Sandeel fishing consultation: strategic environmental assessment - draft environmental report

3. Approach to the Assessment

3.1 Purpose of the assessment

3.1.1 The purpose of this SEA is to assess the potential for likely significant environmental effects to arise from the extension of the existing sandeel closure in Sandeel Area 4 to all Scottish waters. This will allow corresponding mitigation measures to be identified where necessary and highlight opportunities for enhancement in cases where beneficial effects are likely.

3.2 Scope of the proposals

3.2.1 It is not considered within the scope of this SEA to evaluate the evidence base underlying the decision to extend the existing sandeel closure in Sandeel Area 4 to all Scottish waters. This evidence base is presented in the report 'Review of Scientific Evidence on the Potential Effects of Sandeel Fisheries Management on the Marine Environment' and summarised in the consultation document which was published as part of the consultation package.

3.2.2 The potential economic and social impacts that may result from the implementation of the proposals do not form part of the scope of this SEA. A Business and Regulatory Impact Assessment (BRIA) will also be undertaken to assess the economic impacts of this proposal.

3.3 Scope of the assessment

3.3.1 The scope of any potentially significant environmental effects is largely limited to the beneficial effects for species that fall within the proposed closure area or regularly use this area; spill-over benefits beyond area boundaries; and potential adverse effects outside the proposed closure area as a result of the displacement of fishing activity and the intensification of activity in areas where sandeel fishing already occurs.

3.3.2 An initial review of the related assessment work (see Section 3.5) suggests that potentially significant environmental effects are likely to fall under the SEA topic of Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna. This could also include relevant aspects of Water quality, resources, and ecological status (the status of marine resources i.e. the sandeel stock and other marine fish stocks). The rationale for scoping in and out each of the SEA topics is provided in Table 1.

Table 1: Proposed scoping in/out of SEA topics.

Reasons for inclusion/exclusion

Biodiversity, flora and fauna

• In
• The proposals are considered to be beneficial to sandeel stocks, seabirds, predatory fish and marine mammals and therefore this topic will be scoped in.

Population

• Out
• The proposal would not result in significant increases and/or decreases in human population numbers, changes to in- or out-migration, etc. These topics are scoped out of the SEA. Social and economic effects will be considered by the BRIA.

Human health

• Out
• The proposal would not result in any significant human health issues. This topic is scoped out of the SEA.

Soil, geology and hydrodynamic processes

• Out
• The proposals are unlikely to have a significant impact on soil, geology, or hydrodynamic processes. Sandeel fishing is focussed on sandy grounds with a moderate current so there has never been concern about sediment disturbance from sandeel trawls. This topic has therefore been scoped out of the SEA.

Water quality, resources, ecological status

• In
• The proposal may have an impact on resources (fish stocks) therefore this topic will be scoped in.

Air

• Out
• The proposal would be unlikely to result in emissions to air, other than those from vessel use. It is unlikely that the extension would make a significant difference to existing vessel emissions. This fishery currently takes place in offshore waters and therefore doesn't impact Scottish air quality. Any displacement of vessels caused by closing all Scottish waters would move vessels further from Scotland therefore the proposed extension will have no positive or negative impact on Scottish air quality. This topic is scoped out of the SEA.

Climatic factors

• Out
• The proposal is unlikely to result in significant increased/ decreased emissions of greenhouse gases although a change in fishing effort may result in a change in vessel emissions. The UK has not allocated sandeel quota since 2021 therefore no UK vessels hold quota for sandeel. The only vessels that currently fish in the area are Danish. Extending the closure will therefore have no impact on Scottish carbon emissions. Although there may be an impact on emissions from Danish vessels as a result of displacement to other grounds, this is a trans-boundary issue that is disproportionate to a SEA. As Scottish sandeel fishing grounds are furthest geographically from Denmark any affect would be a reduction in emissions. Any reduction in their emissions is not likely to be significant. This is scoped out of the SEA.

Material assets

• Out
• The proposal will not intrinsically impact built assets or natural assets as defined in SEPA guidance.

Cultural heritage

• Out
• Fishing practices will remain largely unchanged at the methodological level. Any impacts to cultural heritage will remain as before. Depending on future spatial measures, there may be less impact in some areas (due to closures) and more in others (due to displacement) but for the purposes of the extension of existing closure in sandeel area 4 to all Scottish waters assessment this can be scoped out.

Landscape/ seascape

• Out
• The proposal is unlikely to have effects on landscape and/or seascape over or below what effects the industry currently has. These issues are therefore scoped out of the SEA.

3.4 Reasonable alternatives

3.4.1 The SEA has identified some reasonable alternatives to the proposals to close fishing for sandeel in all Scottish waters that might achieve the same wider environmental benefits. These alternatives include smaller closures and alternative measures to support the wider ecosystem and are summarised in Table 2.

Table 2: Alterative measures to achieve wider environmental benefits.

Option 0: Do nothing.

• Objectives of the proposed closure will not be met.

Option 1: Complete closure of all Scottish waters to sandeel fishing (preferred option).

• To achieve all objectives of the proposed closure.

Option 2: Extension of existing closure to all of sandeel management area 4 only.

• To achieve all objectives of the proposed closure.

Option 3: Seasonal closure of the sandeel fishery.

• To achieve all objectives of the proposed closure.

Option 4: Voluntary closure of the sandeel fishery

• To achieve all objectives of the proposed closure.

3.5 Assessment methodology

3.5.1 The SEA has presented a high level and qualitative account of the potential environmental effects that might be expected to arise from the proposal. The SEA has also assessed the potential effects that could arise from the measures that have been developed as reasonable alternatives (see Section 3.4).

3.5.2 The assessment has been informed by a desk-based review of available information on the existing environment within the current sandeel closed area within Sandeel Area 4 , and in wider Scottish waters to which we propose to extend the closure (environmental baseline). This baseline review is presented in Section 4.

3.5.3 The assessment has then considered the sensitivity (tolerance/recoverability) of sandeel and sandeel-dependent species identified as part of the baseline review to the removal of fishing pressure as a result of the proposed measure, and to measures outlined as reasonable alternatives. This assessment is based on the latest understanding of the relative impact of fishing pressure on sandeel in comparison to other population drivers; the dependence of identified species on sandeel; the distribution of identified species in relation to sandeel, and the extent of other pressures faced by each identified species.

3.5.4 For the purpose of this assessment, the indicative criteria set out in Table 3 were used to help determine the type (beneficial or adverse) and magnitude (negligible, very minor, minor, moderate or major) of potential effects that may result from the proposed measure. The potential for future effects has also been identified, however the magnitude of potential future effects was impossible to predict based on available information.

Table 3: Indicative criteria of potential effects.

Type: Adverse/Beneficial

Magnitude: Major

Indicative criteria:

• Large spatial scale (size/number);
• Long-term (duration/frequency);
• High sensitivity to management measure; and/or
• Low tolerance/reversibility of features.

Magnitude: Moderate

Indicative criteria:

• Medium spatial scale;
• Medium-term;
• Moderate sensitivity to management measure; and/or
• Moderate tolerance/reversibility of features.

Magnitude: Minor

Indicative criteria:

• Small spatial scale;
• Short-term;
• Low sensitivity to management measure; and/or
• High tolerance/reversibility of features.

Magnitude: Negligible

Indicative criteria:

• There is likely to be a change, but the level will be indiscernible from baseline conditions.

Type: Neutral

Magnitude: None

Indicative criteria:

• No change from baseline conditions.

3.5.5 The potential implications of the proposed measures were then assessed against the SEA objectives. The SEA objectives that we applied in the assessment are presented in Table 4.

Table 4: SEA objectives.

SEA Topic: Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna

• To safeguard and enhance marine and coastal ecosystems, including species, habitats and their interactions;

• To maintain or work towards achieving 'Good Environmental Status' for biodiversity;
• To maintain or work towards achieving 'Good Environmental Status' for relevant commercial fish;
• To protect and conserve the ecosystems and the biological diversity of UK territorial seas;

• To deliver sustainable management of fisheries that takes account of the protection of biodiversity and healthy functioning marine ecosystems.

SEA Topic: Water quality, resources, ecological status

• See Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna