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

Loch Sunart ( LSU)

Site Area (km ²): 55

Site Summary

Table 1. Summary of Proposed Protected Features, Data Confidence and Conservation Objectives					[ LSU]
Proposed protected features
Biodiversity Features Flame shell beds, northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata, serpulid aggregations. Geodiversity Features None. Site Description The Loch Sunart MPA proposal mirrors that of the existing SAC, also encompassing Loch Teacuis. Loch Sunart is located on the west coast of Scotland, opening into the Sound of Mull.
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
Flame shell beds	*Lower: 0.25 Intermediate: 4.16 Upper: 27.05	Yes (Seasearch surveys, 1988, 1993, 1995)	Partial	Not known	Conserve
Northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata	Lower: 0.34 Intermediate: 0.88 Upper: 27.16	Yes ( MNCR sublittoral survey, 1989; MCS & JNCC survey, 1997)	Yes	Not known	Conserve
Serpulid aggregations	Lower: 0.20 Intermediate: 0.20 Upper: 0.20	Yes (2006 survey work)	Yes	Not known	Conserve
Geodiversity Features
N/A
Key: * Estimated area based on best available data References: Area of Feature: GeMs Confidence in feature presence and extent: SNH (2012f)

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)			[ LSU]
Human Activity	Cost Impact on Activity
Human Activity	Lower Estimate (£Million)	Intermediate Estimate (£Million)	Upper Estimate (£Million)
Quantified Economic Costs (Discounted)
Aquaculture (Finfish)	0.002	0.009	0.009
Aquaculture (Shellfish)	See national costs	See national costs	See national costs
Commercial Fisheries*	0.000	0.009	0.028
Military	See national costs	See national costs	See national costs
Ports and Harbours	0.000	0.000	0.005
Total Quantified Economic Costs	0.002	0.018	0.042
Non-Quantified Economic Costs
Aquaculture (Finfish)	Possible costs associated with potential future development; and Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment	Possible costs associated with potential future development; and Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment	Possible costs associated with potential future development; and Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment
Aquaculture (Shellfish)	Possible costs associated with potential future development; and Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment	Possible costs associated with potential future development; and Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment	Possible costs associated with potential future development; and Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment
Commercial Fisheries	Displacement impacts.	Displacement impacts.	Displacement impacts.
Military	See national assessment.	See national assessment.	See national assessment.
Ports and Harbours	None.	None.	Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment.
Recreational Boating	Cost of anchorage/mooring relocation.	Cost of anchorage/mooring relocation.	Cost of anchorage/mooring relocation.
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)			[ LSU]
Description	Public Sector Costs
Description	Lower Estimate (£Million)	Intermediate Estimate (£Million)	Upper Estimate (£Million)
Quantified Public Sector Costs (Discounted)
Preparation of Marine Management Schemes	0.024	0.024	0.024
Preparation of Statutory Instruments	0.004	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	None*	None*	<0.001*
Total Quantified Public Sector Costs	0.028	0.028	0.028
Non-Quantified Public Sector Costs
None identified.
* Regulatory and advisory costs of finfish and shellfish aquaculture assessed at national level.

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)										[ LSU]
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: 0 jobs Upper: 0 jobs	West North West	Oban Mallaig	Impacts concentrated in urban and rural coastal areas	N/A	N/A	No Impact.	No breakdown of fisherman employment by ethnic origin.	No employment data but 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)		[ LSU]
Benefit	Description
Ecosystem Services Benefits (Moderate and High Benefits)	Relevance	Scale of Benefits
Non-use value of natural environment	Moderate - High. Variety of protected features and contribution of the site to MPA network has non-use values.	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

[ LSU]

