU 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns positive effect because maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws. + No effect on recreational angling. No effect on recreational angling. 180 Other Issues 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Minor positive effect on fishing tourism. No effect on recreational angling. 15. Pot Limitation positive effect because maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws. + Minor positive effect on fishing tourism. No effect on recreational angling. EU SI minimum landing size positive effect because maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws. ++ Moderate positive effect in protecting lobster stocks and hence the fishing industry, without which there could be no fishing tourism. No effect on recreational angling. EU SI V notched lobster positive effect because maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws. + Minor positive effect on fishing tourism. No effect on recreational angling. Cumulative Effects positive effect because maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws. ++ Moderate positive effect in protecting lobster stocks and hence the fishing industry, without which there could be no fishing tourism. No effect on recreational angling. issues were identified. Maintains communiti es and attractiven ess to tourism and recreationa l anglers. Overall a secondary benefit positive effect because maintaining sustainable fisheries is the main purpose of the byelaws. + Overall a positive effect because the byelaws are intended to maintain the fishery. Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Dredge Fishery for Scallops Dredge Fishery for Scallops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues Cumulative Effects NIFCA Byelaws 12. Dredges 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? 17. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the BNNC SAC + Minor positive impact caused as it is expect that if you are fishing for scallops you are not fishing for white fish at the same time + Minor positive as there has not been a significant white fish take for approximately 3 years 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective Fishing people know where the grounds are but IFCA is improving the definition of where the smooth ground is. + Not quantified but reduction does limit the overall catch + Not quantified but reduction does limit the overall catch + Not quantified but restrictions may reduce the overall catch in the area There is a fish bycatch with high mortality rate. - There is a fish bycatch with high mortality rate. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? + Overall minor positive impact in maintaining white fish stocks, with additional benefit of not fishing for white fish whilst fishing for scallops. No other issues were identified. + Believed to be a minor positive overall effect but not quantified. Complex interactions but overall approximately neutral - The bycatch is a minor negative effect. Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to non-target species (fish, birds, mammals)? - rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? 0 Fishing right on the sea bed 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Susceptible as more bycatch 0 No overall effect. non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? + Minor positive effect to maintaining fish stocks. + Minor positive effect to maintaining fish stocks. Limit of overall scale + Minor positive effect to maintaining fish stocks. and implement any remedial targets as required. Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? + Not disturbing non-target species. + Not disturbing non-target species. Activity can cause disturbance but not affected by the byelaw 0 Little or no disturbance to birds and seals. 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? - Doesn’t identify species. Ecologically damaging as allows dredges, but predominately on smooth ground 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? 0 As above, but doesn’t damage the species in the SAC + This byelaw has a minor positive effect as it aims to protect the BNNC SAC and its designated features which will have benefits for species within the SAC 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? + Very minor positive effect (would otherwise be 16 dredges per boat) + This byelaw has a minor positive effect as it aims to protect the BNNC SAC and its designated conservation features 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or non-native marine species? 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 181 Also a crab bycatch. Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to nonstatutory habitats? Also a crab bycatch. This also links with number 9 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and non-native marine species? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx + This byelaw has a minor positive indirect effect as it aims to protect seagrass within the BNNC SAC which will have benefits for species within the SAC No other issues were identified. + Minor positive overall effect from protection of features within the BNNC SAC which will have benefits for species + This byelaw has a minor positive effect as it aims to protect the BNNC SAC and its designated conservation features such as seagrass At 16 dredges bigger, more powerful boats could come in which can lead to more depletion and more disturbance. At 10 dredges, this is not viable for the big boats. + Minor positive overall effect from protection of designated conservation features within the BNNC SAC 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Dredge Fishery for Scallops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues Cumulative Effects NIFCA Byelaws 12. Dredges 17. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the BNNC SAC assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species. 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 Limiting dredge number will limit the energy (and associated emissions) used in towing. However, it could lead to increased effort to increase catches. Therefore, neutral has been scored. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective The main risk is operators from larger local ports. 0 Negligible overall effect. + Removes larger vessels + Removes vessels. + Minor positive effect on landscape/seascape as the byelaw aims to protect areas of seagrass within the SAC which will help preserve the habitat No other issues were identified. + Minor positive overall effects as the byelaws will remove large vessels and help protect the character and features of the BNNC SAC Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? Protects sea scape (sea bed) Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. + Decreases number of vessels + Decrease number of vessels 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective No other issues were identified. + Reduction in the number of vessels maybe seen as a benefit. Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Will the scheme use sustainable materials? proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? - Decreases number of vessels - Decrease number of vessels! 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective No other issues were identified. - Reduction in the number of vessels reduces the fleet size, which may reduce the economy, but it does allow the existing infrastructure to be used. 15. Maintain and enhance fishing Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which + Allows alternative (scallops) to 0 This byelaw has no effect on this 0 This byelaw has no effect Fishing community and harbour 0 Negligible overall effect. 182 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Dredge Fishery for Scallops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues Cumulative Effects NIFCA Byelaws communities by developing a can significantly contribute to the local economy? 12. Dredges 17. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the BNNC SAC be targeted because reduces overall pressure. Also maintains a viable small boat fleet objective. on this objective a very important part of the coastal community sustainable fisheries management regime Will the regime create jobs in the community? 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective Only around half a dozen local boats 2 months per year. They move to trawling rest of the year. 0 No overall effect. 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective Also brings non-fishing tourism 0 No overall effect. 183 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Drift Net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout Drift Net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? + Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Minor positive effect as restricts fishing for white fish close inshore in winter (Nov – Mar). Aims to prevent bycatch of trout and salmon. However, they are thinking of dropping this byelaw. EA restrictions for anglers + Minor positive effect as it allows the fish to mature and breed before being caught – thus maintaining the fishery. Also potential sea-bird bycatch. Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? N/A Cumulative Effects Other Regulation UK, EU 4. Fixed Engines 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Other Issues Mostly dealt with under MaCAA which states IFCAs don’t manage migratory fish. However, DEFRA says “Marine organisms” in inshore waters (including sea fisheries resources). IFCA is meeting with DEFRA lawyers to resolve this issue N/A + Overall minor positive effect of maintaining the fishery N/A Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to non-target species (fish, birds, mammals)? 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species. Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or non-native marine species? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? 184 +++ This would change if the byelaw was scrapped since the bycatch would then happen. Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? Seals don’t get caught even though they take the salmon. Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? Also regulated by the EA – small numbers of particular style. Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. If the byelaw is scrapped then the current protection of bycatch could be lost causing a negative effect. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. +++ Overall significant positive effect in protecting the bycatch. No other issues were identified. + 0verall, this is contributing to protection of all species by preventing the catch. Therefore will need review if the byelaw is withdrawn Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. + Potentially protects seals and sea birds (therefore have to stay with net) 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 The nets are not being moved a lot reducing the introduction of new species. (very minor impact) 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to non-statutory habitats? Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and non-native marine species? + 0 Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Drift Net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws Other Issues Cumulative Effects Other Regulation UK, EU 4. Fixed Engines EA restrictions for anglers environment and fishing industry 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? + 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? 185 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 Some social benefit, but likely to be minimal if any benefit at all 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 Negligible effect. 0 Less visual intrusion from Dahn buoys when people are fishing for salmon and sea trout, may be seen as enhancing the seascape, but there is no significant effect. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. + Small but organised and time-limited fishery is protected, so it does promote a sustainable fishery. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. + Overall minor positive effect of protecting the fishery. + The picturesque boats; traditional and historic infrastructure are valuable for tourism. Little recreational angling. + Although restrictions may discourage anglers (although this is thought to be minimal), in the long term it will help maintain this fishery for future recreational angling No other issues were identified. + Overall minor positive effect of protecting the fishery. Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? Will the regime create jobs in the community? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Trawl Fishery for Nephrops Trawl Fishery for Nephrops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues Cumulative Effects NIFCA Byelaws 3. Trawling and Size of Vessels 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC ++ The byelaw on trawling and size of vessels will have a moderate positive indirect effect on the sustainable harvesting of finfish, as it will reduce the size limit of vessels and reduce effort in the district. ++ This byelaw will have a moderate positive indirect effect on the sustainable harvesting of finfish, as it will reduce effort in the district. 0 This byelaw has no effect on the sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks in the area as the SAC is outside the area being fished for Nephrops. + The harvest rate of Nephrops stocks is advised and managed by the EU (total catch restrictions). Restrictions on trawling and the size of vessels will constrain effort in the district which will have a minor positive indirect effect on the sustainable harvesting of Nephrops stocks in NIFCA area. + This byelaw will reduce effort in the district which will have a minor positive indirect effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? NIFCA does not assess finfish in relation to Nephrops trawl fishery. Probably predominantly whiting Cod-bycatch unknown (likely to be low rate) Nephrops caught outside the district and landed with NIFCA district need better links with other organisations to monitor this + The cumulative effect of these byelaws on the sustainable harvesting of white fish stocks is minor positive indirect, as the byelaws reduce effort in the district, indirectly impacting finfish stocks. + The cumulative effect of these byelaws on the sustainable harvesting of Nephrops stocks is minor positive indirect, as they impact effort in the district. + The cumulative effect of these byelaws on the impact of bycatches on non-target species is minor positive indirect. Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? This area is relevant under MaCAA and should be developed within the NIFCA regime. There is a large visiting effort of fisheries people coming from other areas to trawl in the district. Relationship between local prosecuted Nephrops (3-6mm) in district is unknown. Farne Deeps prosecuted fishery Functional Unit information is at SBL Knowledge gap of local stock biomass Main trawl fishery is at Farn Deeps Relationship between international advice and stocks at Farn Deeps and inside the district Evaluation of need for future study Limited data collected (byelaw 13) historical gap between previous MMO data and introduction of byelaw Limited knowledge of stocks, boat numbers and landings – data is collected by other organisations but NIFCA don’t monitor this. NIFCA should review others data Lack of Functional Unit management as recommended by ICES. Not an IFCA management issue but is big picture issues which needs addressing. While NIFCA couldn’t implement functional unit management, they could promote it when asked (or proactively) to contribute to sustainable fishing 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. 186 Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to non-target species (fish, birds, mammals)? Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? + The bycatch of non-target species is not currently being regulated by NIFCA. However, this byelaw is likely to reduce effort (smaller nets) and may lead to a reduction in bycatch. Although this is anecdotal because there is a low incidence rate of non-target + This byelaw will reduce effort in the district, which may lead to a reduction in bycatch. This will have a minor positive indirect effect on the bycatch of non-target species. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. NIFCA will be looking at seals and seabirds in the district but a future project could be to look at the effects of bycatch on these and other nontarget species, and bycatch rates. Anecdotal information only on bycatch (low incident rate) Main issue is seabirds Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Trawl Fishery for Nephrops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues Cumulative Effects NIFCA Byelaws 3. Trawling and Size of Vessels Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species. Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or non-native marine species? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC species bycatch, this byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on bycatch of non-target species. Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining + This byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on capture and aquaculture fisheries and species diversity through reduction of effort. + + This byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on this objective. + This byelaw was brought in to protect species and habitats within the SAC but does not outwardly apply for trawl fishery for Nephrops. However, it is likely that this byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect. There is a knowledge gap in this area, as there is no baseline data on habitats. + This byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on this objective. This byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. This byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on capture and aquaculture fisheries and species diversity through reduction of effort. + + This byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on this objective. This byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on this objective. + 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 + This byelaw will reduce effort in the district which may reduce carbon emissions due to fewer vessels. This will have a minor positive indirect effect on greenhouse gas emissions. Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? + The cumulative effect of these byelaws on the objective is positive minor indirect. There is a knowledge gap in this area as there is no baseline data to assess against. + The cumulative effect of these byelaws on the objective is positive minor indirect. This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Trawlers from areas outside the district could bring invasive species into the NIFCA district. + The cumulative effect of these byelaws on the objective is positive minor indirect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. This objective is not relevant to trawl fishing for Nephrops and is not predictable by NIFCA. 0 No overall effect. This byelaw will reduce effort in the district which may reduce carbon emissions due to fewer vessels. This will have a minor positive indirect effect on greenhouse gas emissions. However, restrictions may also mean that boats travel further afield outside the district using generating more GHG emissions 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Byelaw restrictions may mean more travel to avoid the district which may increase carbon emissions outside the district. + The cumulative effect of these byelaws on greenhouse gas emissions is minor positive indirect. This byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on protecting and enhancing historical and cultural assets. + + The cumulative effect of these byelaws on protecting and enhancing historic and cultural assets. Potential to open up fishing zones for trawling in the EMS Current vessel tracking system uses GPS. IVMS tracking uses mobile phone signal which is more accurate. However, it is expensive. Could get a free trial from an organisation such as Succofish Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to non-statutory habitats? Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and non-native marine species? Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and landbased historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? + This byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on protecting and enhancing historical and cultural assets. + - + If local boats can’t fish within the district, they may need to travel outside which may increase emissions. This byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on protecting and enhancing historical and cultural assets. There are ship wrecks marked on the marine charter but they aren’t marked as historic. Doing a survey of archaeological sites could be a future project to help preserve and enhance historical assets. There is some spatially limited research but this could be developed. By banning trawling in certain areas, 187 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Trawl Fishery for Nephrops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues Cumulative Effects NIFCA Byelaws 3. Trawling and Size of Vessels 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC this could have a positive effect on historic and cultural assets. Under MaCAA NIFCA should be looking after archaeological assets but they aren’t currently 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? ? The byelaw on the trawling size of vessels may have a positive visual impact, as people enjoy seeing small vessels on the coastline. However, this is a matter of personal opinion. Therefore, there is uncertainty over the effect of trawling and size of vessels on this objective. ? There is uncertainty over the effect of multi-rigging, pair trawling and pair seining on landscapes, seascapes and sympathetic fisheries development and activities. ? There is uncertainty over the effect of the new byelaw on sympathetic fisheries development and activities. The effect of these byelaws on landscapes and seascapes is a matter of personal opinion. Some people like to see smaller boats. However, some people like to see lots of varied boats. ? The cumulative effect of these byelaws on landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries is uncertain. ? This byelaw may create less waste locally but they may also take lots with them if they have to go further afield. The effects of byelaw three on marine waste and discharges is uncertain. ? There is uncertainty over the effect of multi-rigging, pair trawling and pair seining on marine waste and discharge. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. ? The cumulative effect of these byelaws on waste and discharges to the marine environment is uncertain. ? There is uncertainty over the effect of byelaw 3 on marine pollution and water quality. ? There is uncertainty over the effect of byelaw 14 on marine pollution and water quality. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. ? The cumulative effect of these byelaws on marine pollution and water quality is uncertain. ? There is uncertainty over the effect of byelaw 3 on health and safety. Smaller inshore fishing boats are below the H&S threshold ? There is uncertainty over the effect of byelaw 14 on health and safety. ? There is uncertainty over the effect of the new byelaw on health and safety. Theoretically, fewer boats would mean there are fewer problems but there are still issues with reporting health and safety. Locally, there aren’t many issues with health and safety. ? The cumulative effect of these byelaws on health and safety is uncertain. Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Boats above 15m need health and safety certifications but smaller boats do not. No information on H&S for smaller boats Marine Accident Organisation – should report accidents to this organisation but many don’t 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? 188 ? This byelaw may decrease the number of fishing vessels, which may have a minor positive impact on the environment (mainly ecology). However, it may also increase the number of boats out at a time, which would have a minor negative impact on the amount of catch each boat brings in, Therefore, the impact of this byelaw on the quality of material assets is uncertain. ? This byelaw may cause a decrease in net gear but this does not necessarily reduce the number of vessels. Therefore, the impact of this byelaw on material assets is uncertain. ? There is uncertainty over the effect of this byelaw on the quality of material assets. May not be equipped to answer this ? The cumulative effect of these byelaws on material assets is uncertain. + This byelaw will have a minor positive direct effect on fishing communities and + This byelaw will have a minor positive direct effect on fishing communities and + This byelaw will have a minor positive indirect effect on fishing There is uncertainty regarding longterm job creation and maintaining jobs within the district. + The cumulative effect of these byelaws on fishing communities is minor positive Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Trawl Fishery for Nephrops SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues Cumulative Effects NIFCA Byelaws 3. Trawling and Size of Vessels regime Will the regime create jobs in the community? 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? 189 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining sustainable fisheries management. It is positive for locals as it stops big boats coming in, contributing to maintaining long-term sustainability of the fishery, and thus maintaining jobs for the future. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC sustainable fisheries management. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx communities and sustainable fisheries management. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. direct. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Gillnet Fishery for Lobster Gillnet Fishery for Lobster SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? Other Issues 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 0 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw will have a moderate positive direct effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks as it aims to protect lobster resources. ++ This byelaw will have a moderate positive direct effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks as it aims to protect lobster resources. ? Since the gillnet fishery for lobsters is done by one person, the impact of this byelaw on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks is uncertain. It is uncertain what he uses for bait. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Other Regulation UK, EU 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 0 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot limitations EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. This byelaw has no effect on this objective. + The fisherman should have a permit and should be recording his returns. This byelaw will have a minor positive direct effect on the sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks. 0 This byelaw has no effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks in the area as the fisherman does not use pots. ++ This regulation will have a moderate positive indirect effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks. ++ This regulation will have a moderate positive indirect effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks. Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? ++ This byelaw will have a moderate positive direct effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks as it aims to protect berried lobster ++ This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 190 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx There is a lack of knowledge about this area (how often does the fisherman go out, rate of bycatch, is anyone else doing this type of fishery). This could be an area for development. These byelaws and regulations are not relevant to finfish. Vessel is checked but what happened to the data. Is it included in reporting Possible increase in effort if viable and more people do it Fishery is currently one fisherman Can other management be put into place? It is unclear if he is reporting his returns. Bycatch should be recorded on the form Fishing effort is not directly regulated, although the fixed engine byelaw would be applicable as a partial management tool. The byelaws don’t cover effort (number of nets, area) More knowledge on the south of the Cumulative Effects 0 No overall effect. + The cumulative effect of these byelaws and regulations on the sustainable harvest of shellfish stocks is minor positive direct. Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Gillnet Fishery for Lobster SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish Other Regulation UK, EU 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot limitations EU SI minimum landing size Cumulative Effects EU SI V notched lobster site (SAC) 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on nontarget species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to nontarget species (fish, birds, mammals)? 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. + Putting shellfish bycatch back where it’s found. Low grade lobster. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. These by-laws and regulations are not bycatch oriented. 0 No overall effect. 0 No overall effect. Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. 191 Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or nonstatutory areas? Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx No cap on shellfish fishing effort Effects of the net on the rocky reef habitat and species in the SAC There are bycatch issues in the SAC. . General lack of knowledge Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Gillnet Fishery for Lobster SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or nonstatutory areas? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species. Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or nonnative marine species? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? 192 Other Issues 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster Other Regulation UK, EU 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot limitations EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? There are bycatch issues in the SAC. General lack of knowledge Effects of the net on the rocky reef habitat in the SAC Cumulative Effects 0 No overall effect. 0 No overall effect. 0 No overall effect. Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to nonstatutory habitats? Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and non-native marine species? Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx It is not clear where the nets used have been sourced from Is it possible to bring in nonnative species from other areas either on the boat or the nets Gill netting is likely to have a greater negative effect with regards to bycatch as the majority will not survive. Impacts could include seals, whales, birds etc. Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Gillnet Fishery for Lobster SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? Other Issues 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster Other Regulation UK, EU 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot limitations EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. It is unclear how often this one fisherman is out fishing for lobsters. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. Effects of casting net on rock reef and historic areas 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. The use of gillnets could damage the reef 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. Cumulative Effects 0 No overall effect. 0 No overall effect. 0 No overall effect. 0 No overall effect. Will it increase/decreas e generation of greenhouse gases? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seasca pe quality and character? 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? Will it enhance landscape/seasca pe quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited 193 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Part of the net could be left behind when pulling up the catch from the rocky reef. Re-use of old nets How does the fisherman dispose of nets? Are nets left behind to ghost fish? Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Gillnet Fishery for Lobster SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster Other Regulation UK, EU 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 15. Pot limitations EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster Cumulative Effects to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? 16. Protect Will it encourage 194 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. + This byelaw will have a minor positive direct effect on health and safety because marking gear will enable other boats to know it’s there. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. ? The impact of this byelaw on the quality of material assets is uncertain. ? The impact of this byelaw on the quality of material assets is uncertain. ? The impact of this byelaw on the quality of material assets is uncertain. ? The impact of this byelaw on the quality of material assets is uncertain. ? The impact of this byelaw on the quality of material assets is uncertain. ? The impact of this byelaw on the quality of material assets is uncertain. ? The impact of this byelaw on the quality of material assets is uncertain. ? The impact of this byelaw on the quality of material assets is uncertain. ? The impact of this regulation on the quality of material assets is uncertain. ? The impact of this regulation on the quality of material assets is uncertain. + This byelaw would benefit shellfish conservation, therefore, promoting sustainable fishing practice, and a sustainable fishing industry 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This byelaw 0 This byelaw 0 This byelaw 0 This byelaw 0 This byelaw 0 This byelaw 0 This byelaw 0 This byelaw 0 This regulation 0 This regulation Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Part of the net could be left behind when pulling up the catch from the rocky reef. Under the byelaw a net (singular) of 100m or less does not require a permit Don’t know the fisherman H&S procedures/ record regarding use of nets.. There is a knowledge gap in this area and NIFCA would benefit from exploring this issue further. Not equipped to answer the impacts of these byelaws on this objective. 0 No overall effect. 0 No overall effect. ? The cumulative effect of these byelaws and regulations on the quality of material assets is uncertain. 0 No overall effect. 0 No overall Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? Will the regime create jobs in the community? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx It is unclear what the effects would be if other people took up gillnet fishery for lobster. It is unclear how much skill Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Gillnet Fishery for Lobster SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime 195 fishing tourism and recreational angling? Other Issues has no effect on this objective. 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster has no effect on this objective. 8. Parts of Shellfish has no effect on this objective. 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait has no effect on this objective. 10. Re-depositing of Shellfish Other Regulation UK, EU 11. Marking of Fishing Gear and Keep Boxes has no effect on this objective. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx has no effect on this objective. 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns has no effect on this objective. 15. Pot limitations has no effect on this objective. EU SI minimum landing size has no effect on this objective. Cumulative Effects EU SI V notched lobster has no effect on this objective. this fishery requires and therefore, it is possible that many more people could take it up. effect. Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Hand Line Fishery for Mackerel Hand Line Fishery for Mackerel SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Other Issues Management Regime Cumulative Effects Other Regulation UK, EU MMO Licence 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? + Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Minimum landing size set by MMO The MMO licencing will have a minor positive direct effect on the sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks as it provides a level of regulation. + This regulation will have a minor positive direct effect on the sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks. Does high grading occur? The fishery consists of 10 vessels, with 10 boxes per vessel. It is a seasonal fishery + These regulations will have a minor positive direct effect on the sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks. Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? N/A N/A N/A N/A Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to nontarget species (fish, birds, mammals)? + This regulation will have a minor positive indirect effect on bycatches and non-target species, as it regulates effort in the district. 0 This regulation will have a minor positive indirect effect on this objective, as it reduces effort in the district. 0 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. This regulation has no effect on this objective. It is possible to bycatch birds in the process of hand line fishing for mackerel + These regulations will have a minor positive indirect effect on bycatches and non-target species. + These regulations will have a minor positive indirect effect on this objective. Jigging increases the likelihood of catching other animals Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or non-native marine species? 196 + Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? This regulation has no effect on this objective. Possible bycatch of birds and other fish 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. Pelagic activity in the water column 0 No overall effect. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. Targeted fishery, highly selective Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to non-statutory habitats? Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and non-native marine species? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Hand Line Fishery for Mackerel SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues Cumulative Effects Other Regulation UK, EU MMO Licence Minimum landing size set by MMO introduction of non-native species. 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? ? The effect of this regulation on identifying, managing and adapting to the effects of climate change is uncertain. ? The effect of this regulation on identifying, managing and adapting to the effects of climate change is unclear. As ocean temperatures increase, certain fish species may migrate to outside of the district. Mackerel are more likely to move further north. ? The effect of these regulations on identifying, managing and adapting to the effects of climate change is unclear. + This regulation will have a minor positive indirect effect on greenhouse gas emissions because it aims to limit the number of boats. - This regulation could have a potential minor negative indirect effect on greenhouse gas emissions because it may be necessary for boats to be out fishing for longer to get their quotas (stakeholder opinion). No other issues were identified. 0 The net cumulative effect of these regulations will be neutral. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. ? The effect of this regulation on discharges to sea and waste is uncertain. ? The effect of this regulation on discharges to sea and waste is uncertain. Boats could be out longer to get their quotas, therefore, generating more waste. There is a possibility to lose your line/net, which may lead to more waste. ? The cumulative effect of these regulations on discharges to sea and waste is uncertain. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. There would only be effects from a reduction in effort if local stock was below minimum size. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. Very low quota 0 No overall effect. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. 0 This regulation has no effect on this objective. Restricted quota; fully utilised 0 No overall effect. Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? Will the regime create jobs in the community? 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime 197 Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Hand gathering for Mussels Hand gathering for Mussels SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Mussels (Mainly commercial, few in estuaries, used as fishing bait) NE Restrictions within Lindisfarne Nature Reserve 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the BNNC SAC Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? Other Issues Cumulative Effects N/A Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? ? Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Baseline information is required to understand the number of mussels captured as there is currently no historic data. Although mussels are not currently found within the area protected under this byelaw they may be in the future which could provide them with a degree of indirect protection. Potential Action Plan – Once baseline information is known decisions for further action can be taken which may include: permitted hand gathering of mussels, restrictions (bag limits) for personal use and a code of conduct. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Baseline information is required to understand the number of mussels captured as there is currently no historic data. The Lindisfarne byelaws prohibit collection and removal of bait such as mussels which may help sustain stocks. ? The hand gathering of mussels will have a major positive effect on this SEA objective as it is beneficial to the seabed (less disturbance) and this method avoids by catch. Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to non-target species (fish, birds, mammals)? 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of nonnative species. Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or non-native marine species? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on Will it assist in building capacity to respond the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing 198 Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? +++ - ? Further information required to determine cumulative effects on stock levels. Negative effects can be minimised through a code of conduct to raise awareness on etiquette and potential effects on other habitats and species from human disturbance and litter. 0 Overall current effects considered neutral. No other issues were identified. ? Further information required to determine cumulative effects. 0 Overall current effects considered neutral. The code of conduct can be prepared without the baseline information and should be done as best practice to advice tourists of standards and etiquette when fishing for mussels. However there will be shortterm negative effect for human disturbance to surrounding species. The Lindisfarne byelaws help protect against harm to species. Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? ? Baseline data is required to determine if this fishing method is having an ecological effect to species in statutory and nonstatutory areas. Within Lindisfarne NNR species are protected from harm by the byelaws + Potential indirect minor positive effects through protection of seagrass areas. 0 There will be short-term minor negative effects due to the disturbance of rocks to find mussels. However, the Lindisfarne byelaws prohibit intentionally removing or displacing any vegetation. So overall effects are considered neutral. + This byelaw aims to protect areas of seagrass. Although mussels are not currently found within the area protected under this byelaw they may be in the future. + The Lindisfarne byelaws prohibits intentionally bringing creatures and plants to the area that could be invasive species and affect the mussel fishery 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. There may need to be restrictions put in place for the amounts of oysters that are in the area as these compete for food with mussels. + There will be a minor positive cumulative effect due to prohibition of bringing creatures and plants to the area. 0 This fishing method will not be affected by climate change as 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Potential to improve knowledge on how mussels adapt to sea 0 No overall effect Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to non-statutory habitats? Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and nonnative marine species? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx No other issues were identified. Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Hand gathering for Mussels SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Mussels (Mainly commercial, few in estuaries, used as fishing bait) NE Restrictions within Lindisfarne Nature Reserve the marine environment and fishing industry industry? the mussels will just move inshore with the changing sea levels. Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? By its nature hand gathering is a low carbon fishery. Although the byelaw will have no effects on this. Hand gathering is a very low carbon method of fishing and there is very few, if any, greenhouse gas emissions associated with it 0 0 There will be no effect as there are no listed structures in the areas where hand gathering takes place. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Monitoring of potential future listed structures e.g. shipwrecks could be done as a low priority to identify if any action needs to be taken to protect historic assets in areas where hand gathering takes place. 0 No overall effect + The method of hand gathering for mussels will have a moderate positive effect on the character of the seascape as people enjoy seeing this type of fishing method along the shore. However, the prohibition of bait digging may reduce numbers of people hand gathering for mussels + The byelaw will have a minor positive effect as landscape/seascape as it protected areas of seagrass. Although mussels are not currently found within the area protected under this byelaw they may be in the future No other issues were identified. + There will be a minor positive cumulative effects from protection of the landscape/seascape as a result of the byelaws 0 The waste associated with hand gathering of mussels is discarded shells however these blend in with the surrounding environment so there is no effect. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect + The fishery itself will not affect water quality. However, the wider Lindisfarne byelaws prohibit acts which pollute or are likely to cause pollution of any water. Therefore, there will be an indirect minor positive effect on water quality in this location 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Poor water quality as a result of algal blooms can have a minor negative effect on the hand gathering of mussels. When algal blooms are present, notices are put up not to fish for mussels as these may be of poor quality. + The byelaws protect the Lindisfarne area from polluting activities 0 There will be no effect on Health & Safety as a result of this fishery. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect 0 There will be no effect on material assets 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Hand gathering is self-managing and makes use of existing infrastructure and assets i.e. the beach and shoreline 0 No overall effect 0 There will be no effect on the local economy as a result of hand gathering. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No overall effect 0 Hand gathering for mussels is allowed under the Lindisfarne NNR byelaws. However, digging, collection and/or removal of bait is not 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Hand gathering provides a source of bait for recreational angling 0 No overall effect Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? 199 temperature change by gathering baseline data. 0 Will it help protect historic assets? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Cumulative Effects By its nature hand gathering is a low carbon fishery.. There may be some reduction in carbon emissions in that travel to the site may be less than if the byelaw did not exist. However, this is considered negligible and therefore neutral has been scored. Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? Other Issues 0 Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the BNNC SAC Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? Will the regime create jobs in the community? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx No overall effect Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 200 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Hand gathering for Winkles Hand gathering for Winkles SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Winkles (Found on rocky shore, commercial and recreational, price is higher in winter) 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the BNNC SAC 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Other Issues Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? N/A Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? ? Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Baseline information is required to understand the number of winkles captured as there is currently no historic data. There is also difficulty in determining the difference between recreational and commercial fishing for winkles. Potential Action Plan – Once baseline information is known decisions for further action can be taken which may include: permitted hand gathering of winkles, restrictions (bag limits) for personal use and a code of conduct. This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Hand gathering of winkles avoids by catch and only causes negligible disturbance. Potential short-term negative Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to non-target species (fish, birds, mammals)? 0 The code of conduct can be prepared without the baseline information and should be done as best practice to advice tourists of standards and etiquette when fishing for mussels. effect from human disturbance to surrounding species. Negative effects can be minimised through a code of conduct and raising awareness of the potential short-term negative effects to tourists. Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species. Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or non-native marine species? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? ? Baseline data is required to determine if this fishing method is having an ecological effect to species in statutory and non-statutory areas. Potential indirect minor positive effects through protection of seagrass areas. No other issues were identified. + This byelaw aims to protect areas of seagrass. Although winkles are not currently found within the area protected under this byelaw they may be in the future. Short-term, seasonal negative effects due to disturbance of rocks to find winkles. Negative effects can be mitigated through a code of conduct to raise awareness on etiquette and potential effects on other habitats and species from human disturbance and litter. 0 . This byelaw has no effect on this objective. There may need to be restrictions put in place for the amounts of Pacific oysters that are in the area as these compete for food with winkles 0 This fishing method will not be affected by climate change as the winkles will just move inshore with the changing sea levels. Potential to improve knowledge on how winkles adapt to sea temperature change by gathering baseline data. 0 By its nature hand gathering is a low carbon fishery. Although the byelaw will have no effects on this. Hand gathering is a very low carbon method of fishing and there are very few, if any, greenhouse gas emissions associated with it 0 There will be no effect as there are no listed structures in the areas where hand gathering takes place. Monitoring of potential future listed structures e.g. shipwrecks could be done as a low priority to identify if any action needs to be taken to protect historic assets in areas where hand gathering takes place. + The method of hand gathering for winkles has a positive effect on the character of the seascape as people enjoy seeing this type of fishing method along the shore. The byelaw will have a minor positive effect as landscape/seascape as No other issues were identified. Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to non-statutory habitats? Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and non-native marine species? Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? 201 Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Hand gathering for Winkles SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Winkles (Found on rocky shore, commercial and recreational, price is higher in winter) 17. Seagrass Protection Byelaw within the English section of the BNNC SAC Other Issues it protects areas of seagrass. 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? 202 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. The main source of waste associated with this hand gathering is from tourists who leave behind litter who have picked and cooked the winkles on the shoreline for recreational purposes. This impact is a short-term negligible negative effect and is seasonal. Effects can be mitigated through a code of conduct to communicate the requirement to remove all waste. There is currently on-going communication with the local council who is responsible for waste collection and management in the area. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Poor water quality as a result of algal blooms can have a minor negative effect on the hand gathering of winkles. When algal blooms are present, notices are put up not to fish for winkles as these may be of poor quality. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Hand gathering is self-managing and makes use of existing infrastructure and assets i.e. the beach and shoreline 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 This byelaw has no effect on this objective. Hand gathering for winkles provides a source of bait for recreational angling Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? Will the regime create jobs in the community? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 4. Fixed Engines 1 Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? 0 Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? This byelaw is not relevant to finfish and only applies to salmon therefore has no effect Other Issues Other Regulation UK, EU Minimum landing sizes set by MMO (not Turbot) ? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? The effect of these minimum landing sizes are uncertain as the minimum landing sizes set by the MMO will soon be removed. However this is not thought to have a potential negative effect as the harvest will be managed to achieve maximum sustainable yield using other regulations. NIFCA are to create their own minimum landing sizes. Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Cumulative Effects The biggest issue is bycatch of bass and illegal nets can bycatch birds. An assessment needs to be done to identify if a byelaw is needed for gillnet fishery for white fish. The severities of any issues need to be identified so a correct level of response can be developed. Gillnet fisheries are minimal (approx. 30 days a year) and in a limited area but something should be done. Potential further actions: Rewording of existing byelaws to include this fishery, raise awareness of potential issues, and develop a code of practice. ? Cumulative effects depend on the effects of the minimum landing sizes regulation 0 This byelaw is not relevant to the protection of shell-fish stocks and therefore has no effects. + NIFCA are to create their own minimum landing sizes. However wholesalers sometimes dictate the minimum landing sizes. There is currently dispute over the minimum landing sizes. There is also potential that if a byelaw that is relevant to this fishery is created and the number of cod increases, there will be less pressure to fish for shellfish so would have a positive effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish. + Minor cumulative positive effects -- Bycatch is generally released but sometimes larger birds get caught in the nets. However there is a major issue with bass bycatch but this is short term and seasonal. A byelaw relating to manning nets means that birds can be released more easily. This byelaw does decrease the level of bird mortality as there is a greater chance of bycatch being released. ++ The minimum landing sizes allow fish stocks to breed and therefore increases biomass in the area. However the minimum landing sizes are not optimal. The existing byelaw only relates to gillnets within close proximity, does not apply to those with a migratory licence. The development of a code of conduct could help reduce the negative impacts on bycatch associated with gillnet fishing, in particular for those not covered by this byelaw. 0 The cumulative effect would be a neutral as there are short-term negative effect associated with bycatch, and positive effects of minimum landing sizes allowing fish stocks to breed and increase biomass in the area. + There is minimal netting activity in SAC’s and this byelaw has a positive effect in these areas where wildlife such as birds are present as there is a greater chance of bycatch being released. ++ The minimum landing sizes allow fish stocks to breed and therefore increases biomass in the area. However the minimum landing sizes are not optimal. A code of conduct should be produced relating to this particular fishery as the fixed engine byelaw is not relevant and the minimum landing sizes set by MMO will no longer exist in the near future. The code of conduct would provide standards and etiquette for the fishery to act as a management tool instead of a byelaw. + The cumulative effect would be a moderate positive as both the fixed engine byelaw and minimum landing sizes help to maintain sustainable levels of fish stocks by providing opportunities for the release of by catch and allowing fish to breed. 0 This byelaw will have no effect on the restoration of the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems. + The minimum landing sizes will have a positive effect on the conservation of biodiversity as the number of fish being harvested before they have an opportunity to breed will be minimised. A code of conduct should be produced relating to this particular fishery as the fixed engine byelaw is not relevant and the minimum landing sizes set by MMO will no longer exist in the near future. The code of conduct would provide standards and etiquette for the fishery to act as a management tool instead of a byelaw. + The cumulative effect would be a minor positive as biodiversity will be conserved by allowing fish to breed. 0 This byelaw will have no effect on the 0 These regulations are not applicable as the A code of conduct should be produced 0 Regime not applicable or has no Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to non-target species (fish, birds, mammals)? Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? 6. Conserve marine Will it suitably identify and regulate those 203 Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to nonstatutory habitats? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 4. Fixed Engines biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species. activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? Other Issues Other Regulation UK, EU Minimum landing sizes set by MMO (not Turbot) prevention of the introduction and spread of non-native species. non-native species have their own minimum landing sizes. Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to nonstatutory habitats? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? effect. Therefore, there are no cumulative effects. This byelaw will have no effect on the level of response to the impacts of climate change on the fishing industry. 0 This regulation will have no effect on the level of response to the impacts of climate change on the fishing industry. A code of conduct should be produced relating to this particular fishery as the fixed engine byelaw is not relevant and the minimum landing sizes set by MMO will no longer exist in the near future. The code of conduct would provide standards and etiquette for the fishery to act as a management tool instead of a byelaw. 0 The cumulative effect is that there will be no effect as neither the fixed engine byelaw nor minimum landing sizes will have any effect on managing and adapting to climate change. 0 This byelaw will have no effect on reducing the carbon footprint of this fishery as fixed licences are assigned. 0 This regulation will have no effect on reducing carbon emissions, but if it was not in place, the quota could be used up in a shorter period of time and boats would not be able to fish all year round, potentially increasing emissions. No other issues were identified. 0 The cumulative effect is that there will be no effect as neither the fixed engine byelaw nor minimum landing sizes will have any effect on reducing carbon emissions. 0 This byelaw will have no effect on the setting and fabric of historic assets as there are no known designated historic assets in the area where this fishery exists. 0 This regulation will have no effect on the setting and fabric of historic assets as there are no known designated historic assets in the area where this fishery exists. No other issues were identified. 0 The cumulative effect is that there will be no effect as neither the fixed engine byelaw nor minimum landing sizes will have any effect on protecting and maintaining historic assets. 0 There are no negative effects associated with seascape and landscape as a result of this byelaw. There are also no positive effects as people prefer to see more traditional methods of fishing that positively enhance the seascape. 0 This regulation will have no effect on the quality of the landscape and seascape character. No other issues were identified. 0 The cumulative effect is that there will be no effect as neither the fixed engine byelaw nor minimum landing sizes will have any effect on the quality of the seascape and landscape. 0 This byelaw will not have any effect on the level of discharge to sea and waste to the marine environment. 0 This regulation will not have any effect on the level of discharge to sea and waste to the marine environment. No other issues were identified. 0 The cumulative effect is that there will be no effect as neither the fixed engine byelaw nor minimum landing sizes will have any effect on the discharge of waste into the marine environment. 0 The main discharge into the sea is fish remains. There are negative effects associated with this byelaw due to the emissions released from the constant manning of the boat. However there are also positive effects associated with this byelaw as bycatch can be prevented and therefore decreased waste being dumped back into the sea. The positive and negative effects balance out to a neutral effect. - This regulation means that fish (bycatch) are thrown back into the sea if they do not meet the minimum landing sizes as they are not allowed to be sold. A code of conduct could help minimise the negative effects associated with the discard of bycatch and fish remains in the sea. 0 The cumulative effect is neutral as the only pollution issue is dead fish being released back into the sea and will have a negligible effect, if any, on the water quality statues. 0 This byelaw does not promote the importance of health& safety therefore has no effect. 0 This regulation does not promote the importance of health& safety therefore has no effect. There is potential for a new gillnet byelaw to be developed which could contain the requirement for a health & safety assessment. The development of a new byelaw could therefore have a positive 0 The cumulative effect is that there will be no effect as neither the fixed engine byelaw nor minimum landing sizes will have any effect on the promotion of Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? relating to this particular fishery as the fixed engine byelaw is not relevant and the minimum landing sizes set by MMO will no longer exist in the near future. The code of conduct would provide standards and etiquette for the fishery to act as a management tool instead of a byelaw. 0 Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area Cumulative Effects Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological 204 Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Gillnet Fishery for Cod, Turbot, Other Flatfish, and Mackerel SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 4. Fixed Engines Other Issues Other Regulation UK, EU Minimum landing sizes set by MMO (not Turbot) activities effect on the promotion of health & safety. 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? 205 Cumulative Effects health & safety. + In the near future this byelaw will no longer exist and then boats are likely to be sold and used for historic displays and uses such as boat trips. Therefore existing infrastructure will be reused. 0 This regulation will have no effect on the quality of material assets. No other issues were identified. + The cumulative effect will be minor positive as there will be some re-use of existing infrastructure. + This byelaw is currently having a positive effect on the promotion of sustainable fishing, however there is potential that this byelaw will no longer exist in the near future so the effect is currently short term. + This regulation is currently having a positive effect on the promotion of sustainable fishing, however this regulation will no longer exist in the near future so the effect is currently short term. NIFCA want to increase the minimum landing sizes for bass and cod to improve sustainable fishing of these species. ++ The cumulative effect is a ST moderate positive as both the fixed engine byelaw and the minimum landing sizes are currently contributing to the promotion of sustainable fishing. 0 This byelaw does not encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling therefore has no effect. -- This regulation has a negative impact on recreational fishing as the minimum landing sizes for cod are too low and therefore the fish stocks diminish before they have had chance to breed. No other issues were identified. -- The cumulative effect is moderate negative as the minimum landing sizes are having a negative effect on recreational fishing. Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? Will the regime create jobs in the community? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Trawl Fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish and Catfish (Bycatch Fishery) Additional Note: This fishery is a result of bycatch from trawl fishing for Nephrops. Trawl Fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish and Catfish SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues NIFCA Byelaws 3. Trawling and Size of Vessel 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining Other Regulation UK, EU 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC MMO Licence Minimum landing sizes set by MMO (not Turbot) - This byelaw does not have a positive effect on the sustainable harvesting of finfish as fishermen adapt their boats to fit the byelaw but still have large engines that can power the carrying of large amounts of fish. +++ Multi-rigging now has to occur outside of the area which has a significant positive effect on the stock in the district. +++ These fish are not being fished using mobile fishing gear as a result of this byelaw. +++ Fishermen are not allowed to fish without a licence. This allows selfregulation of the fish stocks. ++ This is a short-term positive effect on the sustainable harvesting of fish stocks as these minimum landing sizes will no longer exist in the near future. Not all of the fish in this fishery have minimum landing sizes. 0 There will be no effect on the harvesting of shellfish as a result of this byelaw on trawl fishing for finfish. +++ Multi-rigging has to be done outside of the area. +++ These fish are not being fished using mobile fishing gear as a result of this byelaw. +++ Fishermen are not allowed to fish without a licence. This allows selfregulation of the fish stocks. 0 This regulation will have no effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish. Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Cumulative Effects Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? A stakeholder identified that the net mesh size needs to be adjusted to minimise the number of fish that are bycatch as a result of trawl fishing for Nephrops. However, it was then discussed that the mesh size used in the Nephrops fishery is permitted under the EU technical conservation regulation, subject to fish bycatch percentages specified in the regulation. The focus needs to be on the licensing of gear type and the number of days at sea. +++ The cumulative effect is significant positive as there is a significant overall positive effect on the sustainable harvesting of finfish. No other issues were identified. +++ The cumulative effect is significant positive as there is a significant overall positive effect on the sustainable harvesting of shellfish. When bycatch occurs, if it is over the minimum landing size and is over the quota the fish is landed. If it is under the minimum size and under quota, it is discarded. N/A N/A - This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to nontarget species (fish, birds, mammals)? 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? 5. Using relevant criteria, Will it suitably identify and regulate those 206 N/A – This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops, permitted under the EU technical conservation regulation. See assessment tables for trawl fishery for Nephrops for a description of effects and issues Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? + Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? + This byelaw is more relevant to trawl fishing for Nephrops. This byelaw has a positive effect on the Nephrops fishery and therefore there is an indirect positive effect on this trawl fishery as there will be less bycatch. This byelaw is more See trawl fishery for Nephrops assessment. + This byelaw is more relevant to trawl fishing for Nephrops. It has a positive effect on the Nephrops fishery and therefore an indirect positive effect on this trawl fishery as there will be less bycatch. + This regulation is more relevant to trawl fishing for Nephrops. This byelaw has a positive effect on the Nephrops fishery and therefore there is an indirect positive effect on this trawl fishery as there will be less bycatch. See trawl fishery for + This byelaw is more + This byelaw is N/A N/A 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx _ This is a short term effect as these minimum landing sizes will no longer exist in the near future. The effect is negative as it results in the discard of bycatch. No other issues were identified. + The cumulative effect is minor positive as the indirect effects as a result of the byelaws on the trawl fishery for Nephrops result in a reduction in the bycatch of white fish. This is a short term No other issues were + The cumulative effect is Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Trawl Fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish and Catfish SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues NIFCA Byelaws 3. Trawling and Size of Vessel assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to non-statutory habitats? Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or non-native marine species? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? 207 relevant to trawl fishing for Nephrops. This byelaw has a positive effect on the Nephrops fishery and therefore there is an indirect positive effect on this trawl fishery as there will be less bycatch. Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of nonnative species. 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining N/A See trawl fishery for Nephrops assessment Other Regulation UK, EU 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC Nephrops assessment. + Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and non-native marine species? There is an indirect positive effect as there will be less cross-contamination as larger boats are restricted from entering the area. Cumulative Effects MMO Licence relevant to trawl fishing for Nephrops. It has a positive effect on the Nephrops fishery and therefore there is an indirect positive effect on this trawl fishery as there will be less bycatch. 0 This byelaw will not have any effect on preventing the introduction of nonnative species. more relevant to trawl fishing for Nephrops. This byelaw has a positive effect on the Nephrops fishery and therefore there is an indirect positive effect on this trawl fishery as there will be less bycatch. 0 This regulation will not have any effect on preventing the introduction of nonnative species. Minimum landing sizes set by MMO (not Turbot) _ 0 effect as these minimum landing sizes will no longer exist in the near future. The effect is negative as it results in the discard of bycatch and therefore a potential negative effect on the surrounding habitats. identified. This regulation will not have any effect on preventing the introduction of nonnative species. No other issues were identified. minor positive as the indirect effects as a result of the byelaws on the trawl fishery for Nephrops result in a reduction in the bycatch of white fish. + The cumulative effect is minor positive as there are indirect positive effects as a result of the byelaws for trawl fishing for Nephrops and subsequently less crosscontamination. N/A – This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops, permitted under the EU technical conservation regulation. See assessment tables for trawl fishery for Nephrops for a description of effects and issues Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? + There will be some reduction in the carbon footprint associated with his fishery but will be an indirect effect of the byelaw for trawl fishing for Nephrops. ++ There will be a moderate positive effect due to a reduction in the number of vessels in the area. 0 This byelaw will not have any effect on reducing carbon emissions. 0 This regulation will not have any effect on reducing carbon emissions. 0 This regulation will not have any effect on reducing carbon emissions. The type of fishing gear and the number of fishing days need to be considered. ++ The cumulative effect is moderate positive as there will be a significant decrease in the number of fishing vessels as a result of the multi-rigging byelaw. This therefore decreases the carbon footprint. 0 This byelaw will not have any effect on protecting heritage assets as there aren’t any in the area. 0 This byelaw will not have any effect on protecting heritage assets as there aren’t any in the area. 0 This byelaw will not have any effect on protecting heritage assets as there aren’t any in the area. 0 This regulation will not have any effect on protecting heritage assets as there aren’t any in the area. 0 This regulation will not have any effect on protecting heritage assets as there aren’t any in the area. Potential future wrecks should be considered. 0 The cumulative effect is that there will be no effect as none of the byelaws and regulations associated with this fishery do not help to maintain or protect historic assets. 0 This byelaw will not have any effect on protecting or enhancing seascapes and landscapes. 0 This byelaw will not have any effect on protecting or enhancing seascapes and landscapes. 0 This byelaw will not have any effect on protecting or enhancing seascapes and landscapes. 0 This regulation will not have any effect on protecting or enhancing seascapes and landscapes. 0 This regulation will not have any effect on protecting or enhancing seascapes and landscapes. Observing bycatch can be negative. 0 The cumulative effect is that there will be no effect as none of the byelaws and regulations associated with this fishery will not have an effect on the quality of the seascape and landscape. Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans N/A – This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops, permitted under the EU technical conservation regulation. See assessment tables for trawl fishery for Nephrops for a description of effects and issues Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Trawl Fishery for Cod, Sole, Turbot, Other flatfish, Haddock, Whiting, Monkfish and Catfish SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 3. Trawling and Size of Vessel 14. Multi-rigging, Pair Trawling and Pair Seining Other Issues Cumulative Effects No other issues were identified. N/A N/A - This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops Other Regulation UK, EU 16. Prohibition of the use of Mobile Fishing Gear within the English section of the BNNC SAC MMO Licence Minimum landing sizes set by MMO (not Turbot) fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? 208 N/A – This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops. See assessment tables for trawl fishery for Nephrops for a description of effects and issues Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? + There is an indirect positive effect as a result of increased discarding of bycatch. Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? N/A – This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops. See assessment tables for trawl fishery for Nephrops for a description of effects and issues Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? N/A – This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops. See assessment tables for trawl fishery for Nephrops for a description of effects and issues In future, if discards are stopped, infrastructure will increase. N/A N/A - This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops N/A – This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops. See assessment tables for trawl fishery for Nephrops for a description of effects and issues If the fish have to be landed, more jobs will be created. N/A N/A - This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? Will the regime create jobs in the community? N/A – This fishery is a bycatch of the trawl fishery for Nephrops. See assessment tables for trawl fishery for Nephrops for a description of effects and issues 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Hand Gathering Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster and Velvet Crab Hand Gathering Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster and Velvet Crab SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish Cumulative Effects Other Regulation UK, EU 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster N/A Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? + Byelaw works well to facilitate stock replenishment and therefore contributes positively to the achievement of this objective. + 0 No bycatch associated with hand gathering + Hand gathering by its nature has a low impact on other species. The byelaw will have minor positive effects on protecting species. Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Byelaw works well at protecting breeding stock and therefore contributes positively to the achievement of this objective + This byelaw had a positive contribution to the objective. + This byelaw had a positive contribution to the objective. + This byelaw had a positive contribution to the objective. + This regulation had a positive contribution to the objective. + This regulation had a positive contribution to the objective. Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to non-target species (fish, birds, mammals)? 0 No bycatch associated with hand gathering 0 No bycatch associated with hand gathering 0 No bycatch associated with hand gathering 0 No bycatch associated with hand gathering 0 No bycatch associated with hand gathering 0 No bycatch associated with hand gathering 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? + Hand gathering by its nature has a low impact on other species. The byelaw will have minor positive effects on protecting species. + Hand gathering by its nature has a low impact on other species. The byelaw will have minor positive effects on protecting species. + Hand gathering by its nature has a low impact on other species. The byelaw will have minor positive effects on protecting species. + Hand gathering by its nature has a low impact on other species. The byelaw will have minor positive effects on protecting species. + Hand gathering by its nature has a low impact on other species. The regulation will have minor positive effects on protecting species. + Hand gathering by its nature has a low impact on other species. The regulation will have minor positive effects on protecting species. 209 + Cumulative effects of the regime will have a positive contribution to this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 No bycatch associated with hand gathering No other issues were identified. + The current regime for management of the criteria is working successfully. It was noted that there were currently no commercial hand gatherers it was all recreational Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. The stakeholder group decided to include hand gathering divers within this category. Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? Will it affect disturbance to nontarget species, (particularly birds and seals)? Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Hand Gathering Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster and Velvet Crab SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species. Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or non-native marine species? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and landbased historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? 210 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish Cumulative Effects Other Regulation UK, EU 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster 0 Hand gathering is a much more selective fishing process than other forms of fishery; however this byelaw has a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective. 0 Hand gathering is a much more selective fishing process than other forms of fishery; however this byelaw has a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective. 0 Hand gathering is a much more selective fishing process than other forms of fishery; however this byelaw has a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective. 0 Hand gathering is a much more selective fishing process than other forms of fishery; however this byelaw has a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective. 0 Hand gathering is a much more selective fishing process than other forms of fishery; however this byelaw has a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective. 0 Hand gathering is a much more selective fishing process than other forms of fishery; however this byelaw has a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective. 0 Hand gathering is a much more selective fishing process than other forms of fishery; however this regulation has a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective. No other issues were identified. 0 Cumulative neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact. No other issues were identified. 0 Cumulative neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact. 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact. No other issues were identified. 0 Cumulative neutral impact. + Hand gathering is a traditional approach requiring limited motorised methods, therefore it was discussed that this byelaw sufficiently supports this theme. + Hand gathering is a traditional approach requiring limited motorised methods, therefore it was discussed that this byelaw sufficiently supports this theme. + Hand gathering is a traditional approach requiring limited motorised methods, therefore it was discussed that this byelaw sufficiently supports this theme. + Hand gathering is a traditional approach requiring limited motorised methods, therefore it was discussed that this byelaw sufficiently supports this theme. + Hand gathering is a traditional approach requiring limited motorised methods, therefore it was discussed that this byelaw sufficiently supports this theme. + Hand gathering is a traditional approach requiring limited motorised methods, therefore it was discussed that this regulation sufficiently supports this theme. + Hand gathering is a traditional approach requiring limited motorised methods, therefore it was discussed that this regulation sufficiently supports this theme. No other issues were identified. ++ Cumulative effects of the current regime are working well 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective No other issues were identified. 0 Cumulative neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral No other issues were identified. 0 Cumulative neutral impact. Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to non-statutory habitats? Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and non-native marine species? Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Hand Gathering Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster and Velvet Crab SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues NIFCA Byelaws fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? 211 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 8. Parts of Shellfish 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns EU SI minimum landing size EU SI V notched lobster achievement of this objective on the achievement of this objective on the achievement of this objective achievement of this objective objective on the achievement of this objective impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective No other issues were identified. 0 Cumulative neutral impact. (no bycatch from this fishery) 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective No other issues were identified. 0 Cumulative neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective No other issues were identified. 0 Cumulative neutral impact. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective No other issues were identified. 0 Cumulative neutral impact. + The byelaw supports the application of the hand gathering and facilitates a viable hand gathering fishing industry. In terms of lobster conservation, the hand fishery is small and therefore effects will be minor. 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective -- Catch can only be used for personal use, therefore this byelaw disincentives’ the uptake of hand catching. ++ This regulation supports this objective by ensuring a sustainable fisheries method. 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective No other issues were identified. ++ The cumulative effect of all byelaws supports the method of hand gathering and facilitates a viable hand gathering fishing industry Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? Will the regime create jobs in the community? Other Regulation UK, EU 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans Cumulative Effects 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Hand Gathering Fishery for Brown Crab, Lobster and Velvet Crab SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime Other Issues NIFCA Byelaws 6. Protection of ‘V’ Notched Lobsters 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime 212 Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 7. Berried (Egg Bearing) or Soft Shelled Crab or Lobster 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 8. Parts of Shellfish 0 This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective Other Regulation UK, EU 9. Prohibition on Use of Edible Crab for Bait 0 Cumulative Effects This byelaw was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx 13. Permit to Fish for and Sell Lobsters, Crabs, Velvet Crabs, Whelks and Prawns 0 Permits may encourage hand gathering. However, catch can only be used for personal use, therefore this byelaw disincentives’ the uptake of hand catching. An overall neutral was scored. EU SI minimum landing size 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective EU SI V notched lobster 0 This regulation was considered to have a neutral impact on the achievement of this objective No other issues were identified. 0 Accumulatively the regime has a neutral effect. Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Pacific Oyster Farm Pacific Oyster Farm SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Other Regulation UK, EU Other Issues Regulated by Natural England (Marine and Coastal Access Act) 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? N/A Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? 0 Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? The Farm will be a cultivation operation in which, normally, seed oysters are bought, laid, grown on, and then lifted as required for sale. Such operations, especially in a private fishery, are not judged on sustainability criteria, and therefore the assessment criteria for this objective do not apply to this operation. A management regime for wider environmental reasons should be considered. A stakeholder identified that there is evidence of no new recruitment of Mussels beds adjacent to the oyster trestles. However, the 2014 mussel survey showed good levels of recruitment. Further information is needed to understand the effects of the farm on the wider ecosystem. There is potential for primary and secondary impacts including potential removal of food stocks for the mussel population. Further information is needed to understand the impact of the Pacific Oyster farm on the wider ecosystem, is there potential removal of food stocks from the mussel population. Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to non-target species (fish, birds, mammals)? ? Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? There is an opportunity to manage any potential residual effects of the Oyster farm in relation to the wider ecosystem. Currently there is limited data/ monitoring for the Pacific Oyster Farming, Such data would facilitate informed discussions as to the appropriate management regime. Currently a lack of any regulations for environmental and ecosystem reasons Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species. Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or non-native marine species? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? --- Currently a lack of any regulation for environmental and ecosystem reasons No other issues were identified. Currently a lack of any data Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? A scoring of majorly negative was awarded based on the potential for ecologically damaging impacts both now and in the future, and potential effects on mussel populations which are a sub-feature of the EMS. --- There are some concerns over the lack of data and regulations surrounding the Pacific Oyster farms. No knowledge is available of the potential ecological damage to habitats, in statutory or non-statutory areas. No other issues were identified. --- There are concerns over the lack of data and regulations surrounding the Pacific Oyster farms. No knowledge is available of the potential ecological damage to habitats, in statutory or non-statutory areas. No other issues were identified. --- A lack of any monitoring regime both inside and outside the Farm could reduce the capacity of surrounding ecosystems as well as overlook natural or manmade changes occurring within the Pacific Oyster farm itself. No other issues were identified. 0 Although it was discussed that there would be carbon released from animal it was noted that no significant impacts would result from the works. No other issues were identified. 0 No impacts considered either way. No known historical assets onsite. No other issues were identified. Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to non-statutory habitats? Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and non-native marine species? Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area 213 Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Pacific Oyster Farm SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Other Regulation UK, EU Other Issues Regulated by Natural England (Marine and Coastal Access Act) 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? 214 0 Following discussion, the rows of lines/beds can be seen from above (people flying over the area). However, this was considered to be a negligible effect and was therefore scored as neutral. No other issues were identified. 0 No impacts considered either way No other issues were identified. 0 No impacts considered either way Potential for data to be skewed as one of the WFD indicators is the number of fish species and without an understanding of the potential impacts of the Pacific Oyster Farm on the surrounding ecosystem, these may be inaccurately noted as affecting poor water quality 0 No impacts considered either way No other issues were identified. 0 No impacts considered either way No other issues were identified. ? The discussion concluded that it depends on how it is implemented and how it is regulated. The Farm will be a cultivation operation which is not normally judged on sustainability criteria, The Pacific Oyster Farm could be regarded as a development with the potential to increase the local economy, provided that the potential ecological issues are mitigated. However, to expand the farm further would probably require a full impact assessment as it is within an EMS. It would also likely impact directly upon the mussel population which are a sub feature of the site. No other issues were identified. 0 No impacts considered either way No other issues were identified. Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? Will the regime create jobs in the community? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Beach and T-net Fishery for Salmon, and Sea Trout Beach and T-net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 4. Fixed Engines 1. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of finfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below Safe Biological Limits (SBL) Will it sustain, as a minimum, finfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? + Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Positively contributes to the reduced bye-catch and provide appropriate management regimes through licences. Other Issues Cumulative Effects Other Regulation UK, EU Minimum landing sizes enforced by EA + Reduces exploitation and illegal fishing of salmon and fish trout, the byelaw positively contributes to the achievement of this objective. No other issues were identified. + Potential complications whether tried under Scottish Law and English Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 2. Contribute to sustainable harvesting of shellfish stocks and allow for recovery of stocks that have been depleted below SBL Will it sustain, as a minimum, shellfish stocks at a minimum of SBL? N/A N/A N/A Will it contribute to a fishing pattern that maintains the average size of first capture above the mean size of first maturity? Will it contribute to the prevention of, or recovery from, overfishing of the target species by bringing and or maintaining stocks within SBL? Will it contribute to optimal harvesting of the target species? 3. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of bycatches, associated mortality rates, and disturbance caused by each capture fishery and gear on non-target species (fish, birds and marine mammals), and develop and implement any remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those bycatch or disturbance activities that are shown to be ecologically damaging to non-target species (fish, birds, mammals)? + This byelaw positively contributes to this objective. + Will it affect bycatching of non-target fish, birds, and marine mammals? It was noted that measures would need to be adopted to compensate if this regulation is revoked Significant positive protection of the continuation of the fish A problem with seals as by catch was discussed during this session although the current regime appropriately contributes to managing this. ++ The attendance and fixed engine byelaw work well together to reduce the negative effects associated with by catch. Will it affect the mortality rates of discarded fish? Will it sustain, as a minimum, or maintain fish stocks? Will it affect disturbance to non-target species, (particularly birds and seals)? 4. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect and maintain species diversity by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to species in statutory or non-statutory areas? 5. Using relevant criteria, assess the quantitative impact of capture and aquaculture fisheries on species, and work with relevant authorities to protect, maintain and restore the biodiversity of aquatic ecosystems by developing and implementing remedial targets as required. Will it suitably identify and regulate those activities that are ecologically damaging to habitats in statutory or non-statutory areas? 6. Conserve marine biodiversity by preventing the introduction and spread of non-native species to the marine environment, and assess the feasibility of recovering ecosystems impacted by the introduction of non-native species. Will it protect indigenous species from invasive or non-native marine species? 7. Identify, plan, manage and adapt to the effects of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry Will it assist in building capacity to respond to the impacts of climate change on the marine environment and fishing industry? + The major focus of this objective is the reduction of by catch and the negative impacts. This byelaw has a positive impact on reducing bycatch numbers ++ This regulation significantly contributes to the achievement of this objective. No other issues were identified. + Cumulative positive effects 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. No other issues were identified. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. No other issues were identified. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. No other issues were identified. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted 0 No significant effects noted therefore No other issues were identified. 0 No significant effects either way Will it help protect species associated with the SACs, SPAs, SSSIs, MCZ’s and other species? Will it encourage habitat restoration through reduction on, or removal of, damaging activities? Will it involve loss or damage to statutory to non-statutory habitats? Will it protect the marine ecosystem from invasive and nonnative marine species? Will it help the fishing industry to adapt to climate change effects? 8. Reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and 215 Will the regime minimise the carbon footprint of fisheries, e.g. 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation Beach and T-net Fishery for Salmon and Sea Trout SEA Objective Assessment Criteria Management Regime NIFCA Byelaws 4. Fixed Engines other greenhouse gases through cleaner and more efficient energy use promote low carbon technology for fishing; reduce CO2 emissions; promote efficient use of energy? Other Issues Cumulative Effects Other Regulation UK, EU Minimum landing sizes enforced by EA therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. the overall effect is considered neutral. therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. Will it increase/decrease generation of greenhouse gases? 9. Protect and, where appropriate, enhance the marine and land-based historic and cultural assets, and protect archaeological sites in the area Will it affect the fabric of a historic asset? 10. Protect and enhance landscapes and seascapes through sympathetic fisheries infrastructure development and activities Will it negatively affect landscape/seascape quality and character? 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. No other issues were identified. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. No other issues were identified. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. No other issues were identified. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects noted therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. No other issues were identified. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. + The current byelaws governing all fisheries contribute positively towards protecting the Health and Safety of people working in the fishing industry 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. No other issues were identified. + Cumulatively the current byelaws governing all fisheries contribute positively towards protecting the Health and Safety of people working in the fishing industry 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. No other issues were identified. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. No other issues were identified. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. No other issues were identified. 0 No significant effects either way therefore the overall effect is considered neutral. Will it affect the setting of a historic asset? Will it help protect historic assets? Will it enhance landscape/seascape quality and character? Will it support/contradict policies within landscape and seascape management plans 11. Avoid discharges to sea and waste to the marine environment from vessels and fishing operations Will it maintain existing assets and equipment; thus reducing waste? Will it avoid (or at least reduce) discharges to sea? Will it encourage recycling or reuse of waste products? (options include, but are not limited to, biofuels, composting, fertilisers, energy from waste, pharmaceuticals, fish meal) 12. Ensure marine pollution arising from fishing and processing activities does not compromise water quality Will it affect targets under the Water Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive? Will it affect targets under the Bathing Water Directive? 13. Promote the adoption of best practice Health and Safety in the fishing industry and other relevant marine activities, e.g. archaeological activities Will the regime promote the importance of Health and Safety in the fishing industry? 14. Maintain and enhance the quality of material assets, in proportion with the available resource base and carrying capacity Will the regime increase or decrease the number of fishing vessels? 15. Maintain and enhance fishing communities by developing a sustainable fisheries management regime Will it promote sustainable fishing practice, one which can significantly contribute to the local economy? 16. Protect and promote the fishing tourism industry by developing a holistic and sustainable fisheries management regime Will it encourage fishing tourism and recreational angling? 216 Will the regime reduce the number of accidents in the industry? Will the scheme use sustainable materials? Will it utilise/expand existing infrastructure rather than building new infrastructure? Will the regime create jobs in the community? 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx Northumberland IFCA Strategic Environmental Assessment Environmental Report - Draft for Consultation 217 303529/EVT/EES/002/C 12 August 2014 C:\Users\lev33720\AppData\Roaming\OpenText\OTEdit\EC_EUNAPiMS\c1561676471\NIFCA ER Draft for Consultation Rev C August 2014.docx
