Fisheries management measures within Scottish Offshore Marine Protected Areas (MPAs): consultation analysis

Scanner Pockmark SAC

Overview

Overall, all responses to this question indicate support for proposed full fisheries management for Scanner Pockmark SAC. There is widespread support across all campaigns and types of response.

General Support for Proposed Measures

There is strong consensus among respondents in favour of the proposed full site fisheries management measures for Scanner Pockmark SAC, with many expressing support for the full closure to demersal mobile and static gears. Several respondents explicitly state that the proposed measures were developed through extensive stakeholder engagement.

This highlights the collaborative process involved in the development of these measures and suggests a high level of agreement across different parties regarding their implementation.

Strong Support for Full Site Closure to Demersal Gear

The proposal to close the site to demersal mobile and static gears is supported by many respondents noting that this approach provides the most effective protection for the site's unique marine features.

For example, SE LINK members fully support the proposal, emphasising that the pockmark features in the SAC are critical habitats for specialised species. One supporter notes that the Scanner Pockmarks SAC provides critical habitat for highly specialised species such as the nematode worm Astomonema southwardorum and the bivalve Thyasira sarsi, which are essential for the regeneration of sulphide-rich sediments.

Additionally, some respondents argue that the Scanner Pockmarks SAC is irreplaceable, with submarine structures supporting various marine species such as cod, haddock, and king crab.

Scientific and Conservation Rationale

The scientific justification for a full site closure is emphasised in some responses. It is argued that the pockmark features cannot be easily restored due to the long natural processes required for the accretion of methane-derived authigenic carbonate (MDCA), and further accretion is dependent on specific conditions such as gas seepage and the presence of chemosynthetic micro-organisms. Respondents argue that this reinforces the need for full protection to maintain the site's integrity and prevent irreversible damage. One respondent highlights this concern, stating:

“Restoration of the pockmarks is likely to be impossible… Therefore, ensuring a sufficient representation of this feature across this area should remain a high priority.” [Organisation]

The conservation objective of maintaining or restoring the site to a favourable condition is central to the proposal. Several stakeholders strongly support the measures, asserting that a full site closure from damaging bottom trawling is the most appropriate way to maintain and restore the site's features.

Consensus on Full Protection

Several responses reiterate that full site protection is the most effective way to achieve the conservation objectives of the site. For instance, many respondents expressed support for the proposal on environmental grounds, emphasising that it is the only option capable of reversing the condition of the submarine structure features from unfavourable to favourable. They also urge Scottish Ministers to implement the management measures quickly so that Scotland can begin to experience the benefits of properly managed and protected MPAs.

Summary

In general, there is overwhelming support for the full site fisheries management measures proposed for Scanner Pockmark SAC, particularly the full closure to demersal mobile and static gears. Respondents emphasise the scientific justification for protecting the unique pockmark features of the site, with the consensus that full site closure offers the most effective means of ensuring the conservation objectives are met. Additionally, the stakeholder engagement process is widely acknowledged as having been inclusive and meaningful, which has contributed to the broad support for the proposed measures.

Criticism is minimal, with most dissent focusing on the lack of alternative management options or a preference for more customised approaches. Nonetheless, the scientific, ecological, and conservation benefits of a full closure are widely recognised.