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

Flame shell beds

L/I/U

L/I/U

L/I/U

L/I/U

L/I/U

Northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata

L/ I/U

L/I/U

L/I/U

L/I/U

Serpulid aggregations

L/I/U

L/I/U

L/I/U

L/I/U

Geodiversity Features

N/A

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. Aquaculture (Finfish)			[ LSU]
There are three finfish farms (Camas Glas, Glencripesdale and Invasion Bay) within the boundary of the LSU proposed MPA and all directly overlap with the Flame Shell Bed feature under the upper scenario only. Camas Glas and Invasion Bay are within 1km of this feature under the intermediate and upper scenarios and Glencripesdale is within 1km of the feature under the upper scenario only. Camas Glas and Glencripesdale both directly overlap with the Northern Feather star aggregations on mixed substrata under the upper scenario. Camas Glas is within 1km of the feature under the intermediate and upper scenarios and Glencripesdale is within 1km of the feature under the upper scenario. There is no public information on potential future development within the proposed MPA. In the absence of infomation on potential future developments, the assessment has focused on the costs associated with obtaining new CAR licences. A national assessment of the costs of obtaining planning permission for new developments is provided separately.
Economic Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA
	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	Additional assessment costs for new CAR licence applications to assess impacts to MPA features.	Additional assessment costs for new CAR licence applications to assess impacts to MPA features; and Additional survey costs incurred once every 10 years (2019 & 2029) to inform new CAR licence applications.	Additional assessment costs for new CAR licence applications to assess impacts to MPA features; and Additional survey costs incurred once every 10 years (2019 & 2029) to inform new CAR licence applications.
Description of one-off costs	Additional assessment costs for CAR licence once every 10 years (2019, 2029) of £500 per CAR licence application.	Additional assessment costs for CAR licence once every 10 years (2019, 2029) of £500 per CAR licence application; and Additional baseline visual survey costs -£1.6k per CAR licence application	Additional assessment costs for CAR licence once every 10 years (2019, 2029) of £500 per CAR licence application; and Additional baseline visual survey costs -£1.6k per CAR licence application
Description of recurring costs	None	None	None
Description of non-quantified costs	Possible costs associated with potential future development. A national assessment of additional assessment and survey costs for potential future development is provided separately. Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment	Possible costs associated with potential future development. A national assessment of additional assessment and survey costs for potential future development is provided separately. Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment	Possible costs associated with potential future development. A national assessment of additional assessment and survey costs for potential future development is provided separately. Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment
Quantified Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA (£Million)
Total costs (2014-2033)	0.003	0.013	0.013
Average annual costs	<0.001	0.001	0.001
Present value of total costs (2014-2033)	0.002	0.009	0.009
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%.

Table 4b. Aquaculture (Shellfish)			[ LSU]
There are four shellfish aquaculture sites (Camas Inas, Liddesdale, Rhuda Aird Beithe and Site 1) within the boundary of the LSU proposed MPA. All sites directly overlap with the Flame Shell Bed feature under the upper scenario. The Flame Shell Bed is also within the 1km buffer in the intermediate scenario for Camas Inas, Liddesdale, and Site and within the 1km buffer for Rhuda Aird Beithe under all scenarios. Camas Inas, Rhuda Aird Beithe and Site 1 directly overlap with the Northern Feather star aggregations on mixed substrata under the upper scenario. There is no public information on potential future development within the proposed MPA. In the absence of infomation on potential future developments, no site specific assessment has been possible. A national assessment of the costs of obtaining planning permission for new developments is provided separately.
Economic Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA
	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	N/A	N/A	N/A
Description of one-off costs	N/A	N/A	N/A
Description of recurring costs	N/A	N/A	N/A
Description of non-quantified costs	Possible costs associated with potential future development. A national assessment of additional assessment and survey costs for potential future development is provided separately; and Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment.	Possible costs associated with potential future development. A national assessment of additional assessment and survey costs for potential future development is provided separately; and Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment.	Possible costs associated with potential future development. A national assessment of additional assessment and survey costs for potential future development is provided separately; and Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment.
Quantified Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA (£Million)
Total costs (2014-2033)	See national costs	See national costs	See national costs
Average annual costs	See national costs	See national costs	See national costs
Present value of total costs (2014-2033)	See national costs	See national costs	See national costs
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%.

Table 4c. Commercial Fisheries (assuming zero displacement of fishing activity)			[ LSU]
According to VMS-based estimates and ICES rectangle landings statistics, Nephrops trawls and dredges (over-15m) and pots, nephrops trawls, hand fishing and other gears (under-15m vessels) operate within the LSU proposed MPA. The value of landings from the LSU area was £2,690 (over-15m vessels) and £18,300 (under-15m vessels, indicated from ICES rectangle landings data) (annual average for 2007-2011, 2012 prices). Landings from the over-15m vessels were predominantly into Oban (65%), Mallaig (11%), Ardnamurchan (10%) and Tobermory (8%). For the over-15m fleet, there was sparse activity by dredgers and nephrops trawlers in the west and central part of the proposed MPA across areas of flame shell beds and northern feather star aggregations. Provisional ScotMap data indicate that the annual average earnings from the LSU proposed MPA was £41,100, with over 80% from Nephrops pots. Pots are only affected in the Upper Scenario within Loch Teacuis, and ScotMap data indicate that this area is not intensively fished by pots. The coverage for ScotMap interviews in the region was 63.8% (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). Therefore the ScotMap estimate is likely to under-represent the value of fishing by under-15m vessels, and the spatial representation of the value of fishing is less robust than in regions where coverage is higher. VMS data indicate that there are no non- UK vessels fishing within the LSU 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 SNH recommendations. 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	Closure to mobile bottom-contact gear (whitefish, nephrops and other trawls and seines, beam trawls and dredges) across serpulid aggregations and flame shell beds.	Reduce mobile bottom-contact gear (whitefish, nephrops and other trawls and seines, beam trawls and dredges) pressure by 25% across the MPA area.	Closure to mobile bottom-contact gears (whitefish, nephrops and other trawls and seines, beam trawls and dredges) across full extent of MPA; and Closure to nets, lines and pots across Loch Teacuis (for serpulid aggregations).
Description of one-off costs	None.	None.	None.
Description of recurring costs	Loss of >15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices): None. Loss of <15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices): Whitefish trawls (<0.001); Nephrops trawls (<0.001); Other trawls (<0.001); Dredges (<0.001).	Loss of >15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices): Nephrops trawls (<0.001); Dredges (<0.001). Loss of <15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices): Whitefish trawls (<0.001); Nephrops trawls (0.001); Other trawls (<0.001); Dredges (<0.001).	Loss of >15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices): Nephrops trawls (0.001); Dredges (0.001). Loss of <15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices): Whitefish trawls (<0.001); Nephrops trawls (0.003); Other trawls (<0.001); Dredges (<0.001); Nets (<0.001); Pots (0.001).
Description of non-quantified costs	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.	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.	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	0.027	0.121
Average annual costs	<0.001	0.001	0.006
Present value of total costs (2014-2033)	0.000	0.020	0.089
Economic Impacts (£Million)
Total change in GVA (2014-2033)	0.000	0.013	0.038
Average annual change to GVA	0.000	0.001	0.002
Present value of total change in GVA (2014-2033)	0.000	0.009	0.028
Direct and Indirect reduction in Employment	0.0 jobs	0.0 jobs	0.1 jobs
* Due to data confidentiality, the value of catches from the affected gear types has been summed together with other gear types that are not expected to be impacted by management measures. The cost impact is therefore an overestimate of the actual expected impact from the proposed management measures. 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.

Table 4d. Military			[ LSU]
Two military practice areas (Staffa (X5627) and one submarine exercise area) overlap with the LSU proposed MPA. The military practice area Staffa (X5627) overlaps with flame shell beds (all scenarios), northern feather star (all scenarios) and serpulid aggregations (all scenarios). The submarine exercise area overlaps with 'flame shell beds' (all scenarios) and 'northern feather star' (all scenarios). The features and associated habitats which overlap with military activities have not been described as vulnerable to MoD activities in this proposed MPA. 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 MPAs. 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 MPAs. However, these costs will be incurred at national level and hence no site-specific cost assessments have been made.
Economic Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA
	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	See National Assessment.	See National Assessment.	See National Assessment.
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)	See national costs	See national costs	See national costs
Average annual costs	See national costs	See national costs	See national costs
Present value of total costs (2014-2033)	See national costs	See national costs	See national costs
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%.

