Planning Scotland's Seas: 2013 - The Scottish Marine Protected Area Project – Developing the Evidence Base for Impact Assessments and the Sustainability Appraisal Final Report - Appendix E - Marine Site Reports
This is Appendix E for the pMPA Impact and Sustainability Report containing the detailed site by site reports. Published separately due to size.
Mousa to Boddam ( MTB)
Site Area (km 2): 13
Site Summary
Table 1. Summary of Proposed Protected Features, Data Confidence and Conservation Objectives | [ MTB] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Proposed protected features | |||||
Biodiversity Features Sandeels. Geodiversity Features Marine Geomorphology of the Scottish Shelf Seabed - componentsto be confirmed by SNH Site Description The Mousa to Boddam MPA proposal covers two areas around the island of Mousa and off the coast of Boddam in the south-east Shetland region. |
|||||
Summary of confidence in presence, extent and condition of proposed protected features and conservation objectives | |||||
Proposed Protected Feature | Estimated Area of Feature (by scenario) (km 2) | Confidence in Feature Presence |
Confidence in Feature Extent |
Confidence in Feature Condition |
Conservation Objective and Risk |
Biodiversity Features | |||||
Sandeels | *Lower: 10.352 Intermediate: 10.32 Upper: 13.36 |
Yes (Marine Science Scotland survey data, 1985 - 2007) | Yes | Not known | Conserve |
Geodiversity Features | |||||
Marine Geomorphology of the Scottish Shelf Seabed - components to be confirmed by SNH | Yes | Partial - additional work needed to map features | Not known | Conserve | |
Key: * Estimated area based on best available data References: Area of Feature: GeMs Confidence in feature presence and extent: SNH (2012k) |
Summary of Costs and Benefits
Table 2a. Site-Specific Economic Costs on Human Activities arising from the Designation and Management of the Site as an MPA (present value of total costs over 2014 to 2033 inclusive) | [ MTB] | ||
---|---|---|---|
Human Activity | Cost Impact on Activity | ||
Lower Estimate (£Million) | Intermediate Estimate (£Million) | Upper Estimate (£Million) | |
Quantified Economic Costs (Discounted) | |||
Energy Generation | 0.009 | 0.009 | 0.037 |
Total Quantified Economic Costs | 0.009 | 0.009 | 0.037 |
Non-Quantified Economic Costs | |||
Energy Generation |
|
|
|
Note: For detailed information on economic cost impacts on activities, see Table 4. |
Table 2b. Site-Specific Public Sector Costs arising from the Designation and Management of the Site as an MPA (over 2014 to 2033 inclusive) | [ MTB] | ||
---|---|---|---|
Description | Public Sector Costs | ||
Lower Estimate (£Million) | Intermediate Estimate (£Million) | Upper Estimate (£Million) | |
Quantified Public Sector Costs (Discounted) | |||
Preparation of Marine Management Schemes | None | None | None |
Preparation of Statutory Instruments | None | 0.004 | 0.004 |
Development of voluntary measures | National assessment | National assessment | National assessment |
Site monitoring | National assessment | National assessment | National assessment |
Compliance and enforcement | National assessment | National assessment | National assessment |
Promotion of public understanding | National assessment | National assessment | National assessment |
Regulatory and advisory costs associated with licensing decisions | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Total Quantified Public Sector Costs | 0.001 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
Non-Quantified Public Sector Costs | |||
None identified. |
Table 2c. Summary of Social Impacts and Distribution of Quantified Impacts arising from the Designation and Management of the Site as an MPA (over 2014 to 2033 inclusive) | [ MTB] | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Key Areas of Social Impact | Description | Scale of Expected Impact across Scenarios, Average (mean no. of jobs affected) | Distributional Analysis | |||||||
Location | Fishing Groups Predominantly Affected | Social Groups Affected | ||||||||
Region | Port | Rural/ Urban/ Island | Gear Types Most Affected | Vessels most affected | Crofters | Ethnic minorities | With disability or long term sick | |||
None identified (Commercial Fisheries). | ||||||||||
If any energy generation developments do not proceed as a result of designation (due to additional costs, project delays, loss of investor confidence), there may be significant social impacts due to job losses (non-quantified). |
Table 2d. Site-Specific Benefits arising from the Designation and Management of the Site as an MPA (over 2014 to 2033 inclusive) | [ MTB] | |
---|---|---|
Benefit | Description | |
Ecosystem Services Benefits (Moderate and High Benefits) | Relevance | Scale of Benefits |
Non-use value of natural environment | Low | Nil - Moderate |
Other Benefits | ||
Tourism | Higher biodiversity due to designation, and presence of designations, may attract more tourism activity to local economy. | |
Contribution to ecologically coherent network | See report Section 7.5. | |
Note: For detailed information on ecosystem services benefits, see Tables 9 and 10. For detailed information on other benefits, see Table 5 (activities that would benefit) and Table 8 (contribution to ecologically-coherent network). |
Summary of Overlaps and Interactions between Proposed Designated Features and Human Activities
Table 3. Overlaps and Potential Interactions between Features and Activities under different Scenarios, indicating need for Assessment of Cost Impacts on Human Activities from Designation of the Site as an MPA | [ MTB] | ||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Aggregates | Aquaculture (Finfish) | Aquaculture (Shellfish) | Aviation | Carbon Capture & Storage | Coastal Protection | Commercial Fisheries | Energy Generation | Military Activities | Oil & Gas | Ports & Harbours | Power Interconnectors | Recreational Boating | Shipping | Telecom Cables | Tourism | Water Sports | |
Biodiversity Features | |||||||||||||||||
Sandeels | - | - | - | - | - | - | L/I/U | L/ I/ U | - | - | - | - | U | - | L/I/U | L/I/U | L/I/U |
Geodiversity Features | |||||||||||||||||
Marine Geomorphology of the Scottish Shelf Seabed - components to be confirmed by SNH | Not considered to be sensitive at the levels of exposure expected from human activities; thus, not considered in the context of management. | ||||||||||||||||
Note: L = Lower Scenario; I = Intermediate Scenario; U = Upper Scenario. Normal font indicates that there is an overlap between the activity and proposed designated feature under that scenario, bold indicates that the overlap results in a potential interaction between the activity and proposed designated feature that has resulted in cost impacts under that scenario. For detail of management measures assessed under each scenario for each activity, and results of the cost estimates, see Table 4. |
Human Activity Summaries
Human activities that would be impacted by designation of the site as an MPA
Table 4a. Energy Generation | [ MTB] | ||
---|---|---|---|
There are no energy generation activities currently operating within the MTB proposed MPA boundary or corresponding buffer zones. Thus, economic costs and management measures associated with energy generation in this proposed MPA are described in light of known possible future developments. Within the MTB proposed MPA boundary, one potential future export cable route for a wind energy generation Area of Search (AoS) overlaps the BAP designated mobile species feature Sandeels under all scenarios ( i.e. lower, intermediate and upper extent). Therefore, additional management costs may be incurred. |
|||
Economic Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA | |||
Lower Estimate | Intermediate Estimate | Upper Estimate | |
Assumptions for cost impacts |
|
|
|
Description of one-off costs |
|
|
|
Description of recurring costs |
|
|
|
Description of non-quantified costs |
|
|
|
Quantified Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA (£Million) | |||
Total costs (2014-2033) | 0.012 | 0.012 | 0.052 |
Average annual costs | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
Present value of total costs (2014-2033) | 0.009 | 0.009 | 0.037 |
Total costs = Sum of one-off costs and recurring costs for the site summed over the 20 year period. Average annual costs = Total costs divided by the total number of years under analysis ( i.e. 20). Present value of total costs = Total costs discounted to their current value, using a discount rate of 3.5%. |
Human activities that would benefit from designation of the site as an MPA
Table 5. Human Activities that would Benefit from Designation of the Site as an MPA | [ MTB] | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Activity | Description | Lower Estimate | Intermediate Estimate | Upper Estimate |
Tourism | Coastal areas are well represented when considering the locations of various tourist related sites within Scotland with a range of site types present in all regions including the North. Where significant impacts to recreational boating or water sports have been identified for the site, there could also be consequential impacts on tourism. | Tourism may benefit from the designation of the MPA as an added attraction to the destination. In addition, there may also be indirect benefits to tourism as a result of benefits to some water sports activities, for example, recreational angling. | The intermediate management measures applied to sector activities will result in an increase of the beneficial impacts seen in the lower estimate. | The upper management measures applied to sector activities will result in an increase of the beneficial impacts seen in the lower and intermediate estimates. |
Water Sports - Sea Angling | Sea angling is carried out along most of the Scottish coastline within 6nm ( SSACN). MTB proposed MPA is a coastal site and is located wholly within 6nm of the UK coastline. Therefore, sea angling overlaps with all features and there corresponding extents within the proposed MPA. No management restrictions upon this activity are required. | Sea anglers could benefit from any on-site positive effects resulting from the MPA designation and corresponding management restrictions on sector activities including an increase in the size and diversity of species which in turn is expected to increase the attraction of a site for anglers (Fletcher et al. 2012). | The intermediate management measures applied to sector activities will result in an increase of the beneficial impacts seen in the lower estimate. | The upper management measures applied to sector activities will result in an increase of the beneficial impacts seen in the lower and intermediate estimates. |
Human activities that are present but which would be unaffected by designation of the site as an MPA
Table 6. Human Activities that are Present but which would be Unaffected by Designation of the Site as an MPA [ MTB] | |
---|---|
Activity | Description |
Commercial Fisheries | Whitefish trawls and other trawls (over-15m) and dredges, pots and other gears (under-15m vessels) operate within the MTB proposed MPA. The value of landings from the MTB area was £15,600 (over-15m vessels) and £4,620 (under-15m vessels, indicated from ICES rectangle landings data) (annual average for 2007-2011, 2012 prices). Provisional ScotMap data coverage does not extend as far as Shetland and therefore there are no data for the MTB proposed MPA. Landings from the over-15m vessels were into Lerwick (87% by value) and Sandwick (12%). The targeted sandeel fishery is not currently active. There is some evidence that the use of scallop dredges can kill sandeels buried in sediment but further research is required to determine whether it poses a risk to achieving the conservation objectives. Therefore, no cost impacts on fisheries are expected. |
Recreational Boating | There is one anchorage within the MTB proposed MPA boundary that overlaps with the feature extent for sandeels, under the upper scenario only. No additional management measures are anticipated as being required, as whilst the feature is sensitive to surface abrasion the substrate it inhabits is mobile and dynamic in nature. Therefore, the localised pressures associated with anchoring are felt to be minimal in such an environment. |
Telecom Cables | One telecom cable (Shefa-2 Seg 8) is within 1km of the sandeels feature (all scenarios) of the MTB proposed MPA. No additional costs are foreseen in relation to the existing cable. The cable was installed in 2008 and would not be expected to require replacement within the assessment period. |
Social and Distributional Analysis of Impacts from Designation of the Site as an MPA
Table 7a. Identification of Social Impacts from Designation of the Site as an MPA and their significance (over 2014 to 2033 inclusive) | [ MTB] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sector | Economic Impacts | Economic Costs and GVA ( PV) | Consequent Social Impacts | Mitigation | Significance of Social impact |
Energy Generation | Additional operational costs | Quantified Economic Costs (2014-2033): £0.009 - 0.037m | Future employment opportunities - if increased operational costs associated with management measures render projects unviable or restrict project size there will be a negative impact on economic activity and job creation in this sector. | 0 | |
Costs associated with delays during the consenting process Loss of investor confidence (developments do not proceed) | Not quantified | Future employment opportunities - if the delays deter investments there will be a negative impact on economic activity and future job creation in this sector. Environment - possible negative impact in relation to climate change and the ability of the Scottish Government to meet its 2020 renewables targets, decarbonisation targets and climate change targets. There would also be consequent financial implications of climate change impacts. This impact is uncertain and is only likely to arise under the upper scenario. JNCC's current advice is that the intermediate scenario represents their best view on management requirements. |
xxx (under the upper scenario only) | ||
Impacts: xxx - significant negative effect; xx - possible negative effects; x - minimal negative effect, if any; 0 - no noticeable effect expected. |
Table 7b. Distribution of Quantified Economic Costs for Commercial Fisheries and Fish Processors (assuming zero displacement of fishing activity) - Location, Age and Gender | [ MTB] | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sector/Impact | Location | Age | Gender | |||||
Region | Ports | Rural, Urban, Coastal or Island | Children | Working Age | Pensionable Age | Male | Female | |
None identified. | ||||||||
Impacts: xxx - significant negative effect; xx - possible negative effects; x - minimal negative effect, if any; 0 - no noticeable effect expected. |
Table 7c. Distribution of Quantified Economic Costs for Commercial Fisheries and Fish Processors (assuming zero displacement of fishing activity) - Fishing Groups, Income Groups and Social Groups | [ MTB] | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sector/Impact | Fishing Groups | Income Groups | Social Groups | |||||
Vessel Category <15m >15m | Gear Types/Sector | 10% Most Deprived | Middle 80% | 10% Most Affluent | Crofters | Ethnic minorities | With Disability or Long-term Sick | |
None identified. | ||||||||
Impacts: xxx - significant negative effect; xx - possible negative effects; x - minimal negative effect, if any; 0 - no noticeable effect expected. |
Potential Contribution of the Site to an Ecologically-Coherent Network
Table 8. Overview of Features Proposed for Designation and how these contribute to an Ecologically Coherent Network of MPAs | [ MTB] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feature Name | Representation | Replication | Linkages | Geographic Range and Variation |
Resilience |
Sandeels | Provides representation for sandeels in OSPAR Region II. MPA proposal covers preferred site for young sandeels in the Shetland region. | Represents one of three MPA areas for the protection of sandeels in OSPAR Region II. | Replication and representation of areas of importance for sandeels exist in both OSPAR Regions it is present (II and III), based on current knowledge of connectivity between populations. | Areas considered to be of importance to sandeel life history are recorded in OSPAR Regions II and III. MPA proposal covers preferred site for young sandeels in the Shetland region. | Sandeels in Scotland have declined and are considered vulnerable. The MPA area may increase resilience. |
JNCC (pers. comm.); SNH and JNCC. (2012). Assessment of the potential adequacy of the Scottish MPA network for MPA search features: summary of the application of the stage 5 selection guidelines. Available online from: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/mpanetwork/engagement/270612. |
Anticipated Benefits to Ecosystem Services
Table 9. Summary of Ecosystem Services Benefits arising from Designation of the Site as an MPA [10] | [ MTB] | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Services | Relevance to Site |
Baseline Level | Estimated Impacts of Designation | Value Weighting | Scale of Benefits | Confidence | ||
Lower | Intermediate | Upper | ||||||
Fish for human consumption | Low - Moderate. Habitats make contribution to food webs. | Stocks not at MSY | Nil | Low, uncertain if management measures will have impact | Low. Site fishing grounds have low value, but had former sandeel fishery | Nil - Low | Low | |
Fish for non-human consumption | Stocks reduced from potential maximum | Nil | Nil | Nil | ||||
Gas and climate regulation | Nil | Nil | Nil | Nil | Nil | Moderate | Nil | High |
Natural hazard protection | Minimal | Low | Nil | Nil | Nil | Low | Nil | High |
Regulation of pollution | Minimal | Low | Nil | Nil | Nil | Low | Nil | High |
Non-use value of natural environment | Low - protected feature, and contribution of the site to MPA network, have non-use value. | Non-use value of the site may decline, but probably stable | Nil, no change in key characteristics of site | Low - protection of feature of site from uncertain risks | Low, although sandeel is key part of food webs, it is site's only feature | Nil - Moderate | Moderate | |
Recreation | Low | Minimal | Nil | Minimal | Low | Minimal | Moderate | |
Research and Education | Minimal | Nil - Low | Nil | Minimal | Low | Minimal | Moderate | |
Total value of changes in ecosystem services | Nil for lower scenario, Minimal for upper scenarios | Minimal - Low | Moderate |
Contact
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback