Publication - Impact assessment

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

Published: 19 August 2013
Topic: Marine and fisheries
ISBN: 9781782567585

This is Appendix E for the pMPA Impact and Sustainability Report containing the detailed site by site reports. Published separately due to size.

Supporting documents

South-west Sula Sgeir & Hebridean Slope ( SSH)

Site Area (km ²): 2,093

Site Summary

Table 1. Summary of Proposed Protected Features, Data Confidence and Conservation Objectives					[ SSH]
Proposed protected features
Biodiversity Features Burrowed mud, offshore subtidal sands and gravels, offshore deep sea muds, continental slope. Geodiversity Features Quaternary of Scotland - iceberg ploughmark fields, prograding wedges; Submarine Mass Movement - slide deposits. Site Description The SSH MPA proposal is an offshore area located to the north west of the Outer Hebrides. The proposal extends from the continental shelf, down the Hebridean slope and into the Rockall Trough. Potential Alternative Designations The MPA proposal is considered to offer an equivalent contribution to the MPA network as the Geikie Slide and Hebridean Slope possible MPA. Only one of these two designations would therefore be required to be designated.
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
Burrowed mud	Lower: 1563.68 Intermediate: 1563.68 Upper: 1723	Yes (Marine Scotland Science survey data, 2000 - 2009; SAMS analysis of SEA7, 1988 - 1998)	Partial	Low	Conserve (uncertain)
Offshore subtidal sands and gravels	Lower: 271.61 Intermediate: 271.61 Upper: 373.77	Yes ( UK SeaMap, 2010; SAMS analysis of SEA7, 1988 - 1998; BGS PSA data, provided 2012)	Partial	Low	Conserve (uncertain)
Offshore deep sea muds	All scenarios: 22.04	Yes ( UK SeaMap, 2010; SAMS analysis of SEA7, 1988 - 1998)	Partial	Low	Conserve (uncertain)
Continental slope		Yes ( UK SeaMap, 2010)	Partial	Low	Conserve (uncertain)
Geodiversity Features
Quaternary of Scotland - iceberg ploughmark fields	4435.65	Yes	Yes	Low	Conserve (uncertain)
As above - prograding wedges	514.70	Yes	Yes	Low	Conserve (uncertain)
Submarine Mass Movement - slide deposits	1046.25	Yes	Yes	Low	Conserve (uncertain)
Key: * Estimated area based on best available data References: Area of Features: GeMS Confidence in biodiversity feature presence and extent: JNCC (2012k) Confidence in biodiversity feature condition: JNCC (2013) pers. comm. Confidence in geodiversity feature presence and extent: Brooks et al. (2012) Confidence in geodiversity feature condition: Brooks et al. (2012)

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)			[ SSH]
Human Activity	Cost Impact on Activity
Human Activity	Lower Estimate (£Million)	Intermediate Estimate (£Million)	Upper Estimate (£Million)
Quantified Economic Costs (Discounted)
Commercial Fisheries*	0.000	5.282	6.495
Total Quantified Economic Costs	0.000	5.282	6.495
Non-Quantified Economic Costs
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.
Note: For detailed information on economic cost impacts on activities, see Table 4. * These estimates (present value of total change in GVA) assume zero displacement of fishing activity and hence are likely to overestimate the costs.

Table 2b. Site-Specific Public Sector Costs arising from the Designation and Management of the Site as an MPA (over 2014 to 2033 inclusive)			[ SSH]
Description	Public Sector Costs
Description	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	0.005	0.005
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	None	None	None
Total Quantified Public Sector Costs	0.000	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)										[ SSH]
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
Employment with consequent impacts on: Health, Crime, Environment, and Culture and Heritage	Commercial fisheries - Loss of jobs (direct and indirect)	Lower: 0 jobs Intermediate: 9 jobs Upper: 11 jobs	North-East North North-West	Fraserburgh Kirkwall Lochinver	Impacts concentrated in island, rural and urban coastal areas	Whitefish trawls	Lower: N/A Upper: <15m (may be over-estimate)	No Impact.	No breakdown of fisherman employment by ethnic origin.	Unlikely to be employed in fisheries.
Note: For detailed information on socio-economic impacts by sector, see Table 7a. For more detailed information on distributional impacts of quantified costs by sector see Tables 7b and 7c.

Table 2d. Site-Specific Benefits arising from the Designation and Management of the Site as an MPA (over 2014 to 2033 inclusive)		[ SSH]
Benefit	Description
Ecosystem Services Benefits (Moderate and High Benefits)	Relevance	Scale of Benefits
Non-use value of natural environment	Nil - Low	Nil - Moderate
Other Benefits
None identified.
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																	[ SSH]
	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
Burrowed mud	-	-	-	-	-	-	L/ I/U	-	-	L/I/U	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Offshore subtidal sands and gravels	-	-	-	-	-	-	L/ I/U	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Offshore deep sea muds	-	-	-	-	-	-	L/ I/U	-	-	L/I/U	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Continental slope	Not considered as not thought to be sensitive to pressures associated with human activity.
Geodiversity Features
Quaternary of Scotland - iceberg ploughmark fields, prograding wedges	Considered to have a low sensitivity to the pressures associated with activities they are currently exposed and likely to be exposed to in the future; thus not considered in the context of management.
Submarine Mass Movement - slide deposits
Note: L = Lower Scenario; I = Intermediate Scenario; U = Upper Scenario. Normal font indicates that there is an overlap between the activity and proposed protected feature under that scenario, bold indicates that the overlap results in a potential interaction between the activity and proposed protected 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. Commercial Fisheries (assuming zero displacement of fishing activity)			[ SSH]
According to VMS-based estimates and ICES rectangle landings statistics, pelagic trawls, whitefish trawls and lines (over-15m) and whitefish trawls, lines, pelagic trawls, and other gear (under-15m vessels) operate within the SSH proposed MPA. The value of catches from the SSH area was £1.68 million (over-15m vessels) and £1.01 million (under-15m vessels, indicated from ICES rectangle landings data) (annual average for 2007-2011, 2012 prices). Landings from the over-15m vessels are predominantly into Peterhead (28% by value), Lerwick (15%), Fraserburgh (12%), Ijmuiden, The Netherlands (11%) and Ellingsoy, Norway (9%). For the over-15m fleet, whitefish trawlers operate in particular in the east part of the proposed MPA in the area of subtidal sands and gravels. Combined, burrowed mud, offshore deep-sea muds and offshore subtidal sands and gravels cover the whole proposed MPA. Management measures for the scenarios have been developed based on the sensitivity and vulnerability of the features to the pressures caused by different gear types and based on JNCC recommendations. VMS ping data indicate that 33 non- UK vessels were active in the SSH area in 2012: 13 from France; 9 from Spain; 7 from Norway; 3 from the Netherlands and 1 from Germany. The Dutch and German vessels fish with pelagic gear (pelagic trawls) and therefore are unlikely to be affected by the proposed management scenarios. Five French vessels and 4 Spanish vessels fish with bottom trawl and therefore would be impacted by the management measures assessed under the intermediate and upper scenarios. No information on gear types used by the Norwegian vessels was available. Information submitted by the French ministry indicated that 7 vessels in 2008, and 5 vessels in 2011, fished in the proposed MPA area. These were predominantly demersal trawlers and predominantly >40m vessels. Target species were black scabbardfish, hake, grenadiers, blue ling, anglerfish and saithe, with catches worth €0.829 million in 2008 and €0.467 million in 2011. The vessels originated from Lorient, Fécamp and Saint Malo ports, but had their home ports at Lochinver, Lorient and Ijmuiden (in 2011). 2% of their turnover was dependent on fishing in the proposed MPA area, and they accounted for 93 FTE jobs on board in 2011. Provisional ScotMap data do not indicate any under-15m vessel activity in the SSH proposed MPA. The cost estimates for the under-15m sector may be overestimates, as the 'under-15m' length group in the ICES rectangle landings data may include cases where information on vessel length and/or administrative port is missing from landings returns. Unlike most other sectors, the potential cost of designation on commercial fisheries is a loss or displacement of current (and future) output, caused by restrictions on fishing activities. Any decrease in output will, all else being equal, reduce the Gross Value Added ( GVA) generated by the sector and have knock-on effects on the GVA generated by those industries that supply commercial fishing vessels. The costs estimates for this sector have therefore been estimated in terms of GVA. GVA estimates have been generated by applying fleet segment-specific 'GVA/total income' ratios to the value of landings affected. The GVA ratios have been calculated using data on total income and GVA from the Sea Fish Industry Authority Multi-year Fleet Economic Performance Dataset (published March 2013). Further details on the GVA ratios and the methodology for estimating GVA and employment impacts applied are presented in Appendix C7. It is important to note that all costs presented below assume that all affected landings are lost, that is, there is no displacement of fishing activity to alternative fishing grounds. In reality, some displacement is likely to occur and hence the cost, GVA and employment impacts presented in this table are likely to overestimate the costs.
Economic Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA
	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	No additional management.	Closure to mobile bottom-contact gear (whitefish, nephrops and other trawls and seines, beam trawls and dredges) across the MPA, with the exception of depth corridors where all gears are permitted between 300-600m and 1200-1400m depth.	Closure to mobile bottom-contact gear (whitefish, nephrops and other trawls and seines, beam trawls and dredges) across full extent of MPA.
Description of one-off costs	None.	None.	None.
Description of recurring costs	None.	Loss of >15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices): All affected gears (0.195). Loss of <15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices): Whitefish trawls (0.601); Other affected gears (0.001).	Loss of >15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices): All affected gears (0.319). Loss of <15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices): Whitefish trawls (0.682); Other affected gears (0.001).
Description of non-quantified costs	None.	Loss of value of catches from non- UK vessels using bottom contact gears in the proposed MPA (France (5 vessels), Spain (4 vessels), possibly Norway (7 vessels)); and Displacement effects, including conflict with other fishing vessels, environmental impacts in targeting new areas, longer steaming times and increased fuel costs, changes in costs and earnings, gear development and adaptation costs, and additional quota costs.	Loss of value of catches from non- UK vessels using bottom contact gears in the proposed MPA (France (5 vessels), Spain (4 vessels), possibly Norway (7 vessels)); and Displacement effects, including conflict with other fishing vessels, environmental impacts in targeting new areas, longer steaming times and increased fuel costs, changes in costs and earnings, gear development and adaptation costs, and additional quota costs.
Quantified Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA (£Million)
Total costs (2014-2033)	0.000	15.941	20.060
Average annual costs	0.000	0.797	1.003
Present value of total costs (2014-2033)	0.000	11.724	14.754
Economic Impacts (£Million)
Total change in GVA (2014-2033)	0.000	7.181	8.830
Average annual change to GVA	0.000	0.359	0.442
Present value of total change in GVA (2014-2033)	0.000	5.282	6.495
Direct and Indirect reduction in Employment	0.0 jobs	9.1 jobs	11.4 jobs
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%. Total change in GVA (2014-2033) = The change in direct GVA in the sector for the site summed over the 20 year period. Average annual change to GVA = Total change in direct GVA in the sector for the site divided by the total number of years under analysis ( i.e. 20). Present value of total change in GVA (2014-2033) = Total change in direct GVA in the sector for the site discounted to current value, using a discount rate of 3.5%. Direct and Indirect reduction in Employment = The average (mean) reduction in direct employment in the sector plus the indirect reduction in employment on the sector's suppliers.

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			[ SSH]
Activity	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
None identified.

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 [ SSH]
Activity	Description
Oil and Gas	There are two wells within the SSH proposed MPA boundary and in one a significant gas discovery has been made, although the discovery was made in 2000 and both wells now have an abandoned status. Although both wells overlap with proposed protected features, no licence blocks have been awarded within the SSH proposed MPA boundary and no future activity is expected.

Social and Distributional Analysis of Impacts from Designation of the Site as an MPA

Table 7a. Social Impacts Associated with Quantified and Non-Quantified Economic Costs					[ SSH]
Sector	Potential Economic Impacts	Economic Costs and GVA ( PV)	Area of Social Impact Affected	Mitigation	Significance of Social impact
Commercial Fisheries	Loss of traditional fishing grounds with consequent loss in landings, value of landings and hence GVA	Annual Average Loss in Value of Landings: Lower: £0.00m Intermediate: £0.80m Upper: £1.00m Annual Average Loss in GVA (direct and indirect): Lower: £0.00m Intermediate: £0.36m Upper: £0.44m	Culture and heritage - impact on traditions from loss of fishing grounds.		Health: xx (for individuals affected who do not find alternative employment)
	If the loss in GVA significant enough, risk of job losses (direct and indirect)	Job Losses*: Lower: 0.0 jobs Intermediate: 9.1 jobs Upper: 11.4 jobs	A reduction in employment can generate a wide range of social impacts which, in turn, can generate a range of short and long term costs for wider society and the public purse: Healt h (increase in illness, mental stress, loss of self esteem and risk of depression); Increase in crime; and Reduction in f u ture emp lo y me n t prospects/future earnings.	Support to retrain those affected and for the promotion of new small businesses in fisheries dependent areas.
	Loss of value of catches from non- UK vessels using bottom contact gears in the proposed MPA (France (5 vessels), Spain (4 vessels), possibly Norway (7 vessels))	Not Quantified	Employment - loss of foreign jobs from reduced landings.
	Displacement Effects	Not Quantified	Quantified impact on jobs assume worst case scenario ( i.e. no redistribution of effort). In reality displacement effects likely to occur with socio-economic consequences: Empl o y m e nt - reduced employment due to changes in costs and earnings profile of vessels ( e.g. increased fuel costs, gear development and adaption costs, additional quota costs); Conflict/Loss of social cohesion - diminishing fishing grounds may increase conflict with other vessels/gear types, increase social tensions within fishing communities and lead to a loss of social cohesion among fleets. Could also lead to increased operating costs as a result of lost or damaged gear. Equally, gear conflict could reduce where gears are restricted/prohibited; Healt h - increased risks to the safety of fishers and vessels and increased stress due to moving to lesser known areas; E n v ironmental - increased impact in targeting new areas, longer streaming times and increased fuel consumption; and Cul t ur e a nd her i tag e - change in traditional fishing patterns/ activities.		xx
Impacts: xxx - significant negative effect; xx - possible negative effects; x - minimal negative effect, if any; 0 - no noticeable effect expected. * These estimates assume zero displacement of fishing activity and hence are likely to overestimate the costs.

Table 7b. Distribution of Quantified Economic Costs for Commercial Fisheries and Fish Processors (assuming zero displacement of fishing activity) - Location, Age and Gender								[ SSH]
Sector/Impact	Location			Age			Gender
Sector/Impact	Region	Ports*	Rural, Urban, Coastal or Island	Children	Working Age	Pensionable Age	Male	Female
Commercial Fisheries Reduction in landed value, GVA and employment	xx North-East North North-West	xx Largest employment impacts in: Fraserburgh (51%), Kirkwall (15%), Lochinver (12%)	xx Coastal and Island Urban and Rural	xxx Potentially significant negative effect if parent loses job/becomes unemployed.	xxx Potentially significant negative effect if individuals lose job/become unemployed	xx Potential negative effect if retirees own affected vessels or live in households affected by unemployment.	xxx 0-11 job losses Potentially significant negative effect on individuals that lose job/become unemployed.	xxx Potentially significant negative effect if member of household loses job/ becomes unemployed.
Fish Processors Reduction in local landings at landing ports	xx North-West North-East North	xx Kinlochbervie Ullapool Peterhead Scrabster Lochinver Fraserburgh	xx Coastal Urban and Rural	xx	xx	xx	0	xx
Impacts: xxx - significant negative effect; xx - possible negative effects; x - minimal negative effect, if any; 0 - no noticeable effect expected. * Based on value of landings by home port affected under intermediate scenario.

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								[ SSH]
Sector/Impact	Fishing Groups		Income Groups			Social Groups
Sector/Impact	Vessel Category <15m >15m*	Gear Types/Sector*	10% Most Deprived	Middle 80%	10% Most Affluent	Crofters	Ethnic minorities	With Disability or Long-term Sick
Commercial Fisheries Reduction in landed value, GVA and employment	Lower: N/A Upper: <15m (may be over-estimate)	Whitefish trawls	xx	xx	x Information only available on average incomes not the distribution of income. Therefore, not clear whether this group will be affected.	0	No breakdown of fisherman employment by ethnic origin.	0 No employment data but unlikely to be employed in fisheries.
Fish Processors Reduction in local landings at landing ports		Shellfish: xx Demersal: xxx Pelagic: 0	xx	xx	0	0	No breakdown of fisherman employment by ethnic origin.	0 No employment data but unlikely to be employed in fisheries.
Impacts: xxx - significant negative effect; xx - possible negative effects; x - minimal negative effect, if any; 0 - no noticeable effect expected. * Based on costs to gear types/sectors and vessel categories affected under the intermediate scenario.

