Pilot Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters Marine Spatial Plan. Consultation Report

I think that all the possible frameworks are in place, but please simply consider all aspects that have relevance in terms of Orkney & Pentland resources - make sure the scope includes all meaningful resources - back to the point on seaweed.

Noted.

No. It appears that a great deal of effort has gone into including as many stakeholders as practicable. The PFYC may comment on some issues that benefit other stakeholders to ensure all interests are considered.

Noted. The Working Group welcomes the positive feedback on stakeholder engagement.

Emphasis should be placed on identifying and addressing potential barriers to participation for different stakeholder groups.

Noted. Stakeholder engagement is a vital part of the process of developing the Draft Plan.

A comprehensive stakeholder analysis conducted early on in the planning process could be useful in determining opportunities for improving relationships between certain stakeholder groups. This would facilitate progress towards a common vision for the sustainable development of the PFOW.

Noted. Stakeholder engagement is a vital part of the development of the Draft Plan and the Working Group has consulted on an individual and wider basis throughout the process. The consultation events to date i.e. the workshops, evening drop in sessions and the opportunity for one to one meetings were widely advertised and provided many opportunities to discuss the development of the Draft Plan. There will be sector specific focus groups as required to work through development of policy for the Draft Plan.

It will be useful to establish definitions for the roles and responsibilities of the Working Group, Advisory Group, statutory and non-statutory stakeholders and the wider public to avoid any mismatches between expectations for participation and outcomes.

AP31: An updated schematic (Figure 2 in PIOP) will be provided to show the links between the different groups involved in developing the Draft Plan.

Further to that, linear and discrete identification of 'stakeholder' can be too narrow in an island context where social, economic and identity boundaries are blurred and much more holistic in nature. Many islanders have multi-faceted roles within their communities and are part of other contexts as well as their professional definitions. A fisherman can have several stakeholder interests, as an exploiter of the sea for its wild stocks, a lover of the environment, a part-time earner from tourism, and as some-one who appreciates natural and wild beauty. Many islanders would consider themselves as defined by their occupation but also their multi- faceted 'islandness'.

AP32: Ensure that opportunities for stakeholder engagement are provided at all stages of the development of the Draft Plan. Update the Plan Scheme timetable outlining when consultation will take place and ensure this information is made available to stakeholders.

The proposed topics are all very relevant and potentially valuable to the process of learning lessons on stakeholder engagement. Explicit consideration might also be given to how other statutory consultees activities ( e.g. with respect to TCE and leasing rounds and to HIE and National Renewables Infrastructure Plan ( NRIP) sites) are informed by or inform the Plan. We would suggest that when considering and analysing the lessons to be drawn within these broad topics particular consideration be given to the differing capacity and constraints issues that may affect various types of stakeholders ( e.g. statutory consultees, commercial bodies, and voluntary and community groups) and to the optimal timing for inputs from these groups within the planning process. Consideration of these issues should help to inform future resource needs for regional marine planning, in terms both of team structures and expertise and time allowed for plan development.

Noted. Consideration will be given to how and when statutory consultees are consulted to ensure that the most efficient process possible is developed.

AP33: Consider how and when best to consult stakeholders and ensure that lessons learned are recorded to inform future resource needs for regional marine planning.

Through previous engagement we have already provided you with all the information on other stakeholders which we consider may be relevant.

Noted.

No comments.

N/A

Scottish Water has no comment

Noted.

See above.

Noted.

With regard to marine recreation and tourism we have far too little knowledge. The Anatec report shows tracks obtained from AIS. This however is only 17% of the total movements and is mainly from the large sail training vessels. We need to know where the majority are coming from and eventually going to; the weather they had on passage; did they have any navigational problems; do they know about all the changes that have taken place in the seas in the PFOW; are their charts up to date including the electronic ones plus many other items. All this needs to be tabulated over a period of two to three years and it is only then will we know what mitigation needs to take place.

Noted. The proposed Tourism and Recreation study will aim to collect data to improve knowledge for marine recreation and tourism. Although not all the suggested data listed will be collected, the study will provide an improved data set to inform the Draft Plan.

AP34: Ensure, where feasible, the proposed Tourism and Recreation study provides information to fill current data gaps.

Emphasis should be placed on identifying and addressing potential barriers to participation for different stakeholder groups. It is very difficult to get effective engagement with inshore fishermen due to the nature of their work and their employment "philosophy". Contributions from representative organisations should not be taken as a definitive reflection of individual views.