Table 4e. Ports and Harbours			LSU
There is one port/harbour (Salen) within the LSU proposed MPA boundary. Salen overlaps with the MPA feature flame shell beds under the upper scenario only. Therefore, management costs may be incurred under the assumption that small ports/harbours will undergo one new development within the relevant time frame (2014-2033), assumed for the year 2024.
Economic Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA
	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	None.	None.	Additional licensing costs for small port developments (up to 1 in total).
Description of one-off costs	None.	None.	Additional assessment costs for licence application - £6.75k per licence application. Application estimated for submission in 2024 (Salen).
Description of recurring costs	None.	None.	None.
Description of non-quantified costs	None.	None.	Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment.
Quantified Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA (£Million)
Total costs (2014-2033)	0.000	0.000	0.007
Average annual costs	0.000	0.000	0.000
Present value of total costs (2014-2033)	0.000	0.000	0.005
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%.

Table 4f. Recreational Boating			[ LSU]
One medium traffic cruising route for recreational boating intersects the LSU MPA proposal boundary, although vessels transiting along cruising routes are not assessed as requiring any additional management measures. Under the upper scenario there are five recreational boating anchorages within the MPA proposal that overlap with features proposed for protection. Four of the anchorages (and associated 100m buffer zones) overlap with feature extents for flame shell beds. The fifth anchorage overlaps with northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata. A further 65 Crown Estate mooring points are present in the proposed MPA under the upper scenario that overlap with flame shell beds, serpulid aggregations and northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata. Five larger moorings areas owned by The Crown Estate are also present and two additional mooring points lie within one of them, although it is expected that this is an underestimate and additional mooring points are present within the areas that are not represented by the data. Under the intermediate and lower scenarios, SNH have identified one recreational anchorage within Loch Teacius that overlaps with potential habitat for Serpulid growth, and one mooring area owned by The Crown Estate that overlaps with one point record of flame shell beds.
Economic Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA
	Lower Estimate	Intermediate Estimate	Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts	Remove anchorage from the head of Loch Teacius and relocate elsewhere out of Loch Teacius. Whilst there is no overlap with Serpulid aggregations this feature has high sensitivity to the pressures associated with anchoring and anchorage may potentially inhibit further spatial growth of the habitat. Additionally, any anchoring elsewhere in the loch has the potential to impact this feature and result in the conservation objectives for the feature not being achieved. If not possible to relocate away from features, relocate to more representative area; and Relocate mooring area (after confirmation of presence by TCE) away from highly sensitive flame shell beds.	Remove anchorage from the head of Loch Teacius and relocate elsewhere out of Loch Teacius. Whilst there is no overlap with Serpulid aggregations this feature has high sensitivity to the pressures associated with anchoring and anchorage may potentially inhibit further spatial growth of the habitat. Additionally, any anchoring elsewhere in the loch has the potential to impact this feature and result in the conservation objectives for the feature not being achieved. If not possible to relocate away from features, relocate to more representative area; and Relocate mooring area (after confirmation of presence by TCE) away from highly sensitive flame shell beds.	Relocate all anchorages/moorings away from all features with a high or medium sensitivity to surface abrasion pressure associated with anchoring: flame shell beds; northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata; serpulid aggregations. If not possible to relocate away from features, relocate to less sensitive or more representative area.
Description of one-off costs	None.	None.	None.
Description of recurring costs	None.	None.	None.
Description of non-quantified costs	Cost of anchorage/mooring relocation.	Cost of anchorage/mooring relocation.	Cost of anchorage/mooring relocation.

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				[ LSU]
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 West. 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 and diving.	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 - Scuba Diving	There are six dive locations within the LSU proposed MPA, three scenic boat dive sites ( Risga pinnacle, Sligneach Beag and Sligneach Mhor) and three shore dive locations (Camas Torsa, Laudale Pier, Laudale Slip and Scot's Pine Bay). All six dive locations overlap with Flame Shell Beds and Northern Feature star aggregations on mixed substrata under the upper scenario. Risga pinnacle overlaps with Flame Shell Beds under both the upper and intermediate scenarios. No management restrictions upon this activity are required.	The added protection offered by an MPA designation and management measures placed upon sector activities may increase the aesthetic attraction of the dive sites through an improved marine ecosystem and a reduction in degradation to the wreck sites.	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). LSU 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	[ LSU]
Activity	Description
None identified.

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					[ LSU]
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: <£0.01m Upper: <£0.01m Annual Average Loss in GVA (direct and indirect): Lower: £0.00m Intermediate: <£0.01m Upper: <£0.01m	Culture and heritage - impact on traditions from loss of fishing grounds.		Health: x (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: 0.0 jobs Upper: 0.1 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.
	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 Culture and heritage - change in traditional fishing patterns/ activities.		x
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								[ LSU]
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	x West North-West	x Largest employment impacts in: Oban (95%), Mallaig (5%)	x Coastal Rural and Urban	0	0	xx Potential negative effect if retirees own affected vessels or live in households affected by unemployment.	0	0
Fish Processors Reduction in local landings at landing ports	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0
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								[ LSU]
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	N/A	N/A	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: xxx Demersal: x Pelagic: 0	0	0	0	0	0	0
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					[ LSU]
Feature Name	Representation	Replication	Linkages	Geographic Range and Variation	Resilience
Flame shell beds	Provides representation of the best and most extensive example of flame shell beds in OSPAR Region III.	Represents one of five recommended areas for flame shell beds in OSPAR Region III.	Not currently understood for flame shell beds.	All records of flame shell beds are from OSPAR Region III. The recommended MPA areas would to some extent reflect the geographic range of flame shell beds in Scottish seas.	Not listed by OSPAR as threatened and/or declining, although there is evidence of decline. The MPA may increase resilience.
Northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata	Provides representation of northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata in OSPAR Region III.	Represents one of three recommended areas for northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata in OSPAR Region III.	Not currently understood for Northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata.	All records of Northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata are from OSPAR Region III.
Serpulid aggregations	No information available.
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 ^[5]								[ LSU]
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	Minimal	Low. Some recovery of benthic species possible.		Moderate. Site fishing grounds are valuable	Minimal - Low	Moderate
Fish for non-human consumption	Moderate. Habitats make contribution to food webs.	Stocks reduced from potential maximum	Minimal	Low. Some recovery of benthic species possible.		Moderate. Site fishing grounds are valuable	Minimal - Low	Moderate
Gas and climate regulation	Nil - Low	Nil - Low	Nil	Nil	Low	Moderate	Nil	High
Natural hazard protection	Low	Low	Nil, won't affect stability of coastline			Low	Nil	High
Regulation of pollution	Low	Low	Nil	Minimal - Low, maintained by protecting seabed features		Low - Moderate, for recreational use of waters	Nil - Low	High
Non-use value of natural environment	Moderate - High, protected features, and contribution of the site to MPA network, have non-use value.	Non-use value of the site may decline	Nil, no change in key characteristics of site	Low - protection of key characteristics of site from minor decline	Moderate - protection of key characteristics of site from decline, and/or allowing some recovery of values	Moderate	Nil - Moderate	Low
Recreation	Moderate	7 active dive sites, Sea angling	Nil	Low - slightly higher biodiversity encountered by divers		Moderate	Low	Moderate
Research and Education	Moderate	Biological and geological features have research value but there are substitutes	Nil, no change in key characteristics of site	Low - protection of key characteristics of site from decline, improving future research opportunities		Low	Nil - Low	Low
Total value of changes in ecosystem services			Low for lower scenario, moderate for upper scenarios				Low - Moderate	Low

Human Activities which Occur within the Proposed MPA Loch Sunart

Fishing Activities which Occur within the Proposed MPA Loch Sunart

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

Loch Sunart ( LSU)

Contact

There is a problem