Scottish Marine Protected Areas (MPA): monitoring strategy

6. What monitoring or evidence gathering is required?

To meet our monitoring and reporting obligations, clear quantifiable objectives should be established. In most cases, monitoring will be undertaken to meet one or more of the following objectives:

• To determine the condition of the protected features;
• To identify any changes in the features over time;
• To assess whether implemented management measures are effective in meeting their objectives.

Meeting these objectives requires information on human activities (and their associated pressures) taking place within and adjacent to MPAs, as well as information on the protected features. The results of monitoring will inform an adaptive approach to MPA management.

6.1 Pressure(s) monitoring

Where possible, monitoring should cover the pressures exerted on MPA features and the biological impact of these pressures to determine whether current management is effective. A summary of the key pressures for the different MPA feature groups is provided in Table 2 with additional information in Annex 1.

A risk-based approach to management of Scottish MPAs is used to ensure that activities are sustainable. An assessment of MPA feature sensitivity to pressure is provided in the FEAST portal (FEature, Activity, Sensitivity Tool). FEAST also details the links between human activities and pressures for Scottish waters. Sensitivity assessments for seabed habitats have recently been completed and are available on the MarLIN website. A working group is progressing updates to FEAST to ensure coverage of all MPA network features in the future.

Many pressures and related activities are difficult to monitor systematically. Relevant information needs to be gleaned through marine planning and licensing on a case by case basis (e.g. in relation to pollution, organic enrichment, siltation, habitat loss, etc.).

Monitoring programmes do exist for some specific pressures. For example, the Scottish Marine Animal Strandings Scheme (SMASS) and the UK Cetacean Strandings Investigative Programme (CSIP) monitor pressures associated with disease, entanglement, deliberate killing and trauma in marine animal populations, while the UK Bycatch Monitoring Programme monitors fisheries with a risk of bycatch of marine species.

Where possible, relevant activities and their spatial and temporal distribution will be monitored remotely. For example, seabed abrasion can be inferred by analysing Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) data from fishing vessels. VMS data are currently lacking for <12 m vessels and it is also difficult to infer abrasion pressure from VMS data for vessels operating static gear. Such vessels routinely operate in Scottish inshore waters and there is a need to improve monitoring of pressures arising from these sectors. An ongoing European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) project is investigating potential cost effective solutions for monitoring smaller inshore vessels.

Table 2. List of the most significant pressures for each MPA biodiversity feature group (more detailed information is provided in Annex 1)^[8].

Marine birds

• Bycatch / entanglement
• Collisions
• Disease/parasitism
• Disturbance (including noise and lighting)
• Non-native species (on land/at colonies)
• Pollution
• Reduced prey availability
• Physical barriers to movement
• Physical damage or loss to habitats (on land/at colonies)

Seals (harbour and grey)

• Bycatch / entanglement
• Collisions
• Disease
• Physical barriers to movement
• Physical damage or loss due to habitats
• Pollution
• Reduced prey availability
• Visual disturbance

Cetaceans

• Bycatch / entanglement
• Collisions
• Noise disturbance
• Physical barriers to movement
• Physical damage or loss to habitats
• Pollution (esp. PCBs)
• Reduced prey availability

Fish

• Bycatch / entanglement
• Collisions
• Disease
• Physical barriers to movement
• Physical damage or loss to habitats
• Pollution
• Reduced prey availability

Seabed habitats

• Hydrological changes
• Organic enrichment
• Physical damage or loss to habitats
• Removal of target / non-target species
• Smothering

6.2 Feature monitoring

The Scottish MPA network encompasses a wide range of biodiversity features. These include broad physiographic units including coastal lagoons and estuaries, discrete seabed habitats such as maerl and horse mussel beds, through to highly mobile species of fish, birds and mammals. Despite this variation the need for information to inform assessment and reporting is broadly comparable (Table 1).

For seabed habitats, information is required on habitat range and extent and its structure and function; and, also on the status of the various species the habitat typically supports. It is also essential to know the geographic range of the protected species of Scottish MPAs as well as being beneficial to have an understanding of their population dynamics and the role and status of supporting habitats (for breeding, feeding etc.). Information on physical setting (bathymetry and hydrography) and water quality is needed, for example in relation to habitat function.

Four types of MPA-related feature monitoring have been identified (see Box 1). Applied examples of these different monitoring types are provided in Annex 3. Their descriptions relate to the purpose of the work in a Scottish MPA Programme context and the data collected. Types 1 to 3 are equivalent to the monitoring categories established in the UK Marine Biodiversity Monitoring Strategy (JNCC, 2016).