SEMS Response Report 2016SEMS Management Scheme 2016
Solent European Marine Sites
Annual Monitoring Response Report
2016
Prepared by the
Solent Forum on behalf of the
SEMS Management Scheme
Draft 3 June 2016
Contents
Introduction
Respondents’ Jurisdiction and Code
Profile Information
Change in Activity by Type
High Risk Activities
Access/Land Recreation
Fishing (Commercial including Shellfisheries)
Bait Digging
Water Sport (eg hovercraft, kayaking and kite surfing)
Medium Risk Activities
Low Risk Activities
General Information on Activities
Activities Resulting From Plans and Projects
Monitoring
Other Issues
Introduction
This document reproduces the responses made to the SEMS annual online monitoring questionnaire in 2016.
Respondents who indicated an increase in any activities, or a concern that activities may be damaging the Solent European Marine Site, will be telephoned and interviewed for further relevant information, unless it was indicated that any increases are being managed satisfactorily. The original and any subsequent responses will be summarised and assessed in the SEMS Annual Monitoring Report 2016, and this document will be used to help determine the actions required in the SEMS Delivery Plan 2016.
Details of the monitoring programme and a summary of the questions can be found at:
Note that the question numbers within this document link to the original survey results to enable tracking and cross referencing, and they are not necessarily sequential or relevant.
Throughout this document, colour coding has been used as follows:
KEY
Respondents’ Jurisdiction and Code
Authority / Code/ Jurisdiction
Associated British Ports / ABP / Rivers Test, Itchen, Southampton Water and areas of the Solent
Beaulieu River Management / BRM / Beaulieu River
Chichester District Council / CDC / Chichester District
Chichester Harbour Conservancy / CHC / Chichester Harbour Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Cowes Harbour Commissioners / CoHC / Cowes Harbour,
Environment Agency / EA / Solent and South Downs
Fareham Borough Council / FBC / Fareham Borough
Gosport Borough Council / GBC / Gosport Borough Council
Havant Borough Council / HBC / Havant borough Council
Isle of Wight Council / IoWC / Isle of Wight
Langstone Harbour Board / LHB / Langstone Harbour up to MHW
Lymington Harbour Commissioners / LHC / Lymington Harbour
Natural England / NE / England and territorial seas out to 12nm
New forest District Council / NFDC / New forest district
New Forest National Park Authority / NFNPA / New Forest National Park
Portsmouth City Council / PCC / Portsmouth
QHM Portsmouth / QHM / Eastern Solent and Portsmouth Harbour
River Hamble Harbour Authority (Hampshire County Council) / RHHA / Hamble Estuary
Southern Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority / SoIFCA / Hampshire, Dorset and the Isle of Wight to 6nm. from territorial baselines
Sussex Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority / SxIFCA / East and west Sussex, from MHWN seaward to 6nm
Southampton City Council / SCC / City of Southampton
Southern Water Services Ltd. / SWS / Hants, IOW, Kent and Sussex
Test Valley Borough Council / TVBC / Borough of Test Valley
West Sussex County Council / WSCC / West Sussex
Wightlink / W / Fishbourne & Lymington
Winchester City Council / WCC / Winchester District (excluding national park)
Yarmouth Harbour Commissioners / YHC / Yarmouth Harbour
No Response
Eastleigh Borough Council
Hampshire County council
Marine Management Organisation
Portsmouth International Port
Trinity House Lighthouse Service
Number of responses / 27
Number who did not respond / 5
Total / 32
Profile Information
18. What type of authority do you represent?
Government Authority / 2
Harbour Authority / 8
Local Authority / 11
IFCA / 2
Private Company / 3
Other (PLEASE TYPE IN DETAILS) / 1
Other (PLEASE TYPE IN DETAILS)
NFNPA- National Park Authority
20.Have any coastal and marine management responsibilities in your organisation changed since 2015?
Yes / 1
No / 26
Total / 28
23. What is the responsibility that has changed?
CHC- Chichester Harbour Conservancy has been designated with powers of Harbour Direction.
25. Is the responsibility that has changed statutory? / Yes
27. Have you taken this responsibility from another body? / No
31. Has this previous responsibility of yours been given to another body? / Yes
35. What was the approximate date of the change?
CHC- 2015
37. Please describe the implications of the change?
CHC- Harbour Directions are similar to byelaws, but only apply to ships. They may relate to the movement, mooring or unmooring, equipment and manning of ships. The master of a ship must comply with relevant harbour directions, and commits a criminal offence for failing to do so without reasonable excuse. Acquiring new byelaws is costly and takes a long time. Powers of harbour directions will facilitate better use of the harbour by providing sufficient controls when needed. Chichester Harbour Conservancy has not yet used the powers of direction.
116. Activities that fall within the jurisdiction of the Management Group in the area of the Solent European marine sites (SEMS) (ranked High, Medium or Low Risk by Defra)
Activity and Tier / Percentage of SEMS MG Relevant Authoritieswith jurisdiction for each activity / Response
HIGH RISK ACTIVITIES (TIER 1)
Access/Land recreation / 69% / 18
Fishing (commercial including shellfisheries) / 50% / 13
Bait digging / 31% / 8
Water sports (eg. hovercraft, kayaking and kite surfing) / 54% / 14
MEDIUM RISK ACTIVITIES (TIER 2)
Agricultural run-off / 38% / 10
Airborne Sports / 12% / 3
Anchoring / 46% / 12
Oil spill and clean-up / 65% / 17
Recreational boating (power and sail) / 58% / 15
LOW RISK ACTIVITIES (TIER 3)
Angling / 42% / 11
Barrage/Sluice operation / 15% / 4
Littering / 58% / 15
Boat repair/maintenance / 31% / 8
Education/Scientific studies / 42% / 11
Egg harvesting / 12% / 3
Grazing / 19% / 5
Moorings (management) / 54% / 14
Navigation (maintenance of infrastructure) / 50% / 13
Slipway cleaning and maintenance / 50% / 13
Activity and Tier / Increase / Level remains elevated / No change / Decrease / Unknown / No. of Responses
HIGH RISK ACTIVITIES (TIER 1)
Access/Land recreation / 0 / 4 / 10 / 0 / 4 / 18
Fishing (commercial including shellfisheries) / 0 / 0 / 8 / 2 / 1 / 11
Bait digging / 0 / 1 / 6 / 0 / 1 / 8
Water sports (eg. hovercraft, kayaking and kite surfing) / 1 / 1 / 10 / 0 / 2 / 14
MEDIUM RISK ACTIVITIES (TIER 2)
Agricultural run-off / 0 / 1 / 5 / 0 / 3 / 9
Airborne Sports / 0 / 0 / 2 / 0 / 1 / 3
Anchoring / 0 / 0 / 10 / 0 / 1 / 11
Oil spill and clean-up / 0 / 0 / 14 / 0 / 2 / 16
Recreational boating (power and sail) / 0 / 2 / 10 / 1 / 1 / 14
LOW RISK ACTIVITIES (TIER 3)
Angling / 0 / 0 / 9 / 0 / 2 / 11
Barrage/Sluice operation / 0 / 0 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 3
Littering / 1 / 1 / 11 / 0 / 2 / 15
Boat repair/maintenance / 0 / 0 / 7 / 0 / 1 / 8
Education/Scientific studies / 0 / 0 / 9 / 0 / 2 / 11
Egg harvesting / 0 / 0 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 3
Grazing / 0 / 0 / 4 / 0 / 0 / 4
Moorings (management) / 0 / 0 / 13 / 0 / 13
Navigation (maintenance of infrastructure) / 1 / 1 / 10 / 0 / 0 / 12
Slipway cleaning and maintenance / 0 / 0 / 12 / 0 / 1 / 13
Change in Activity by Type
117. Change in Level of Activities between 2015 and 2016
Access/Land recreation / 0 / 4 / 10 / 0 / 4 / 18
Level remains elevated
832. For the access/land recreation activity that remains elevated, please describe the levelstating how, where, when and why this has stayed constant, if known.CHC- At present it is only conjecture that the number of people using the footpaths is increasing. This assumption is based on the increasing number of houses built within close proximity to the footpath links around the harbour. Chichester Harbour Conservancy will be installing automatic counters at key walking locations around Chichester Harbour in 2016 in order to monitor the usage of footpaths.
CDC- Recreational disturbance of over-wintering birds remains elevated due to historic development of housing since 1945 and before the adoption of the SRMP Interim Strategy. That strategy can only mitigate new development but cannot address pre-existing development impacts.
IoWC- Evidence through the SRMP work showed that recreational pressure on the SPA was causing disturbance to birds. The Isle of Wight Council, in collaboration with the SRMP, is working to mitigate increased pressure through new housing development. This does not address existing pressures.
