Fisheries Management Measures within Scottish Offshore Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) - Socio-Economic Impact Assessment

Appendix B Public Sector Costs

Following a decision to implement management measures at individual sites, costs could be incurred by the public sector in the following broad areas:

• Mechanisms to implement restrictions on fishing activity in offshore sites; and
• Monitoring and control of fishing activity.

The potential costs to the public sector of implementing fisheries management measures have been assessed at a national level, taking into account the number of individual sites that will require management measures. It is assumed that costs for site monitoring (of features and condition) have already been taken account of through previous assessments for designation of sites.

B.1 Mechanisms to restrict fishing activity in offshore sites

Different mechanisms may be used to restrict fishing activity in the offshore sites:

• Fisheries management measures beyond 12 NM;

The UK has powers to manage fisheries out to 200 NM. Section 137A of The Fisheries Act 2020 established the power for Scottish Ministers to make orders in the Scottish offshore region for the purposes of conserving marine flora or fauna, marine habitats or features of geological or geomorphological interest. It is likely that management measures will be implemented through the use of Scottish Statutory Instruments (SSI), and that two orders will be implemented, splitting the measures between sites in the Northern North Sea and Northern North West Waters. It is assumed that implementing SSIs are part of the normal public process and no additional public sector costs are incurred.

B.2 Monitoring and control of fishing activity

Monitoring and control procedures (in relation to fishing activity) will be required where fisheries management measures are necessary to support the achievement of conservation objectives for individual features within MPAs.

The primary management system will be the Vessel Monitoring System (VMS), linked to legislation restricting access to MPAs at fishing speeds, allowing passive remote monitoring of vessels over 12 m length. The set-up costs would be relatively low and are considered to be part of core public sector workstreams, however there will be a requirement for additional resources to monitor and react to suspected incursions. Future technologies such as Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM) will require further resources to monitor and control, if implemented.

It is likely that an increase in polling rates would be required within the MPAs to support monitoring, control and surveillance activities. A general increase in polling rates is under discussion, however this would rely on GSM (mobile phone) technology to send the data as it has lower costs, but this technology is not available in the offshore area. This would not allow real-time monitoring of activity in the offshore area and therefore would not be appropriate. Satellite-based VMS data would therefore be required. Geofences can be set up around MPAs, initiating a higher polling rate of VMS within the geofence area. VMS usually transmit a ‘ping’ every two hours.

It is assumed that a higher polling rate of a ‘ping’ every hour is required within the MPA areas for Option 1, and every 15 minutes for Option 2, and the cost of this increased polling would be borne by Scottish Government for Scottish fishing vessels and by the relevant administration for other UK vessels (non-UK vessels cannot be polled by Scottish Government). It is assumed that the geofences for increased polling are set up around the management areas only under Option 1. Should geofences be set up around the whole site, this would increase the cost of Option 1, as a higher polling rate would be applied to gears that continue to operate at current levels within the site. The cost per ping is £0.095 (US$0.11, converted to GBP at exchange rate 1.1505 on 15/09/2022). It is assumed that activity for gear types not affected by the measures will continue at the same level, and activity for affected gear types will reduce to 10% of current levels once measures are implemented. It is assumed that costs for increased polling fall on the administrations, but where geofences are pre-loaded onto the VMS systems, the increased polling costs would be borne by the vessels.

For non-UK vessels, costs are uncertain, and are based on the estimates of non-UK activity in Appendix D. Some countries may be able to download the MPA geo-fences directly to the vessels’ device whilst other countries may have to poll the vessels from the Fisheries Management Centre (affecting whether the costs fall on the vessels, or on the administration). If countries can only poll vessels then the costs will vary depending on which satellite service is being used e.g. for polling on Inmarsat there may be a charge for the poll request and a charge for the returned position report; this may double the cost in some instances.

The estimated annual cost of an increased VMS polling rate is provided in Table B1.

*For UK vessels, affected gears, this is based on 10% of the current number of pings in the management areas (Option 1) and MPAs (Option 2). For UK vessels, non-affected gears, this is based on 100% of the current number of pings in the management areas (Option 1) and MPAs (Option 2). For non-UK vessels, this is based on the estimates of non-UK activity in Appendix D, assuming one ping every 2 hours, and that affected gears reduce activity to 10% of current levels.

The use of the compulsory Automatic Identification System (AIS) which also transmits a vessel’s position could be considered as an alternative or addition to VMS. This provides near real-time data but is often switched off or used on low power which is not detected remotely, and is not a tamper-proof system. Increased enforcement and a requirement to transmit using satellites would strengthen the usefulness of this technology. These costs would be borne by the vessels.

If the MPAs are to be monitored and controlled in real time, then there will be the need for increased resources in the UK Fisheries Monitoring Centre (UKFMC). Part of their work allows for limited checking on the VMS activity within Scottish Waters along with other control and enforcement tasks. It currently costs c. £850 k per annum for 1.5 persons on duty 24/7 and their resources are currently fully committed.

The cost of additional staff resources will depend on the level of monitoring required. Table B2 to Table B4 give examples of the current costs depending on the level of monitoring required. It is possible that the requirement may diminish over time depending on the level of compliance by the industry. For Option 2, it is assumed that the ‘gold’ level is required for the first two years, followed by ‘silver’ for three years, and ‘bronze’ beyond that. For Option 1, it is assumed that ‘gold’ is required on an ongoing basis.

It should be noted that any incursions would need to be responded to and investigated which can be a lengthy process should a criminal prosecution be required. The requirement for this is unclear and so this has not been explicitly costed, beyond the additional UKFMC resourcing requirements above.

The Marine Directorate of Scottish Government Compliance division have three offshore Marine Protection Vessels (MPVs) and two inshore patrol Rigid Inflatable Boats (RIBs) which are deployed on marine enforcement activities in Scottish inshore and offshore waters.. Scottish Government also operate two aircraft used for surveillance and marine enforcement, these would be utilised to monitor compliance with Offshore MPAs. For Option 2, it is assumed that site-based inspections can be incorporated within existing resources through reprioritisation, without additional public sector costs.

B.3 Summary of public sector costs

The present value (2022 prices) of public sector costs are summarised in Table B5.