Draft Fisheries Assessment – Braemar Pockmarks SAC: Fisheries management measures within Scottish Offshore Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)

2. Part A assessment – Fisheries screening

2.1 Fisheries screening overview

Part A of this assessment meets the 'likely significant effect (LSE)' test under Article 6(3) of Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (the Habitats Directive); for sites within the offshore region under Regulation 28 of the Conservation of Offshore Marine Habitats and Species Regulations 2017. The test for likely significant effect under Regulation 28(2)(b) of the Conservation of Offshore Marine Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 is not required for activities which are directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site. Fishing activities are not considered to be directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site unless otherwise indicated.

In line with the guidance within EU Commission guidance on the Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites; a methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6 (3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC, this assessment considers an LSE as any effect that may reasonably be predicted as a consequence of a plan or project that would negatively and significantly affect the conservation objectives established for the protected features of the site. If any likely significant effect of a plan or project cannot be excluded beyond reasonable doubt, then a full appropriate assessment should be undertaken.

In Part A of this assessment the pressure-feature interactions were assessed to determine the potential for LSE and risk to the conservation objectives. This section looks at the pressures exerted by the fishing activity occurring in the site (within the assessment period) in relation to the sensitivities of the protected features. The potential for an LSE was identified where there was both a medium-high risk of a pressure arising from the fishing activity and if any of the features were considered sensitive to that pressure. These pressure-features interactions were then taken forward to the appropriate assessment stage (Part B) to determine whether the plan or project would have an adverse impact on site integrity.

For each activity assessed in Part A, there were two possible outcomes for each identified pressure-feature interaction:

1. The pressure-feature interactions were not included for Part B:

a. If the feature is not exposed to the pressure, and is not likely to be in the future; or

b. If the effect/impact of the pressure is not likely to be significant.

2. The pressure-feature interactions were included for assessment in Part B:

a. If the feature is exposed to the pressure, or is it likely to be in the future; and

b. If the potential scale or magnitude of any effect is likely to be significant; or

c. If it is not possible to determine whether the magnitude of any effect is likely to be significant.

Part B of the assessment aligns with the requirements for an Appropriate Assessment under the Conservation of Offshore Marine Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) and considers the potential impact to site integrity by assessing the impact of fishing gears identified in Part A. This involves determining the level potential of interaction between the feature and the fishing activity, assessing the potential impact on the feature, and subsequently if fishing activities are liable to affect the conservation objectives of the site and thus the integrity of the site

This involves determining the level of interaction between the feature and the fishing activity, assessing the potential impact on the feature, and subsequently if fishing activities are liable to affect the conservation objectives of the site and thus the integrity of the site.

Consideration of exposure to and the effect of a pressure on a protected feature of the SAC includes the consideration of exposure to and the effect of that pressure on any ecological or geomorphological process on which the conservation of the protected feature is wholly or in part dependant.

The JNCC conservation advice package and the Fisheries Management Options Paper for Braemar Pockmarks SAC have been used to inform this assessment. These are the most recent package and options paper available.

Where appropriate, this advice has been supplemented by information on the pressures associated with fishing activity from the JNCC Marine Pressures-Activities Database (PAD) v1.5 2022.

2.2 Activities taking place within Braemar Pockmarks SAC

To screen out fishing activities that were not taking place within the site or likely to take place in the future, vessel monitoring system (VMS) data within Braemar Pockmarks SAC from 2015 – 2019 were analysed to identify the gear types being used in the site and the aggregated gear method (Table 1). The gear types identified from 2015 – 2019 VMS data align with those included in the Braemar Pockmarks SAC Conservation Advice package from the JNCC Site Information Centre. The fishing gears screened out at this stage were not taken forward to Part B of the assessment.

On reviewing the ICES gridded data, which includes EU and Norwegian vessels, demersal seine activity was also found to occur within the site.

2.3 Potential pressures exerted by site fishing activity on protected feature

The potential pressures that could be exerted by fishing activities considered capable of affecting Annex I Submarine structure feature (demersal trawls) were determined using the JNCC Marine Pressures-Activities Database (PAD) v1.5 2022 (Table 3). The potential pressures that could be exerted by demersal trawls are summarised in Table 2.

Pressures that are not caused by the activities (those listed as 'Not relevant' in the table above) will not be considered further in the assessment. According to the PAD methods document, for pressures with 'low' risk profiles unless there are evidence-based case or site-specific factors that increase the risk, or uncertainty on the level of pressure on a receptor, these pressures generally do not occur at a level of concern and should not require consideration as part of an assessment. For pressures with 'medium-high' risk profiles, these pressures are commonly induced by the activity at a level that needs to be considered further as part of an assessment.

2.4 Significance of effects/impacts to protected features

To determine whether each pressure is likely to have a significant effect on the site's feature, the sensitivity assessments and risk profiling of pressures from the JNCC Advice on Operations conservation advice package and the JNCC Marine Pressures-Activities Database (PAD) v1.5 2022 were used.

Table 3 identifies the pressures from particular gears that could have a likely significant effect on each feature. Where a pressure from a particular gear is identified as not having a likely significant effect on a feature, justification is provided. To ensure the effects of fishing activities in-combination with other activities (including other fishing activities) are fully assessed, the pressures from fishing activities which were not identified as having a likely significant effect but which do interact with the feature are considered in the in-combination aspect of the assessment (Part C).

Considering both the information on the pressure activity association (Table 3) and the sensitivity of the feature (Table 4), pressures with the potential to cause likely significant effects are summarised in Table 5.

Pressures that are not relevant to demersal trawls or demersal seines (pressures that are not exerted by that fishing activity: 'not relevant to the activity' in Table 3) do not need to be considered further in the assessment. According to the PAD methods document (Robson et al., 2018), pressures with low risk profiles (i.e. 'low' risk profile for the activity: Tables 3 and 4) generally do not occur at a level of concern and should not require consideration as part of an assessment, unless there are evidence-based case or site-specific factors that increase the risk, or there is uncertainty on the level of pressure on a receptor. Pressures with 'medium-high' risk profiles are commonly induced by the activity at a level that needs to be considered further as part of an assessment.

Pressures that were not relevant to the feature, do not need to be considered further in the assessment (Table 5). Pressures where the feature was 'not sensitive' (Table 4) can also be screened out. Any pressures that do not have a sensitivity assessment (either 'not assessed' or 'no evidence') should be considered as this does not mean that the feature is not sensitive, only that there is insufficient evidence to make an assessment.

Pressures with a medium-high risk profile in PAD and to which the feature is sensitive would meet the definition of a likely significant effect ("any effect that may reasonably be predicted as a consequence of a plan or project that would negatively and significantly affect the conservation objectives established for the habitats and species significantly present on the site": EU Commission, 2021). Of all the pressures considered, five have medium-high risk profiles where the feature is also sensitive, or sensitivity is unknown (i.e. no sensitivity assessment exists due to insufficient evidence): abrasion/disturbance of the substrate on the surface of the seabed; penetration and/or disturbance of the substrate below the surface of the seabed, including abrasion; removal of non-target species; smothering and siltation rate changes (light) and changes in suspended solids (water clarity) (Table 5). These five pressures are subsequently considered to have the potential to have likely significant effects (LSE) on the Annex I feature.

2.5 Part A Conclusion

Considering the information on pressures and sensitivity above, and guidance within the EU Commission guidance on the Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites; a methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6 (3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC in relation to European sites, demersal trawls and demersal seines have the potential to have a likely significant effect (LSE) on the Annex I habitat within Braemar Pockmarks SAC, through abrasion/disturbance of the substrate on the surface of the seabed, penetration and/or disturbance of the substrate below the surface of the seabed, including abrasion, removal of non-target species, smothering and siltation rate changes (light), and changes in suspended solids (water clarity).These five pressures will be taken through to Part B of the assessment.