NE- Whilst the Solent Recreation Mitigation Partnership (SRMP) is now in place, this scheme only addresses the recreational disturbance effect from new housing development. The Footprint Ecology work for SDMP showed that there is already an impact from existing levels of recreational disturbance, which still needs to be addressed. The SDMP report includes details on which parts of the Solent EMS are already exceeding the threshold number of visits for an impact on the SPAs.
835. In your opinion, has the risk category within which the access/land recreation activity now falls changed since 2015
Yes / 0
No / 4
842. What Management Measures, if any, have you introduced to influence the access/land recreation activity since the last report?
CHC- We have restored 1183 metres of coastal footpath around the harbour in 2015 all which encourages walkers to stay on the footpath rather than walking on the areas of intertidal. We have also installed 17 replacement interpretation boards across the harbour throughout 2015 and early 2016 and more will be installed throughout 2016. The information on these boards provides information on the history and wildlife of the specific location. In addition to this, the boards request all to: following the footpaths, keep dogs under control and reduce the spread of invasive species all help to protect the SEMS. Two new interpretation boards have been installed at Ella Nore spit specifically with the aim of protecting the nesting site of terns and other birds.
CDC- None further since the last report. The Graylingwell and Roussillon mitigation project continues - this, like the SRMP wardens, addresses new development but the education and awareness raising activity will also have an impact on the community more generally by encouraging responsible dog-ownership
IowC- A wardening service commenced October 2015 which aims at educating people about the SPA designation and its features. This wardening service will occur every winter season.
NE- Natural England sits on the SRMP Project Board. SRMP wardens are now out on site but the effectiveness of the mitigation measures will not be known until the SRMP carries out full monitoring in 5 years’ time. The SRMP Monitoring Strategy is to be published shortly.
843. Given that the level of the access/land recreation activity remains elevated and any Management Measures introduced, do you believe that there is any residual impact on the Solent European marine site?
Yes / 3
No / 1
844. Please give details of the residual impacts of access/land recreation on the Solent European Marine Site:
CHC- There are regular incidents of dogs off their lead disturbing birdlife across Chichester Harbour. In spite of this I do believe the new Solent Rangers who are patrolling the Solent coastline during the winter will make a positive difference to the behaviour of many dog owners.
CDC- Residual impact on over-wintering SPA bird species as evidenced by the SDMP reports
NE- As stated above, the SRMP only addresses impacts from new housing development - it does not address the existing impacts in certain parts of the site or disturbance from water borne activities.
845. Do you believe that the residual impacts of access/land recreation may cause the condition of the Solent European marine site to change
Yes / 2
No / 1
846. Please give details of the change of the Solent European Marine Site due to access/land recreation:
CDC- Continued decline in bird species due to loss of feeding time and increased energy expenditure during winter
NE- Recreational disturbance will impact on breeding and non-breeding bird populations of the SPAs.
Copied from Q1090
CHC- We met with the newly appointed Solent Rangers in order to provide them with information on where birdlife is regularly disturbed by dogs off the lead in around Chichester Harbour.
NFNPA- The authority has a working group on recreational management, however to date this appears focused on terrestrial areas of the park.
Activity and Tier / Increase / Level remains elevated / No change / Decrease / Unknown / No. of Responses
Fishing (commercial including shellfisheries) / 0 / 0 / 9 / 2 / 1 / 12
Level Decreased
526. Please describe the decreased fishing recreation activity stating how, where, when and why this decrease occurred, if known.SxIFCA- The number of oyster dredges exploiting Chichester Harbour over the 2015 season was lower than in proceeding years, with 14 vessels present compared to up to 21 in 2014 and 31 in 2013. The requirement to purchase a permit to exploit the fishery, under the new Sussex IFCA Oyster Permit Byelaw in September 2015, may have driven this reduction. The byelaw covers the whole of Chichester Harbour and specifies dredge configuration, with the prohibition of diving blades. The harbour has been split into three management units in order to manage sustainable dredging. The oyster season is closed when a catch threshold is reached, so that a sustainable population remains on the ground. Over the 2015 season, the eastern part of the harbour containing Bosham and Fishbourne channels was closed. Emsworth channel was open as in previous years, and Thorney Channel was also fished due to a change in its shellfish classification to B. In total, the fishery was open for 7 days until the predetermined CPUE threshold was reached.
SoFICA- The application of the temporary closure of shellfish byelaw, the decline in stocks and shellfish health classification restrictions has resulted in a reduction in the shellfish fishing activity in the Solent. The increased enforcement presence in the Solent, by IFCA, has also reduced the supply and demand of undersized clams taken from the Solent EMS. The exact quantification of this reduction is difficult to quantify given the clandestine nature of this activity. Furthermore the IFCA byelaws which restrict bottom towed fishing gear and hand gathering on sea grass beds within and adjacent to the EMS (introduced in 2014) have achieved good compliance and the activity on these EMS features has reduced.
529. In your opinion, has the risk category within which the fishing activity now falls changed since 2015
Yes / 0
No / 2
536. What Management Measures, if any, have you introduced to influence the fishing activity since the last report?
SxFICA- Oyster Dredging Permit Byelaw - enabling closure of the fishery within Chichester Harbour when a predetermined harvest threshold has been reached.
SoFICA- see previous responses
537. Given the decrease in the fishing activity and any Management Measures introduced, do you believe that there is any residual impact on the Solent European marine site?
Yes / 2
No
538. Please give details for the impact of fishing activities on the Solent European Marine Site:
SxFICA- Under the Government's revised approach to fishing within EMS SxIFCA continues to assess all amber risk fishing activity / feature interactions within Chichester Harbour. This will ensure that all existing and potential commercial fishing activities are subject to an assessment of their impact on the EMS. Management for high, red risk activities was introduced in 2014, through a Chichester Harbour European Marine Site (specified Areas) Prohibition of Fishing Method Byelaw, in which certain activities are prohibited to protect Zostera spp. Sussex IFCA has found a way of managing the oyster fishery, identified as amber risk, and protecting the site, through management built into a Chichester Harbour Oyster Dredging Permit Byelaw, introduced in September 2015. By the end of 2016 all amber fisheries interactions with all other features or subfeatures of the EMS, not already managed through the red risk process, will have been assessed against the conservation objectives of the EMS. Any need for management to reduce impact on the EMS will be highlighted and actioned. As of April 2015 the Prinstead area of Chichester Harbour (Cefas bed ID BO18P) is now Class C bed for C. Edule (common cockle) and Tapes spp. (clam). Northney (Cefas bed ID BO18PN) is a Class B bed. There is a potential risk hand collection activity for these species may increase. Collection by dredge is prohibited under the Sussex IFCA Fishing Instrument Byelaw.
SoFICA- In 2016 we continue to develop the final phases of further management measures to manage fisheries in the Solent EMS. We have completed the first round of pre-consultation on the creation of a rotational system of management coupled with the adoption of further areas to be permanently closed to bottom towed fishing gears. This process follows the system established by the 'revised approach to the management of commercial fisheries in EMS Further pre consultation will be conducted in summer. The Southern IFCA anticipate introducing management under byelaw by the end of 2016 and have concluded a period of statutory consultation on a regulatory notice byelaw, which will provide the framework for the introduction of these measures.
539. Do you believe that impacts of fishing may cause the condition of the Solent European marine site to change?
Yes / 2
No / 0
540. Please give details of the change in the Solent European Marine Site’s condition due to fishing:
SxFICA- Improvements in the condition of the Solent EMS may arise due to fisheries management introduced under the revised approach to EMS work.
SoFIXA- following the assessment of fisheries in the EMS, applying the principles of habitats regulations assessment, the measures we plan to introduce will ensure the requirements of Article 6 of the habitats directive will be applied to the fisheries in the Solent EMS.
Activity and Tier / Increase / Level remains elevated / No change / Decrease / Unknown / No. of Responses
Bait digging / 0 / 1 / 6 / 0 / 1 / 8
Remained elevated
866. For the bait digging recreation activity that remains elevated, please describe the level stating how, where, when and why it has stayed constant, if known.RHHA- Bait digging continues at designated sites on both banks of the estuary, but RHHA has received an increase in reporting by locals near LincegroveHacketts Marsh, with particular reference to a repetitive group of vehicles which include a named tackle shop van. RHHA believes the activity overall across the estuary remains at/near to similar levels to previous years, but has concerns regarding these more intense periods. An increase in local awareness as a result of presentations given at the Hamble Estuary Partnership meetings and local communication is helping to improve the evidence base. RHHA is in discussions with SIFCA.
869. In your opinion, has the risk category within which the bait digging activity now falls changed since 2015?
Yes / 0
No / 1
876. What Management Measures, if any, have you introduced to influence the bait digging activity since the last report?
RHHA- None, although reports of activity are being collated and sent to SIFCA to help build an evidence base.
877. Given that the level of the bait digging activity remains elevated and any Management Measures introduced, do you believe that there is any residual impact on the Solent European marine site
Yes / 0
No / 1