Noted. Stakeholder engagement is a vital part of the development of the Draft Plan and the Working Group has consulted on an individual and wider basis throughout the process. The consultation events to date i.e. the workshops, evening drop in sessions and the opportunity for one to one meetings were widely advertised and provided many opportunities to discuss the development of the Draft Plan. There will be sector specific focus groups to work through development of policy for the Draft Plan.

AP35: Ensure that opportunities for stakeholder engagement are provided at all stages of the development of the Draft Plan. Update the Plan Scheme timetable outlining when consultation will take place and ensure this information is made available to stakeholders.

Although the shipping study was able to draw on the experience of many recreational boating stakeholders, some such stakeholders live outside the UK. The RYA through RYA Scotland can represent UK domiciled boaters but not visitors from Scandinavia and other parts of the world.

Noted. This information will be useful to the development of the Draft Plan. The Tourism and Recreation study will also pick up some of this information.

No comments to add.

Noted.

No comments to add.

Noted.

Important to recognise that recreational stakeholders will not be limited to those local to the area and that there is national (international) recreational interest in the area and that these interests should be engaged with.

Noted. This information will be useful to the development of the Draft Plan. The Tourism and Recreation study will also pick up some of this information.

We support the objectives set out in paragraph 6.5 to develop effective means to engage stakeholders in the development of regional marine plans based on lessons learned during the PFOW MSP process. In addition to this, it may also be appropriate to consider lessons learned during other marine spatial planning initiatives such as the National Marine Plan for Scotland and the East of England Inshore and Offshore marine plans currently being developed by the Marine Management Organisation ( MMO).

Noted. The lessons learned from other marine spatial planning initiatives will be used.

AP36: Lessons learned from other marine spatial planning initiatives will be consulted and taken into consideration.

No comments.

N/A

The Highland Council welcomes being part of the Working Group that is developing the Plan. The Council also welcomes the efforts being made to engage with stakeholders in preparation of the Plan, and encourages continued efforts and the provision of timely feedback to those involved on how the issues raised have been considered in developing the Plan.

The CNSRP's Advisory Board might offer a useful additional mechanism to gather views from (and disseminate information to) a range of local organisations (eg Community Councils, Trades Unions, Chamber of Commerce, College etc).

Noted. The CNSRP is included on the stakeholder distribution list and, if necessary, will be contacted directly to facilitate discussion with other stakeholders.

AP37: If necessary contact the Caithness & North Sutherland Regeneration Partnership to facilitate discussion with other stakeholders.

Scottish Renewables supports using the pilot plan to develop experience for the future regional plans. In particular, we support the desire to learn lessons for streamlining future processes and governance arrangements for Marine Planning Partnerships.

Noted. The lessons learned from the marine spatial planning process will be recorded.

AP38: Ensure that lessons learned are recorded to inform future resource needs for regional marine planning.

No comments.

N/A

n/a

Noted.

No.

Noted.

In terms of governance arrangements for the future Regional Marine Plans it is vital that the private sector is fully involved and represented on any working, advisory and decision making groups and bodies.

Noted. For the pilot Marine Spatial Plan the Advisory Group consists of the Working Group (Marine Scotland, Highland Council and Orkney Islands Council), SNH, SEPA, HS, HIE, RYA, Orkney Harbour and Scrabster Harbour. It is likely that MS-LOT will also join as a member.

AP39: Ensure lessons learned from the governance arrangements are recorded to inform future regional marine planning.

Comments in Question 19 box.

Noted.

Comments in Question 19 box.

Noted.

RSPB, "Caithness Biodiversity Group", Whale Dolphin Conservation.

Noted. It is not clear from this response what governance related issues should be investigated. RSPB and the WDC groups are listed on the stakeholder database and any representation from the Caithness Biodiversity Group is welcome.

HIE supports the proposal that relevant stakeholders will be taking part. HIE encourages Marine Scotland to contact members of the Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters Leadership Forum, most of the members are included in Annex 3 with the exception of SEGEC.

Noted. The organisations that make up the working group (Marine Scotland, Highland Council and Orkney Islands Council) are all represented on the PFOWLF.

Comments in Question 19 box.

Noted.

From an SFF point of view it will be essential going forward, to learn the lessons of the need for clarity in full and proper consultation with the catching sector.

Noted. Stakeholder engagement is a vital part of the process of developing the Draft Plan and we will propose to produce a lessons learned document. The Working Group has consulted on an individual and wider basis throughout the process. The consultation events to date i.e. the workshops, evening drop in sessions and the opportunity for one to one meetings were widely advertised and provided many opportunities to discuss the development of the Draft Plan. There will be sector specific focus groups to work through development of policy for the Draft Plan and these are open to all fishermen that wish to participate.