Outer Firth of Forth and St. Andrews Bay Complex Special Protection Area: business and regulatory impact assessment

Consultation

Within Government

Consultation has been undertaken with policy colleagues within Marine Scotland, including aquaculture, nature conservation, marine renewables, fisheries and fresh water fisheries, and with Transport Scotland.

Historic Environment Scotland and the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency have also been consulted. Meetings were held with policy officials within these public bodies to discuss the development of these SPAs. We have also been working with Defra and other UK Departments on the join up between the Scottish MPA network, which includes SPAs, and the wider UK contribution to the OSPAR MPA network.

Public Consultation

A full public consultation took place in Autumn 2016. Further consultation took place in Autumn 2018 on at Network Assessment for the proposed set of sites and the SEA. An update to the SEA was consulted on in the summer of 2019.

Business

Routine updates are provided to the Marine Strategy Forum and are supplemented with bilateral meetings across sectors including the fishing industry, environmental NGOs, tourism and recreation, nature conservation, renewable energy, aquaculture, ports and harbours, defence and local community groups.

A National Workshop attended by a wide range of stakeholders was held in March 2016 to present the proposals and gather feedback on the proposed consultation package.^[3]

Options

Option 1: Do nothing

Option 1 is the 'Do nothing' option; this is the baseline scenario. Under this option, the proposed Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex site is not classified. Accordingly, no additional management measures would be required.

Option 2: Classify site as a Special Protection Area

Option 2 involves the formal classification of the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex site. Classification would provide recognition and protection to the natural features of the site while also contributing to the wider Scottish and UK SPA network. Requisite management would be required to maintain the status of the site.

• Sectors and groups affected

The following sectors have been identified as present (or possibly present in the future) within the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex site and potentially interact with one or more of the features:

• Coastal defence and flood protection
• Commercial fisheries (GVA)^[4]
• Energy generation
• Military
• Ports and harbours
• Recreational boating
• Water sports
• Public Sector

Affected sectors may be impacted to a greater or lesser degree by classification depending on which scenario is pursued and which management option is preferred.

Benefits

Option 1: Do nothing

No additional benefits are expected to arise from this policy option.

Option 2: Classify site as a Special Protection Area

The extent and quality of habitat and available food around Scotland's coast supports huge numbers of different species of seabirds. Few countries can match this and we have an international responsibility to protect what we have around Scotland. Therefore the appropriate action is to protect and maintain Scotland's seabird and water bird populations and meet the requirements of the EU Wild Birds Directive.

SPAs are created to meet international commitments under the EU Wild Birds Directive, which promotes the conservation of wild birds. SPAs are managed to safeguard the birds and avoid significant disturbance and deterioration of their habitats. This means that proposed activities likely to affect an SPA are assessed for their potential to cause such disturbance or deterioration. The relevant consenting authority must ensure beyond reasonable scientific doubt that any impact is not significant before permitting the activity.

While it may not be possible with current levels of research to monetise benefits with a satisfactory degree of rigour, it is clear that many of the benefits relate to aspects of our lives that we take for granted and for which it is good practice and common sense to maintain through protection measures such as SPAs.

Contribution to an Ecologically Coherent network

Scotland's seas support a huge diversity of marine life and habitats, with around 6,500 species of plants and animals, with plenty more no doubt to be found in the undiscovered deeps of the north and west of Scotland. Our seas account for 61% of UK waters and remain at the forefront of our food and energy needs, through fishing, aquaculture, oil and gas, and new industries such as renewables, as well as recreation activities and ecotourism. This SPA is a contribution to a wider network of Marine Protected Areas designed to conserve and regenerate our seas. This in turn will help ensure that ecosystem goods and services continue to support current and future generations. It is likely that an ecologically coherent network of marine protected areas is likely to provide greater benefit than the sum of its individual components.

Ecosystem Services Benefits

Ecosystems are very complex, and it is thought that the more complex an ecosystem is the more resilient it is to change. Therefore, if it is damaged or if a species or habitat is removed from that ecosystem, the chances of survival for those services reduce as the ecosystem becomes weaker. However, by conserving or allowing the species and habitats that make up that ecosystem to recover, we can be more confident of the continuation of the long term benefits the marine environment provides.

Non-Use Values

Non-use value of the natural environment is the benefit people get simply from being aware of a diverse and sustainable marine environment even if they do not themselves use it. We take for granted many of the things we read about or watch, such as bright colourful fish, reefs and strange shaped deep sea curiosities, to lose them would be a loss to future generations that will not be able to experience them. It is challenging to put a precise value on this, but the high quality experience derived from Scotland's seas can be better preserved through measures such as SPAs.

It is expected that non-use value will be attained as a result of classification and the support of wider conservation objectives. Whilst ecosystem services benefits at an individual site level cannot be readily calculated, the one-off non-use value to Scottish households of marine conservation in Scottish waters generated by the additional 14 SPAs is estimated to be in the region of £74 million.^[5] This figure uses valuation evidence across several sites with similar features and characteristics and highlights the significant positive non-use value that divers and anglers within the Scottish marine environment place on securing the quality of the marine resources they use as a result of protection against degradation.

Use Values

There could be a major transformative effect on inshore habitat and a significantly enhanced flow of environmental goods and services. We know the inherent capacity of the system and the flora and fauna that it could support. Achieving that could see the expansion of recreational activities such as diving, sea-angling, and other tourism alongside sustainable methods of fishing.

Research by Kenter et al^[6] has been used to estimate the use benefits to divers and anglers specifically, as a result of classifications safeguarding the total recreational value of the sites. The additional increase in recreational value as result of implementing management measures for the 14 new SPAs has an estimated total present value of £2.1-6.2 million over the 20 year assessment period.^[7]

In addition there is likely to be increased activity for businesses in the marine wildlife and tourism sector. This includes those directly involved (e.g. operating boat trips) and those benefiting indirectly (e.g. accommodation providers). The scale of this increase across the sites cannot be quantified, but it can be expected to be some increment of the existing value of these activities. Given the marine wildlife tourism market is currently estimated to be worth £100's of millions per year, an increment of this could be expected to be worth in the region of £10 million per year across the network to the Scottish wildlife tourism market.^[8]

Summary of Benefits

The uncertainties in each of the benefits assessed result in a large range of estimated values. Based on the available evidence, the combined total present value of the benefits for the new network (based on the additional benefits of the 14 new sites) is tentatively estimated to be between in the region of £80 million over the 20 year assessment period.

This is comprised of a one-off non-use value to Scottish households of marine conservation in Scottish waters generated by the additional 14 SPAs of £74 million and an additional use value as result of implementing management measures for the 14 new SPAs of £2.1-£6.2 million, based on an increase in recreational value to divers and anglers specifically. Furthermore classification of the SPA network is likely to provide further benefits to the marine wildlife tourism market.

For a qualitative summary of anticipated benefits to ecosystem services in this particular site see appendix A.

Costs

Option 1: Do nothing

This option is not predicted to create any additional costs to the sectors and groups outlined above.

However failure to classify the "most suitable territories" as SPAs would leave the Scottish Government exposed to a high risk of EC infraction proceedings, which may result in substantial one off and recurring fines.

In addition it should be noted that the societal cost of not classifying could be both large and irreversible relative to the current condition of the marine environment. The absence of management measures to conserve the identified features may produce future economic and social costs in terms of increased marine habitat and biodiversity degradation. The option to not classify holds the potential to undermine the overall ecological coherence of the Scottish SPA Network. This potentially large and irreversible societal cost avoided is presented within the benefits section of the 'do classify' scenario (option 2) to avoid double counting the same impact.

Option 2: Classify site as a Special Protection Area

Costs have been evaluated based on the implementation of potential management measures. Where feasible costs have been quantified, where this has not been possible costs are stated qualitatively. All quantified costs have been discounted in line with HM Treasury guidance using a discount rate of 3.5%. Discounting reflects the fact that individuals prefer present consumption over future consumption.

Coastal defence and flood protection

There are nine coast protection and flood defence structures (3 x hard engineered schemes, 1 x rock revetment, 3 x embankment, 1 x artificial protection (dyke) and 1 x artificial beach) which overlap the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA boundary or within the 10km buffer. Therefore, management costs may be incurred under the assumption structures will require maintenance or construction works once every 20 years (starting in 2024). However, five of these structures (3 x embankment, 1 x artificial protection (dyke) and 1 x artificial beach) overlap with existing SPAs for which no costs impacts are anticipated in this assessment.

Seasonal controls will be applied to construction activity, where necessary, to minimise impacts to protected features. It has been assumed that these seasonal restrictions can be accommodated without imposing any additional cost on the construction programme.

Economic Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as a SPA

	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	Additional assessment to support planning application (maintenance or construction works).	Additional assessment to support planning application (maintenance or construction works).	Additional assessment to support planning application (maintenance or construction works).
Description of one-off costs	Additional assessment to support planning application (maintenance or construction works) - £5.2k per application. Applications estimated for four developments to be submitted in 2024.	Additional assessment to support planning application (maintenance or construction works) - £5.2k per application. Applications estimated for four developments to be submitted in 2024.	Additional assessment to support planning application (maintenance or construction works) - £5.2k per application. Applications estimated for four developments to be submitted in 2024.
Description of recurring costs	None.	None.	None.
Description of non-quantified costs	Seasonal controls applied to construction activity.	Seasonal controls applied to construction activity.	Seasonal controls applied to construction activity.

Quantified Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as an SPA (£million)

Total costs (2015–2034)	0.021	0.021	0.021
Average annual costs	0.001	0.001	0.001
Present value of total costs (2015–2034)	0.015	0.015	0.015

Commercial Fisheries:

According to VMS-based estimates and ICES rectangle landings statistics, nephrops trawls, dredges, other trawls and whitefish trawls (over-15m) and pots, nephrops trawls, dredges, other trawls, hand fishing, whitefish trawls, lines and other gears (under-15m) operate within the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA. The value of catches from the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex area was £980,000 (over-15m vessels) and £6,728,840 (under-15m vessels, indicated from ICES rectangle landings data) (annual average for 2009–2013, 2015 prices). Landings from the over-15m vessels are predominantly into Eyemouth (46% by value), Pittenweem (22%) and Fraserburgh (9%). For the over-15m fleet, a total of 238 UK vessels operated in the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex area in the period 2009-2013, comprising nephrops trawls (139), dredges (64), other trawls (45) and whitefish trawls (15). Nephrops trawls mainly operate across the central and southern parts and dredges operate mainly in the north-east and south-west parts of the SPA.

Uprated ScotMap data (under-15m vessels) indicate that the annual average earnings from the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA was £24,248,206 for the period 2007-2011, with pots and nephrops trawls contributing the highest value. The coverage for ScotMap interviews in the region was 88% (total value of reported landings from the Fisheries Information Network for those vessels included in the ScotMap value analysis expressed as a percentage of the total reported landings for all vessels <15m); the spatial representation of the value of fishing is more robust in regions where coverage is higher.

Economic Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as a SPA

	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	No change to existing	10% reduction in mobile bottom gear effort across the site 10% reduction in pelagic gear effort across the site	30% reduction in mobile bottom gear effort across the site 25% reduction in pelagic gear effort across the site
Description of one-off costs	None	None	None
Description of recurring costs	None	Loss of >15m fishing income (annual values, £ k): nephrops trawls (76.2); dredges (13.9); other trawls (2.7); and whitefish trawls (1.8). Loss of <15m fishing income (annual values, £ k): nephrops trawls (306.7); dredges (17.0); whitefish trawls (6.7); and all other trawls (8.9).	Loss of >15m fishing income (annual values, £ k): - nephrops trawls (228.7); - dredges (41.6); - other trawls (8.2); and - whitefish trawls (5.3). Loss of <15m fishing income (annual values, £ k): - nephrops trawls (920.1); - dredges (50.6); - whitefish trawls (20.1); and - all other trawls (26.8).
Description of non-quantified costs	None	Loss of value of catches from non-UK vessels using mobile bottom contact and pelagic gears in the SPA; and Displacement impacts (additional fishing pressure on other areas, potential conflict with other vessels, additional steaming time/fuel costs, gear development and adaptation costs, and additional quota costs).	Loss of value of catches from non-UK vessels using mobile bottom contact and pelagic gears in the SPA; and Displacement impacts (additional fishing pressure on other areas, potential conflict with other vessels, additional steaming time/fuel costs, gear development and adaptation costs, and additional quota costs).

Commercial fisheries costs are presented below in terms of Gross Value Added (GVA). GVA more accurately reflects the wider value of the sector to the local area and economy beyond the market value of the landed catch. Stating costs purely in terms of landed value would overstate the true economic cost of not fishing. If fishermen are prevented from catching fish they forgo the landed value of those fish but subsequently forgo the payment of intermediate costs such as fuel (it is assumed that no fishing activity is displaced). Costs are also presented in terms of the reduction in full-time equivalent (FTE) employment. It is also possible that effort not continuing in the area could be transferred to other locations resulting in no or reduced loss of income.

Quantified Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as a SPA (£Million)

Total change in GVA (2015–2034)	0.000	3.012	9.495
Average annual change to GVA	0.000	0.151	0.475
Present value of total change in GVA (2015–2034)	0.000	2.215	6.984
Direct and Indirect reduction in Employment	0.0 jobs	6.6 jobs	19.7 jobs

These estimates represent a worst-case scenario, based on the assumption of zero displacement of fishing activity. In reality, it is likely that some commercial fishing activity will be displaced to other grounds and hence it is likely that the impacts on employment are likely to be lower than those estimated. A Marine Scotland study on fisheries displacement in relation to the 2015 Nature Conservation MPA designations^[9] indicated that a significant proportion of fishing effort affected by the designations was likely to relocate elsewhere. In reality, vessels are likely to react to any management measures in place in order to maintain profitability (i.e. by changing target species/gear type) but this could add to their costs (i.e. the extra fuel cost associated with fishing elsewhere). This uncertainty surrounding the change in behaviour is the reasoning behind not attempting to quantify this cost impact. Other non-quantified costs include: potential conflict with other fishing vessels, environmental consequences of targeting new areas, longer steaming times and increased fuel costs, changes in costs and earnings, gear development and adaptation costs, and additional quota costs.

Energy Generation:

There is one operational energy generation development within the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA boundary. The Methil (Samsung) Demonstration Project is an offshore (albeit just 50 m off the coast at Methil) wind test site comprising one 7 MW turbine, with construction completed in October 2013. There are no further operational energy generation developments within the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA boundary; thus economic costs and management measures associated with energy generation in this SPA are described in light of known possible future developments.

In October 2014, Seagreen Wind Energy Limited (Seagreen) received consent from the Scottish Government to construct two offshore wind farms (Project Alpha and Project Bravo, 525MW each) in the Firth of Forth Offshore Wind Zone (Phase 1). It should be noted that neither Phase 1 wind farm overlaps with the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA boundary, although export cable routes from these potential wind farm developments do overlap with the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA boundary.

Seagreen's plans are ongoing regarding the development of two further areas of the Firth of Forth Offshore Wind Zone (Phases 2 and 3, up to 2.6 GW combined capacity). Phase 2 is planned to comprise three wind farms (Seagreen Charlie, Seagreen Delta and Seagreen Echo) and Phase 3 is planned to comprise two wind farms (Seagreen Foxtrot and Seagreen Golf). The search area considered for Phases 2 and 3 overlaps the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA boundary, as do the proposed export cable routes. Therefore, should Seagreen successfully obtain permission(s) to construct Phases 2 and 3, additional management measures may be required.

Economic Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as an SPA

	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	Additional assessment of new offshore wind development.	Additional assessment of new offshore wind development.	Additional assessment of new offshore wind development; and Additional reporting of bird surveys for consented/operational developments following Review of Consents.
Description of one-off costs	Additional assessment for licence application – £1k per licence application. Applications estimated for three offshore wind developments (SeaGreen Phase 2, Seagreen Phase 3 and 2-B Energy Test Site) to be submitted in 2016.	Additional assessment for licence application – £1k per licence application. Applications estimated for three offshore wind developments (SeaGreen Phase 2, Seagreen Phase 3 and 2-B Energy Test Site) to be submitted in 2016.	Additional assessment for licence application – £1k per licence application. Applications estimated for three offshore wind developments (SeaGreen Phase 2, Seagreen Phase 3 and 2-B Energy Test Site) to be submitted in 2016.
Description of recurring costs	None.	None.	Additional reporting of bird surveys for consented/operational developments following Review of Consents. Surveys estimated for four consented offshore wind developments (Seagreen (Phase 1), Inch Cape, Neart na Gaoithe, Methil (Samsung) Demonstration Project) - £1k per year per development from 2016-2034.
Description of non-quantified costs	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.

Quantified Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as an SPA (£Million)

Total costs (2015–2034)	0.003	0.003	0.079
Average annual costs	<0.001	<0.001	0.004
Present value of total costs (2015–2034)	0.003	0.003	0.058

Possible social impacts may flow from the economic costs resulting from classification. There may be reduced future employment opportunities if additional costs are significant and render development projects economically unviable or if delays arising from classification impact on potential investment opportunities. It is not possible to assess potential cost impacts relating to potential future development areas, such as the Sectoral Marine Plan options, that could be affected due to the uncertainty surrounding the location and nature of future development.

Military

15 military practice areas (Burnt-island (X5610), Firth of Forth (X5613(S)), Firth of Forth (X5613(N)), Kirkcaldy Bay (X5611), Aberlady Bay (X5612), May Island (X5614), Firth of Forth (Southern) (X5637), Firth of Forth (Middle) (X5641), Firth of Forth (Outer) (X5642), Barry Buddon (D604), Firth of Forth (Northern) (X5638), Anstruther (X5625) and Forth Deep (X5615); thirteen firing danger areas and two explosives dumping grounds (neither are in use)) overlap with the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA.

The features which overlap with military activities have not been described as vulnerable to MoD activities in this SPA. It is assumed that management relating to MoD activity will be coordinated through the MoD's Maritime Environmental Sustainability Appraisal Tool (MESAT) which the MoD uses to assist in meeting its environmental obligations. This process will include operational guidance to reduce significant impacts of military activities on SPAs. It is assumed that the MoD will incur additional costs in adjusting MESAT and other MoD environmental assessment tools in order to consider whether its activities will impact on the conservation objectives of MPAs and also incur additional costs in adjusting electronic charts to consider SPAs. However, these costs will be incurred at national level and hence no site-specific cost assessments have been made.

Ports and Harbours

There are six major ports/harbours (Burntisland, Dundee, Granton, Inverkeithing, Leith and Methil) located within the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA boundary or within the 5km buffer. Therefore, management costs may be incurred under the assumption that major ports/harbours will undertake development every 5 years (starting in 2018) within the assessment period (2015-2034). However, three of these major ports/harbours (Granton, Inverkeithing and Leith) overlap with existing SPAs for which no costs impacts are anticipated in this assessment.

There are 24 minor ports/harbours (Aberdour, Anstruther, Arbroath, Braefoot Terminal, Carron, Cockenzie, Cove, Crail, Dunbar, Dysart, Elie, Fisherrow, Hound Point Terminal, Kinghorn, Kirkcaldy, Newhaven, North Berwick, Pettycur, Pittenweem, Port Seton, St Andrews, St Monans, Tayport and West Wemyss) located within the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA boundary or within the 1km buffer. Therefore, management costs may be incurred under the assumption that minor ports/harbours will undertake development every 10 years (starting in 2025) within the assessment period (2015-2034). However, 17 of these minor ports/harbours (Aberdour, Braefoot Terminal, Carron, Cockenzie, Crail, Dunbar, Dysart, Fisherrow, Hound Point Terminal, Kinghorn, Kirkcaldy, Newhaven, North Berwick, Pettycur, Port Seton, Tayport and West Wemyss) overlap with existing SPAs for which no costs impacts are anticipated in this assessment.

There are eight open disposal sites (Arbroath, Methil, Middle Bank (Tay), Blae Rock A, Narrow Deep B, Oxcars Ext A, Oxcars Ext B and Oxcars Main) within the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA boundary (or 1km buffer). Therefore, management costs may be incurred under the assumption that disposal sites will require licence applications to be submitted every 3 years (starting in 2017) within the assessment period (2015-2034). However, three of these disposal sites (Oxcars Ext A, Oxcars Ext B and Oxcars Main) overlap with existing SPAs for which no cost impacts are anticipated in this assessment.

Economic Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as an SPA

	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	Additional assessment of new port/harbour developments in or adjacent to SPA to support licence applications; and Additional assessment of maintenance dredging disposal licence application affecting SPA.	Additional assessment of new port/harbour developments in or adjacent to SPA to support licence applications; and Additional assessment of maintenance dredging disposal licence application affecting SPA.	Additional assessment of new port/harbour developments in or adjacent to SPA to support licence applications; Additional monitoring of development project (major ports/harbours only); and Additional assessment of maintenance dredging disposal licence application affecting SPA.
Description of one-off costs	Additional assessment of new port/harbour developments – £7.1k per application. Assessment estimated for three major ports (Burntisland, Dundee, Methil) to be submitted in 2018, 2023, 2028 and 2033 and seven minor ports (Anstruther, Arbroath, Cove, Elie, Pittenweem, St Andrews, St Monans) to be submitted in 2025; and Additional assessment of maintenance dredging disposal licence application – £7.1k per application. Assessment estimated for five disposal sites (Arbroath, Methil, Middle Bank (Tay), Blae Rock A, Narrow Deep B) to be submitted in 2017, 2020, 2023, 2026, 2029 and 2032.	Additional assessment of new port/harbour developments – £7.1k per application. Assessment estimated for three major ports (Burntisland, Dundee, Methil) to be submitted in 2018, 2023, 2028 and 2033 and seven minor ports (Anstruther, Arbroath, Cove, Elie, Pittenweem, St Andrews, St Monans) to be submitted in 2025; and Additional assessment of maintenance dredging disposal licence application – £7.1k per application. Assessment estimated for five disposal sites (Arbroath, Methil, Middle Bank (Tay), Blae Rock A, Narrow Deep B) to be submitted in 2017, 2020, 2023, 2026, 2029 and 2032.	Additional assessment of new port/harbour developments – £7.1k per application. Assessment estimated for three major ports (Burntisland, Dundee, Methil) to be submitted in 2018, 2023, 2028 and 2033 and seven minor ports (Anstruther, Arbroath, Cove, Elie, Pittenweem, St Andrews, St Monans) to be submitted in 2025; Additional monitoring of major port development – £30k per development. Monitoring estimated for three major ports (Burntisland, Dundee, Methil) to be conducted in 2019, 2024, 2029 and 2034; and Additional assessment of maintenance dredging disposal licence application – £7.1k per application. Assessment estimated for five disposal sites (Arbroath, Methil, Middle Bank (Tay), Blae Rock A, Narrow Deep B) to be submitted in 2017, 2020, 2023, 2026, 2029 and 2032.
Description of recurring costs	None.	None.	None.
Description of non-quantified costs	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.

Quantified Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as an SPA (£Million)

Total costs (2015–2034)	0.348	0.348	0.708
Average annual costs	0.017	0.017	0.035
Present value of total costs (2015–2034)	0.252	0.252	0.499

It should be noted that additional cost impacts could also arise as a result of consenting delays. The cost impacts and uncertainty associated with SPA classification may impact on potential investment opportunities.

Recreational Boating

One light and 13 medium traffic cruising routes for recreational boating intersect with the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA boundary. Four marinas (Anstruther Harbour, Arbroath Marina, Edinburgh Marina and Tayport Harbour) are located in the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA or within a 1km buffer zone.

Economic Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as an SPA

	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	None.	None.	Zoning of recreational activities to avoid important bird foraging areas
Description of one-off costs	None.	None.	It has been assumed that RYA (Scotland)/Scottish Boating Alliance is required to contribute to the development of each zoning plan at a cost of £1,000 per site (at 2015 prices) and that this cost is incurred in 2016.
Description of recurring costs	None.	None.	None.
Description of non-quantified costs	None.	None.	None.

Quantified Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as an SPA (£Million)

Total costs (2015–2034)	0.000	0.000	0.001
Average annual costs	0.000	0.000	<0.001
Present value of total costs (2015–2034)	0.000	0.000	0.001

Water Sports

Two sea kayaking routes overlap with the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA boundary. There are also a large number of dive sites within the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA, including 45 wreck dives (of which five are submarines), a scenic boat dive (Blae rock) and five shore dives (Peticowick, Dunbar Harbour, Elie Harbour and Fife Ness). Sea angling is carried out along most of the Scottish coastline within 6nm (SSACN). The Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex SPA overlaps with several sections of coastline and these areas out to 6nm are areas of potential recreational sea angling.

Economic Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as an SPA

	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	None.	None.	Zoning of water sports activities to avoid important bird foraging areas.
Description of one-off costs	None.	None.	Discussions on zoning will be undertaken as part of the development of a Scheme of Management for individual SPAs. It has been assumed that the British Marine Federation is required to contribute to the development of each zoning plan – £1k per site (at 2015 prices) and that this cost is incurred in 2016.
Description of recurring costs	None.	None.	None.
Description of non-quantified costs	None.	None.	None.

Quantified Costs on the Activity of Classification of the Site as an SPA (£Million)

Total costs (2014–2033)	0.000	0.000	0.001
Average annual costs	0.000	0.000	<0.001
Present value of total costs (2014–2033)	0.000	0.000	0.001

Public Sector:

The decision to classify the Outer Firth of Forth and St Andrews Bay Complex site as a SPA would result in costs being incurred by the public sector in the following areas:

• Preparation of Marine Management Schemes
• Preparation of Statutory Instruments
• Development of voluntary instruments
• Site monitoring
• Compliance and enforcement
• Promotion of public understanding
• Regulatory and advisory costs associated with licensing decisions

Some of these costs will accrue at the national level and as such have not been disaggregated to site level.

Site-specific Public Sector Costs (£Million, 2015-2034)

	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Preparation of Marine Management Schemes	0.025	0.025	0.025
Preparation of Statutory Instruments	0.000	0.004	0.004
Development of voluntary measures	0.000	0.000	0.004
Site monitoring	0.088	0.088	0.088
Regulatory and advisory costs associated with licensing decisions	0.027	0.035	0.035
Total Quantified Public Sector Costs	0.140	0.152	0.156

Total Costs

Total quantified costs are presented in present value terms. Commercial fisheries costs are presented in terms of GVA.

Total Present Value of Quantified Costs (£Million, 2015-2034)

Sector	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Coastal defence and flood protection	0.015	0.015	0.015
Energy generation	0.003	0.003	0.058
Military	See National Costs	See National Costs	See National Costs
Ports and harbours	0.252	0.252	0.499
Recreational Boating	0.000	0.000	0.001
Water Sports	0.000	0.000	0.001
Public Sector	0.140	0.152	0.156
Total Present Value of Costs	0.410	0.422	0.730

GVA Impacts (£million 2015-2034)

Commercial Fisheries	0.000	2.215	6.984

Total Non-Quantified Costs

Scenario	Low	Intermediate	Upper
Sector/Group
Coastal defence and flood protection	Seasonal controls applied to construction activity.	Seasonal controls applied to construction activity.	Seasonal controls applied to construction activity.
Commercial fisheries	None	Loss of value of catches from non-UK vessels and Displacement impacts	Loss of value of catches from non-UK vessels and Displacement impacts
Energy generation	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.
Ports and harbours	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.	Costs of project delays during consenting; potential impact on investment opportunities.