Fisheries management measures within Scottish Offshore Marine Protected Areas (MPAs): consultation

Annex B Impact Assessment – High level summary of impacts

Across the various impact assessments, the overall impacts of measures across all sites are assessed, as well as the potential impacts for each individual site.

Sixteen of the sites have two proposed fisheries management options. These are ‘Option 1’ and ‘Option 2’, with Option 1 referring to zonal restrictions of fishing with specified gear, and Option 2 for full site exclusions of fishing with specified gear. Five sites have a single option proposed, which is a full site exclusion to fishing with specified gears.

Socio-economic effects of the proposed management measures

Table 4 shows the key estimated overall socio-economic impacts which have been calculated for the two proposed management options. Table 4 outlines the estimated overall impacts for various socio-economic outputs from each proposed fisheries management option. The full assessment on socio-economic impacts is available within the SEIA document. The range presented reflects the possibility of vessels who currently use the areas moving their fishing activity elsewhere. This captures the additional costs such as fuel consumption and catch variability. The lowest value is where the fishing that is restricted by the measures is able to continue nearby (either elsewhere within the site, or within the same ICES rectangle). The highest value is the impact if the fishing activity cannot take place elsewhere and thus cannot continue in any capacity and the landings are subsequently lost. In reality, the level of impact is likely to fall somewhere within the range.

*gross value of landings by Scottish vessels £582 million in 2019 **Total sea-fishing industry headcount 4,886 in 2019

Ecosystem service socio-economic benefits and costs could arise on-site or off-site. On-site benefits are the result of protection of features through the proposed management measures. Off-site benefits include spill-over effects, where particular species (including commercial fish or shellfish species, and other protected biodiversity) have healthier populations inside the site, and this supports movement of individuals to areas outside the site. The extent of this effect depends, amongst other things, on the size of site, impact of management measures and mobility and lifecycles of the species concerned.

Ecosystem service costs that could arise on-site, for example if alternative fishing activities (using different gears), enter areas where restrictions are introduced on existing fishing activities. Costs could also arise off-site – where a significant amount of fishing activity is expected to be displaced from the site to other areas there could be a negative effect.

Ecosystem services are assessed as far as possible, and discussed further within the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment.

Environmental effects of the proposed management measures

The potential environmental impacts arising from the measures have also been assessed. This looked at the direct benefits within the site, spill over benefits outwith the site, and also the potential adverse effects on the environment as a whole through displacement effects (effects of the restricted fishing activity relocating), and impacts from gear types not subject to measures subsequently occurring within the site.

The results of the SEA provide a descriptor and a scale of the environmental effects of the measures for each site. The descriptors are categorised as neutral, beneficial, or adverse. The scale of the effect is categorised as major, moderate, minor, negligible, or none.

When taking into account of the balance of beneficial and adverse environmental effects, the overall effects of Option 1 across the suite of sites were:

• None: 1 site
• Negligible Neutral: 3 sites
• Minor Beneficial: 10 sites
• Moderate Beneficial: 5 sites
• Major Beneficial: 2 sites

For Option 2 the overall environmental effects were:

• None: 1 site
• Negligible Neutral: 3 sites
• Minor Beneficial: 10 sites
• Moderate Beneficial: 6 sites
• Major Beneficial: 1 sites

For some sites, where a low (none/negligible neutral) effect is identified, this may be due to low levels of fishing activity occurring within the site during the assessment period (2015-2019). However it is considered that the fisheries management measures under either option are likely to result in overarching benefits to biodiversity. This is likely to occur through reducing damaging fishing pressures to sensitive habitats and species, and providing the opportunity for spill-over benefits. However, there is also potential for adverse effects on biodiversity from displacement of commercial fishing activities and the potential for use of other gear types that are not targeted by the management measures. The overall cumulative environmental impact at the displacement locations, however, is not considered to be significant.

Further detail on the potential environmental effects that are considered to occur as a result of the proposed management measures for each site under both options are set out with the supporting evidence base in Tables C1 to C21 in Appendix C of the Socio-Economic Impact Assessment document.