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					[ SSH]
Feature Name	Representation	Replication	Linkages	Geographic Range and Variation	Resilience
Burrowed mud	Provides representation for the seapens and burrowing megafauna type of burrowed mud in OSPAR Region V at the northern extent of its geographical range on the Hebridean slope.	Makes a contribution to one of at least two recommended areas of this type of burrowed mud in OSPAR Region V in Scotland's seas.	Not currently understood for burrowed mud.	Provides representation at the northern extent of its range on the continental slope and off the shelf in OSPAR Region V in Scotland's seas.	Burrowed mud is considered to be Threatened and/or Declining by the OSPAR Commission in OSPAR Region V so the MPA is expected to help increase resilience for the feature.
Offshore deep sea muds	Provides representation for Atlantic-influenced offshore deep sea mud habitats on the slope in OSPAR Region V.	Represents one of at least two examples of slope Atlantic-influenced offshore deep sea mud habitats recommended for protection in OSPAR Region V.	Not currently understood for offshore deep sea muds.	Provides representation of Atlantic influenced offshore deep sea muds at the northern extent of their range in OSPAR Region V.	Offshore deep sea muds are fairly widely recorded across offshore waters in Scotland's seas.
Offshore subtidal sands and gravels	Provides representation for Atlantic-influenced offshore subtidal sand and gravel habitats predominantly on the slope in OSPAR Region V, but also to a small extent on the shelf in OSPAR Region III.	It represents one of at least two recommended examples of Atlantic influenced slope and shelf offshore, subtidal sand and gravel habitats to be protected in OSPAR Regions V and III respectively.	Not currently understood for offshore subtidal sands and gravels.	Provides representation at the northern extent of its range on the continental slope and on the shelf in OSPAR Regions V and III respectively in Scotland's seas.	Offshore subtidal sands and gravels are fairly widely recorded across offshore waters in Scotland's seas.
Continental slope	The possible MPA provides representation for one of two recommended areas of the Scottish continental slope to be included within the MPA network.	The Hebridean slope is considered ecologically and hydrographically distinct to the Faroe-Shetland Channel slope and so the recommendation is for at least one example of each area of the slope to be included.	Not currently understood for the continental slope.	The Hebridean slope is considered ecologically and hydrographically distinct to the Faroe-Shetland Channel slope. This possible MPA represents one example of the Hebridean slope.	The continental slope occurs between Scotland's shelf and off-shelf environment.
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 ^[31]								[ SSH]
Services	Relevance to Site	Baseline Level	Estimated Impacts of Designation			Value Weighting	Scale of Benefits	Confidence
Services	Relevance to Site	Baseline Level	Lower	Intermediate	Upper	Value Weighting	Scale of Benefits	Confidence
Fish for human consumption	Moderate. Habitats make contribution to food webs.	Stocks not at MSY	Nil	Low - Moderate, promotes stocks in medium /long term. Features provide moderate level of supporting services to support recovery		High - fishing grounds are of high value	Nil - Moderate	Moderate
Fish for non-human consumption	Moderate. Habitats make contribution to food webs.	Stocks reduced from potential maximum	Nil			High - fishing grounds are of high value	Nil - Moderate	Moderate
Gas and climate regulation	Nil - Low	Nil - Low	Nil, or at best a very low level of protection of parts of ecosystem providing these services			Low	Nil - Low	High
Natural hazard protection	Nil - Low	Nil - Low				Low	Nil - Low	High
Regulation of pollution	Nil - Low	Nil - Low				Low	Nil - Low	High
Non-use value of natural environment	Low - Moderate	Low - Moderate	Nil	Low	Low - Moderate	Low - Moderate	Nil - Moderate	Low
Recreation	Minimal	Minimal	Nil	Nil	Nil	Minimal	Minimal	Moderate
Research and Education	Minimal - Low	Minimal	Nil	Low	Low	Low	Low	Low
Total value of changes in ecosystem services			Fisheries likely to drive benefits from scenarios ranging from low to moderate benefits.				Low - Moderate	Low

Human Activities which Occur within the Proposed MPA Southwest Sula Sgeir and Hebridean Slope

Fishing Activities which Occur within the Proposed MPA Southwest Sula Sgeir and Hebridean Slope

Contact

The Marine Environment Team

There is a problem

Thanks for your feedback

Was this helpful?

Yes

Your comments

Your feedback helps us to improve this website. Do not give any personal information because we cannot reply to you directly.

Choose a reason for your feedback

Your comments

Your feedback helps us to improve this website. Do not give any personal information because we cannot reply to you directly.

Yes, but

Choose a reason for your feedback

Your comments

Your feedback helps us to improve this website. Do not give any personal information because we cannot reply to you directly.

Information

South-west Sula Sgeir & Hebridean Slope ( SSH)

Contact

There is a problem