Offshore Annexes Annex 5.6.1 Commercial Fisheries Technical

Home , Aquarius Reef Base, Walney Wind Farm

Environmental Statement Volume 5 – Offshore Annexes

Annex 5.6.1 Commercial Fisheries Technical Report

PINS Document Reference: 7.5.6.1 APFP Regulation 5(2)(a)

January 2015

Hornsea Offshore Wind Farm All pre-existing rights reserved. Project Two – Environmental Statement

Volume 5 – Offshore Annexes

Annex 5.6.1 – Commercial Fisheries Technical Report Liability

This report has been prepared by RPS Group Plc (RPS), with all reasonable skill, care and diligence within the terms of their contracts with SMart Wind Ltd or their

subcontractor to RPS placed under RPS’ contract with SMart Wind Ltd as the case may be.

Document release and authorisation record PINS document reference 7.5.6.1 Report number UK06-050200-REP-0038 SMart Wind Limited Date January 2015 11th Floor Company name SMart Wind Limited 140 London Wall London EC2Y 5DN

Tel 0207 7765500

Email [email protected]

Table of Contents Appendix B MMO VMS data for non-UK vessels ...... 53 Appendix C IMARES VMS data for Dutch registered vessels ...... 59 1 Introduction ...... 1 Appendix D Meeting minutes ...... 62 1.1 Context ...... 1

1.2 Study Area ...... 1 1.3 Data Sources and Methodology ...... 1 Table of Figures 2 Key Species and Fleet Métiers ...... 4 Figure 1.1 Commercial fisheries study areas for Project Two...... 3 2.1 Key Species ...... 4 Figure 2.1 ICES Divisions for EU fisheries management purposes across the UK and wider (Source: EU, 2011)...... 5 2.2 Key Gears ...... 7 Figure 2.2 Seasonality of total landings (live weight, tonnes) by UK, Dutch, Danish and 3 UK Fisheries Activity Assessment ...... 12 German vessels by species from 2007 to 2012 for the regional commercial 3.1 Subzone 2 ...... 12 fisheries study area (Sources: MMO, 2011a; 2012; 2013a; IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 3.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor ...... 18 2013; Danish Fisheries Directorate, 2011a; 2012; 2013; BMELV, 2011a, 2012). ..8 4 Netherlands Fisheries Activity ...... 22 Figure 2.3 Typical beam trawler vessel and gear diagram (Sources: Visserijnieuws, 2010; FAO, 2005)...... 8 4.1 Subzone 2 ...... 22 Figure 2.4 Typical demersal otter trawler vessel and gear diagram (Sources: Visserijnieuws, 4.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor ...... 26 2010; FAO, 2005)...... 9 5 France Fisheries Activity Assessment ...... 27 Figure 2.5 Typical industrial trawler vessel (Source: Visserijnieuws, 2010)...... 10 5.1 Subzone 2 ...... 27 Figure 2.6 Typical inshore potting vessel (Source: Poseidon)...... 10 5.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor ...... 27 Figure 2.7 Typical scallop dredging vessel (Source: Poseidon)...... 11 6 Belgium Fisheries Activity Assessment ...... 29 Figure 3.1 Left: Live weight (tonnes) and value (£’000) of all landings by UK vessels from 6.1 Subzone 2 ...... 29 Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to 2012. Right: Proportion by value of landings by vessel length 6.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor ...... 29 (Source: MMO, 2011a; 2012; 2013a)...... 12 7 Denmark Fisheries Activity Assessment ...... 31 Figure 3.2 Value (£) of all landings by UK vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries 7.1 Subzone 2 ...... 31 study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) by species and vessel length category in 2011 (top) and species and ICES rectangle in 2012 (bottom) (Source: 7.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor ...... 32 MMO, 2012; 2013a)...... 12 8 German Fisheries Activity Assessment ...... 36 Figure 3.3 Vessel Monitoring System data for UK mobile vessels (≥ 12 m) actively fishing 8.1 Subzone 2 ...... 36 within regional commercial fisheries study area in 2012 indicating value of catch 8.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor ...... 37 (Source: MMO, 2013b)...... 15 9 Norway Fisheries Activity Assessment ...... 39 Figure 3.4 Vessel Monitoring System data for UK passive vessels (≥ 12 m) actively fishing within regional commercial fisheries study area in 2012 indicating value of catch 9.1 Subzone 2 ...... 39 (Source: MMO, 2013b)...... 16 9.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor ...... 39 Figure 3.5 Surveillance data for UK vessels (all lengths) actively fishing within regional 10 Swedish Fisheries Activity Assessment ...... 39 commercial fisheries study area, amalgamated for 2008-2012 (Source: MMO, 2010, 2013d)...... 17 10.1 Subzone 2 ...... 39 Figure 3.6 Value (£ ) of all landings by UK vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries 10.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor ...... 39 study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) in 2010 by port of landings 11 Summary ...... 40 and gear type (Source: MMO, 2011a)...... 18 References ...... 41 Appendix A Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) data for UK registered vessels ...... 43

Figure 3.7 Value (£) of all landings by UK registered vessels from ICES rectangles that Figure 5.1 Vessel Monitoring System data for French demersal trawl (top) and combined overlap with Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) demersal and pelagic trawl (bottom)vessels (≥ 15 m) actively fishing within and offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES regional commercial fisheries study area in 2008 (Source: CNPMEM, 2009)...... 28 rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to 2012 (Source: MMO, Figure 6.1 Value (€) of landings by Belgian vessels in 2009 across regional commercial 2011a; 2012; 2013a)...... 19 fisheries study area (Source: Rederscentrale, 2011a)...... 29 Figure 3.8 Left: Live weight (tonnes) and value (£ ’000) of all landings by UK vessels from Figure 6.2 Vessel Monitoring System data for Belgian beam trawl vessels (≥ 15 m) actively the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES fishing within the regional commercial fisheries study area in 2009 indicating rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2006 to 2011. Right: Proportion of hours fished (Source: Rederscentrale, 2011b)...... 30 landings value by vessel length (Source: MMO, 2011a; 2012; 2013a)...... 19 Figure 7.1 Left: Live weight (tonnes) and value (€’000) of all landings by Danish vessels from

Figure 3.9 Value (£ ) of all landings by UK vessels from the offshore cable route corridor Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) in 36F2) from 2008 to 2012. Right: Proportion of landings weight by gear type from 2012 by species and vessel length category (Source: MMO, 2013a)...... 19 2008 to 2012 (Source: Danish Fisheries Directorate, 2011a; 2012; 2013)...... 31 Figure 3.10 Seasonality of value (£) and live weight (tonnes) of lobster and brown crab Figure 7.2 Value (€) of all landings by Danish vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries landings by UK vessels from the offshore cable route corridor commercial study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to 2012 by species fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to (Source: Danish Fisheries Directorate, 2011a; 2012; 2013)...... 31 2012 (Source: MMO, 2013a)...... 20 Figure 7.3 Live weight (tonnes) of landings by Danish demersal, semi-pelagic and pelagic Figure 3.11 Value (£ ) of all landings by UK vessels from the offshore cable route corridor vessels from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) in 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) and the other ICES rectangles overlapping the regional

2011 by port of landings and gear type (Source: MMO, 2012)...... 21 commercial fisheries study area (35F0, 35F1, 35F2, 36F0, 37F0 and 37F2) Figure 4.1 Top: Live weight (tonnes) and value (€’000) of all landings by Dutch registered (Source: Danish Fisheries Directorate, 2011a; 2012; 2013)...... 32 vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, Figure 7.4 Map of key sandeel fishing grounds (yellow) for Danish fleet based on Vessel 36F1 and 36F2) from 2003 to 2012. Bottom: proportion of landings value by gear Monitoring System data (Source: DTU Aqua, 2011). [Note: red, white, green, blue

type (Source: IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 2013)...... 22 and navy hashed boxes represent UK, Dutch, German and Danish proposed or Figure 4.2 Value (€) of all landings by Dutch registered vessels from Subzone 2 commercial designated European Marine Sites)...... 33 fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2003 to 2012 Figure 7.5 Map of key sandeel fishing grounds (yellow) for Danish fleet based on vessel by species (Source: IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 2013)...... 23 tracking data (Source: Danish Fishermen's Association, 2011)...... 34 Figure 4.3 Top: Live weight (tonnes) and value (€’000) of sole and plaice landings by Dutch Figure 7.6 Map of key sandeel fishing grounds (yellow) for Danish fleet based on vessel registered vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES tracking data showing Subzone 2 turbine layout 1 (Source: Danish Fishermen's rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2003 to 2012, including linear regression. Association, 2011)...... 35 Bottom: proportion of sole and plaice landings value by gear type (Source: IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 2013)...... 23 Figure 7.7 Top: Value (€) of all landings by Danish vessels from the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and

Figure 4.4 Vessel Monitoring System data for Dutch registered beam trawl vessels actively 36F2) from 2008 to 2012. Bottom: Value (€) of all landings by Danish vessels fishing within regional commercial fisheries study area in 2012 (Source: Hintzen from ICES rectangles 35F0 and 36F0 from 2008 to 2012 by species (Source: et al., 2013)...... 24 Danish Fisheries Directorate, 2011a; 2012; 2013)...... 36 Figure 4.5 Vessel Monitoring System data for Dutch registered beam trawl vessels actively Figure 8.1 Left: Live weight (tonnes) and value (€’000) of all landings by German vessels fishing within regional commercial fisheries study area in 2012 indicating VMS from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, data points (Source: Hintzen et al., 2013)...... 25 36F1 and 36F2) from 2007 to 2011. Right: Value (€) of all landings by German Figure 4.6 Value (€) of all landings by Dutch vessels from the Subzone 2 commercial vessels from ICES rectangles 36F1 and 36F2 from 2007 to 2011 by species fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to 2012 (Source: BMELV, 2011a; 2012)...... 36 by port of landing (Source: IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 2013a)...... 26 Figure 8.2 Vessel Monitoring System data for German vessels (≥ 15 m) actively fishing Figure 4.7 Top: Value (€) of all landings by Dutch vessels from the offshore cable route within the regional commercial fisheries study area in 2010 (Source: BMELV, corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 2011b)...... 38 36F2) from 2008 to 2012. Bottom: Value (€) of all landings by Dutch vessels from

ICES rectangles 35F0 and 36F0 from 2008 to 2012 by species (Source: IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 2013a)...... 26

iii

Table of Tables Glossary

Table 1.1 Data sources...... 2 Term Definition Table 2.1 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and Quotas in tonnes per country for key species for 2012 (BE: Belgium, DK: Denmark, DE: Germany, FR: France, NL: Netherlands, A fishing net consisting of a conical net with two long wings with a UK: United Kingdom, SE: Sweden, NR: Norway) (Source: EU, 2012)...... 6 bag where the fish collect. Drag lines extend from the wings, and are Anchor seine long so they can surround an area. A seine boat drags the net in a Table 2.2 Profile of typical beam trawling vessels active across regional commercial circle around the fish, the motion of the drag lines herds the fish into fisheries study area...... 9 the central net. Table 2.3 Profile of typical demersal otter trawling vessels active across regional A method of bottom trawling with a net that is held open by a solid commercial fisheries study area...... 9 metal beam, attached to two "shoes", consisting of solid metal plates, Table 2.4 Profile of typical industrial trawling vessels active across regional study. Area. .. 10 Beam trawlers fixed to the ends of the beam. These shoes slide over and disturb the seabed, resulting in fish and crustaceans falling back into the Table 2.5 Profile of typical potting vessels active across regional commercial fisheries study attached net. area...... 10 Catch which is retained and sold but is not the target species for the Table 2.6 Profile of typical scallop dredging vessels active across regional commercial Bycatch fishery. fisheries study area...... 11 Demersal Living on or near the sea bed. Table 3.1 Live weight (tonnes) of landings by UK registered vessels from ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2 (Source: MMO, 2011a; MMO, 2012; MMO, 2013a)...... 13 Demersal trawl A fishing net used by towing the trawl along or close to the sea bed. Table 3.2 Live weight (tonnes) and value (£) of all landings by UK vessels from offshore Any natural population of fish which is an isolated and self- Fish stock cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, perpetuating group of the same species. 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) in 2012 (MMO, 2013a)...... 20 Fishing ground An area of water or sea bed targeted by fishing activity. Table 3.3 Inshore effort for the Holderness Coast in 2010 (Holderness Coast FLAG, 2011).21 Mortality due to fishing; death or removal of fish from a population Fishing mortality due to fishing Gear type The method / equipment used for fishing. Fishing net set vertically in the water so that fish swimming into it are Gill net entangled by the gills in its mesh. ICES statistical Defined areas, 1 degree longitude x 0.5 degree latitude equalling rectangles approximately 30 x 30 NM used for fisheries statistics. Highly mechanised commercial fishing operations whose ultimate Industrial fishery products are principally fish meal and fish oil. Quantitative description of amount of fish returned to port for sale, in Landings terms of value or weight. Notice to fishermen The publication of information pertinent to the fishing industry. Fisheries Liaison Officer based onshore with the role of keeping local Onshore Fisheries and international fishermen informed of ongoing work within the area, Liaison Officer including marine surveys. A net with large rectangular boards (otter boards) which are used to keep the mouth of the trawl net open. Otter boards are made of timber or steel and are positioned in such a way that the Otter trawl hydrodynamic forces, acting on them when the net is towed along the seabed, pushes them outwards and prevents the mouth of the net from closing.

Term Definition Acronym Full term Pelagic Of or relating to the open sea. EEFPO The East of England Fish Producers Organisation Pelagic trawl A net used to target fish species in the mid water column. EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone Precautionary EIA Environmental Impact Assessment Precautionary reference point for biomass as defined in fisheries Biomass Reference management plans. EU European Union Point F Fishing Mortality A method to catch scallop using steel dredges with a leading bar fitted with a set of spring loaded, downward pointing teeth. Behind FEPA Food and Environment Protection Act 1985 Scallop dredge this toothed bar (sword), a mat of steel rings is fitted. A heavy net FU Functional Unit cover (back) is laced to the frame, sides and after end of the mat to form a bag. HCFIG Holderness Coast Fishing Industry Group Shrimper A vessel that predominantly targets shrimp. ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea Spawning The act of releasing or depositing eggs (fish) IFCA Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authorities Spawning stock IFREMER French Research Institute for Exploration of the Sea The stock population of a species capable of reproducing biomass IMARES Institute for Marine Resources and Ecosystem Studies A series of static fishing gear (pots) joined together to form a single String LPUE Landings Per Unit Effort deployable linear line of pots. MLS Minimum Landing Size A system used in commercial fishing to allow environmental and Vessel Monitoring fisheries regulatory organizations to monitor, minimally, the position, MMO Marine Management Organisation System time at a position, and course and speed of fishing vessels. NFFO National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations (Coöperatie Kottervisserij Nederland u.a.) a Dutch umbrella NM Nautical Mile VisNed organisation of producer organisations, representing 75% of the Dutch Demersal Fishing interest. OFLO Onshore Fisheries Liaison Officer SSB Spawning Stock Biomass

STECF Scientific, Technical, and Economic Committee for Fisheries Acronyms TAC Total Allowable Catches Acronym Full term UK United Kingdom BERR Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform VMS Vessel Monitoring System German Federal Ministry for Food, Agriculture and Consumer BMELV Protection

Bpa Precautionary Biomass Reference Point Cefas Centre for Environment Fisheries and Aquaculture Science C.M.E. Cooperative Maritime Etaploise CNPMEM French National Committee for Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture CPA Coast Protection Act 1949 DECC Department of Energy and Climate Change EC European Council EEC European Economic Community

1 INTRODUCTION 1.3 Data Sources and Methodology

1.3.1 A number of data sources have informed the commercial fisheries assessment. In particular, three forms of data sources have been key in the assessment: 1.1 Context . Landing statistics for fisheries operating within the regional commercial fisheries 1.1.1 The purpose of this Commercial Fisheries Technical Annex is to provide a detailed study area (2002 to 2012 for Dutch and Danish registered vessels; 2008 to 2012 baseline characterisation of fisheries activity on a country basis for the United for all other nationalities); Kingdom (UK), Netherlands, Denmark, France, Belgium, Germany, Norway and . Surveillance data for all vessel lengths and nationalities (2008 to 2012); Sweden. . VMS data for vessels ≥ 15 m (2008 to 2012); and 1.1.2 An overview of the baseline, together with the impact assessment, cumulative and . transboundary impact assessment are provided within the Environmental Statement, Consultation with UK inshore and offshore fisheries and European offshore Volume 2, Chapter 6: Commercial Fisheries. Details of the commercial fisheries study fisheries. area, legislation and guidance, consultation, data sources, methodology for data 1.3.2 Many sources of literature have been reviewed in the preparation of this assessment. collection and analysis of Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) data are also included A full list of references is provided at the end of this chapter and cited within text within the Commercial Fisheries chapter. where appropriate. 1.1.3 It is recommended that the Commercial Fisheries chapter (Volume 2, Chapter 6: 1.3.3 For UK data, landing statistics, VMS and surveillance data have been collated from Commercial Fisheries) is read in conjunction with this Technical Annex. the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) for the five year period 2008 to 2012. 1.3.4 A full description of the data sources and methodology for data collection and analysis is provided within the Environmental Statement, Volume 2, Chapter 6: 1.2 Study Area Commercial Fisheries. A summary of the data sources is provided in Table 1.1. 1.2.1 The Round 3 Hornsea Zone is within the southwest portion of the International 1.3.5 Data has been sourced from a number of European fisheries bodies, including Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Division IVb (Central North Sea) and Government, research bodies and directly from the fishing industry. Where available lies outside the 12 nautical miles (NM) limit in UK Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) the most recent data has been provided (i.e., for 2012). Notably the most recent data waters. For the purpose of recording fisheries landings, ICES Division IVb is divided provided by the French is for 2008 and for the Belgians is 2009. into statistical rectangles which are consistent across all Member States operating in 1.3.6 Three surveys have been undertaken relating to commercially important shellfish the North Sea. species across the offshore cable route corridor to inform Volume 2, Chapter 3: Fish 1.2.2 From a commercial fisheries perspective, a study area is defined by the ICES and Shellfish Ecology, as follows: statistical rectangles that Project Two overlaps (Figure 1.1). The commercial fisheries . Experimental potting surveys utilizing three experimental strings along the cable study areas are defined as follows: corridor, sampled in June, October and November 2011; . Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area - ICES statistical rectangles 37F1, . Observational trip, accompanying a fishing vessel during their normal fishing 36F1 and 36F2; operations in September 2011; and . Offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area - ICES statistical . Logbook data collection from a voluntary scheme whereby potting vessels in the rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2; and Hornsea provide a logbook of their fishing activity and landings over the 2011 . Regional commercial fisheries study area covering 14 ICES statistical fishing season. rectangles (35F0, 35F1, 35F2, 35F3, 36E9, 36F0, 36F1, 36F2, 36F3, 37E9, 1.3.7 In additional ecology surveys carried out across Subzone 2 and the offshore cable 37F0, 37F1, 37F2 and 37F3) to ensure adequate representation of surrounding route corridor (in particular see Volume 2, Chapter 2: Benthic Subtidal and Intertidal activity. Ecology and Volume 2, Chapter 3: Fish and Shellfish Ecology for details), include:

. Benthic ecology Subzone 2 survey; . Benthic ecology offshore cable route corridor survey;

. Benthic ecology intertidal survey; . Fish and shellfish ecology subtidal survey; and

. Fish and shellfish ecology intertidal survey.

1.3.8 Results will be used to provide data describing the community structure and composition of the commercially important shellfish and fish populations and presented as part of Volume 2, Chapter 3: Fish and Shellfish Ecology.

Table 1.1 Data sources.

Nationality Data Timeframe Source Landing statistics data for UK registered vessels with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel length 2008 to 2012 category; country code; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and value. Vessel Monitoring System data for UK registered vessels with attributes for time fishing and value of catch at a resolution of 2008 to 2012 200th of an ICES rectangle amalgamated for all mobile vessels and all static vessels. Marine Management UK Vessel Monitoring System data for Belgian, Danish, Dutch, French, German, and Norwegian registered vessels with Organisation 2010 attributes for time fishing at a resolution of 200th of an ICES rectangle amalgamated for all mobile vessels. Surveillance data with data query attributes for: sighting date; ICES rectangle; ICES subsquare; latitude; longitude; 2008 to 2012 vessel/gear type; activity; nationality; course; speed; and number of sightings. Landing statistics data for Dutch registered vessels with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel length 2008 to 2012 category; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and value. Landing statistics data for Dutch owned vessels indicated (through consultation) to be fishing within Hornsea Zone including Dutch registered, UK registered and German registered vessels with data query attributes for: landing year; vessel length 2001 to 2011 Institute for Marine Resources Netherlands category; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and value. and Ecosystem Studies Vessel Monitoring System data for Dutch registered vessels with data attributes presented graphically for: year; month; (IMARES) 2009 to 2011 vessel/gear type; and vessel size category. Vessel Monitoring System data for Dutch registered vessels with data attributes presented graphically for: year; vessel/gear 2012 type and value of catch. French National Committee for Mapping of effort (hours fishing) for demersal and combined demersal/pelagic otter trawling (French data provided in France 2008 Maritime Fisheries and response to the consultation on The Crown Estate Round 3 UK offshore wind proposal). Aquaculture (CNPMEM) Belgium Landing statistics data for Belgian registered vessels with data query attributes for: ICES rectangle and value. 2009 Rederscentrale Landing statistics data for Danish registered vessels with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel 2002 to 2012 Danish Fisheries Directorate length category; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and value Denmark Danish Fishermen’s Maps of key sandeel grounds based on vessel tracking plots from Danish registered vessels 1985 to 2010 Association German Federal Ministry for Landing statistics data for German registered vessels with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel Germany 2007 to 2011 Food, Agriculture and length category; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and value. Consumer Protection (BMELV) Landing statistics data for Norwegian registered vessels with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel Norwegian Directorate of Norway 2008 to 2012 length category; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and value. Fisheries

Figure 1.1 Commercial fisheries study areas for Project Two.

2 KEY SPECIES AND FLEET MÉTIERS 2.1.4 Sole Spawning Stock Biomass (SSB) has fluctuated around the precautionary reference points3 for the last decade and is estimated to be well above the precautionary biomass reference point in 2013. Fishing mortality has shown a declining trend since 1995 and is estimated to be close to the maximum sustainable 2.1 Key Species yield fishing mortality reference point in 2012. North Sea sole stocks are therefore Total Allowable Catch and Quotas considered to be harvested sustainably (ICES, 2012). Both the North Sea sole and plaice stocks have been within safe biological limits in the last three years (June 2009 2.1.1 As per European Union (EU) Council Regulations1 Total Allowable Catches (TACs) to June 2012) (ICES, 2013a; ICES, 2013b). and quotas are in place for many commercial fish species based on their stock 2.1.5 Sole TAC is set for the stock across ICES Divisions IV and II. Countries that have distribution across ICES Divisions, as presented in Figure 2.1. The TACs set for a been allocated a quota from this TAC can fish for sole within IVa, IVb, IVc, IIa and IIb. species across IV and II, for example, allow countries that have been allocated a Netherlands have 75% of quota allocation for the stock defined in area IV and II. quota from this TAC to fish within IVa, IVb, IVc, IIa and IIb. TACs and quotas per country are presented in Table 2.1 for key species landed from the regional 2.1.6 Landing statistics for the regional commercial fisheries study area indicate that sole commercial fisheries study area including: sole Solea solea, plaice Pleuronectes landings peak from August to December (Figure 2.2). Days-at-sea regulations, high platessa, turbot Scophthalmus maxima (including brill Scophthalmus rhombus), sprat oil prices, and different patterns of TACs changes between plaice and sole have led Sprattus sprattus, sandeel Ammodytes species and nephrops Nephrops norvegicus. to a transfer of fishing effort from the northern to the southern North Sea where sole tend to be more abundant (ICES, 2011). Since plaice is often taken as bycatch from 2.1.2 Within the UK EEZ, fishing activity from the shore to six NM is only permissible for UK the sole fishery, landings also peak during the same period (i.e., from August to registered vessels. A number of restrictions are in place based on byelaws set by December) (Figure 2.2). English Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authorities (IFCA) that control fisheries out to 6 NM. From 6 NM to 12 NM, non-UK vessels may fish if they have acquired 2.1.7 Sole is mainly caught by the beam trawl fleet working with 80 mm mesh nets. Plaice historical rights to do so. Outside 12 NM, international vessels are permitted to fish is predominantly caught by beam trawlers in the central part of the North Sea, subject to quota allocation and other EU level restrictions such as days at sea. however across the regional commercial fisheries study area, plaice is taken within the mixed fishery targeting sole. The North Sea plaice stock is well within Demersal Finfish precautionary boundaries, and has reached its highest levels in recorded history since 1957. Recruitment has been around the long-term average from 2005 onwards. Plaice and Sole Turbot and Brill 2.1.3 ICES define safe precautionary biomass reference points (Bpa) for the stocks of both plaice and sole. The stocks are within safe (i.e., precautionary) biological limits for the 2.1.8 Turbot TAC has been set in combination with brill in the North Sea (and IIa). Trend years in which (according to the opinion of the Scientific, Technical, and Economic based assessments undertaken by ICES show that landings have been stable since Committee for Fisheries (STECF)) the spawning stock biomass of the plaice stock 1995, and fishing mortality has declined since 2002. Recruitment has shown an exceeds 230,000 tonnes and the sole stock exceeds 35,000 tonnes, and the average increase since 2000 and total stock biomass has been stable in that period (ICES, fishing mortality2 rate on ages two to six of plaice is less than 0.6 per year and on 2013c). Turbot is a valuable bycatch in the sole and plaice beam trawl fishery and sole less than 0.4 per year (ICES, 2008). These precautionary levels form the basis demersal otter trawl fishery. of the harvest control rule for these stocks.

fish dying in one year, or the instantaneous rate F, and which can range from 0 for no fishing to 1 very high values such as 1.5 or 2, meaning that 1.5 or 2 times as many fish have been caught As fixed by EU Council Regulations 1225/2010, 716/2011, 1256/2011 and 57/2011, 5/2012, as were present at the beginning of the fishing season (this is possible with short-lived, fast 43/2012, 44/2012. Changes may be made to 2012 TACs and quotas during 2012. growing species such as anchovies). 2 Fishing mortality (F) is defined as the mortality due to fishing i.e., death or removal of fish 3 from a population due to fishing, usually expressed as the annual mortality, the percentage of Precautionary biomass reference point for sole relates to a Bpa of 35,000 tonnes.

Figure 2.1 ICES Divisions for EU fisheries management purposes across the UK and wider (Source: EU, 2011).

Table 2.1 Total Allowable Catch (TAC) and Quotas in tonnes per country for key species for 2012 (BE: Belgium, DK: Denmark, DE: Germany, FR: France, NL: Netherlands, UK: United Kingdom, SE: Sweden, NR: Norway) (Source: EU, 2012).

Species Area TAC BE DK DE FR NL UK SE NR Sole II, IV 16,200 1,346 615 1,077 269 12,151 692 Plaice IIa, IV 84,410 4,874 15,840 4,569 914 30,462 22,542 Turbot (incl. brill) IIa, IV 4,642 340 727 186 88 2,579 717 5 Sprat IIa, IV 161,500 1,631 129,103 1,631 1,631 1,631 5,383 1,330 9,160 Sandeel IIa, IIIa, IV 200,000 167,436 256 3,660 6,148 2,500 Nephrops IIa, IV 21,929 1,147 1,147 17 34 590 18,994

Sandeels Pelagic Finfish

2.1.9 Sandeel are largely stationary after settlement and there is a complex of local (sub) Sprat stocks in the North Sea. There are indications that the survival of sandeel larvae is linked to the availability of copepod prey in the early spring, especially Calanus 2.1.11 Sprat in the North Sea is short-lived and the catch is dominated by young fish. The finmarchicus that supports the survival of sandeel larvae. Sandeel is taken by stock size is mostly driven by the recruiting year class. Thus, the fishery in a given trawlers using small-mesh demersal gear. The fishery is seasonal, taking place year is dependent on that year’s incoming year class. The majority of the sprat mostly in the spring and summer (Figure 2.2). Most of the catch consists of landings are taken in the Danish industrial small-meshed trawl fishery. The spawning Ammodytes marinus, but other sandeel species are caught as well. stock has been above the precautionary spawning stock biomass reference point since 20054, with the exception of 2007, where it was approximately at this reference 2.1.10 To avoid local depletion, ICES advice for sandeel is provided for seven areas in point level. Fishing mortality has shown an overall decreasing trend since 2004. Division IIIa and Subarea IV. The Hornsea Zone is located within Sandeel Area 1 - Recruitment appears to have been more stable than is often the case for short-lived Dogger Bank. In this area, the stock at the start of 2013 was expected to be just species, although recruitment in 2012 was estimated to be below average (ICES, above the spawning stock biomass limit reference point, owing to low recruitment in 2013e). The fishery is seasonal with landings mostly in late autumn and winter 2010 and 2011, and medium recruitment in 2012. Fishing mortality decreased in (Figure 2.2). 2005 from a high level and has fluctuated around 0.5 since then, except in 2012 when fishing mortality was the lowest observed on record (since 1983) (ICES, Shellfish 2013d). Recruitment was very low in both 2010 and 2011, and the combined recruitment of these two years is the lowest combined value of any two consecutive European Lobster years in the time-series (which started in 1983). A medium level of recruitment 2.1.12 European lobster Homarus gammarus is a long-lived, large decapod crustacean. occurred in 2012. European lobster breed once per year in the summer and newly berried females begin to appear from September to December. Juveniles or adult lobsters do not undertake any significant migrations and juveniles in the first 3 to 4 years of life maybe particularly sedentary.

4 Precautionary biomass reference point for spart relates to a Bpa of 142,000 tonnes.

2.1.13 Lobsters are caught by pots and there are no TACs or quotas in place. Primary Scallops management is by the technical measure of a Minimum Landing Size (MLS) of 87 mm (Council Regulation 850/98). Landings are throughout the year, but have a 2.1.19 Scallops Pecten maximus are most common in water depths of 20 to 70 m, in areas prominent peak from July to September (Figure 2.2). of clean firm sand and fine gravel exposed to water currents, which provide good feeding conditions. Recruitment is usually unpredictable as it depends not only on Brown crab successful spawning and larval production but also on retention of larvae or transport of larvae into areas suitable for settlement. Settlement in a particular area may be 2.1.14 Brown crab Cancer pagurus is a long-lived, large decapod crustacean. Brown crabs unpredictable leading to an unstable age structure. As a consequence of this, scallop are very productive animals and each female can hatch between 1 and 4 million beds frequently show a regional separation of year classes and spatial variability in eggs. Post larvae are known to settle inshore and juvenile crabs are more common in age structure. shallow waters. Adult crabs undertake extensive migrations, which may be associated with reproductive cycle. 2.1.20 Scallops are targeted by dredgers and there are no TACs or quotas in place with this species, therefore this species is primarily managed by a MLS of 100 mm (Council 2.1.15 As with lobster, brown crab is caught by pots and with no TACs or quotas in place, Regulation 850/98). this species is primarily managed by a MLS which is set at 130 mm (Council Regulation 850/98). Due to the inshore location of lobster and brown crab they are 2.1.21 As indicated within VMS data, scallop dredgers operate to the west of the Hornsea predominately targeted by the UK potting fleet. Landings of brown crab occur Zone (well outside the Hornsea Zone). Scallop dredgers are not known to routinely throughout the year, with peaks across September to November (Figure 2.2). fish across the offshore cable route corridor or Subzone 2. Seasonality of landings from the regional commercial fisheries study area indicate peaks from April to August, Brown shrimp based on a six year average (2006 to 2011).

2.1.16 Brown shrimp Crangon crangon (also known as common shrimp) are found mainly in shallow inshore waters and are fast growing with a relatively short lifespan (four to 2.2 Key Gears five years). Shrimp fisheries have high recoverability and low vulnerability to fisheries exploitation, due to rapid maturation. Brown shrimp are targeted by trawlers in the 2.2.1 There are three descriptive units used for defining fisheries (Marchal, 2008): inshore waters. No TACs or quotas are in place and there is no legal minimum . Fishery – a group of vessel voyages which target the same species or use the landing size for brown shrimp in the EU. Landings occur throughout the year with same gear; peaks from September to December (Figure 2.2). . Fleet – a physical group of vessels sharing similar characteristics (e.g., Nephrops nationality); and . Métier – a homogenous subdivision, either of a fishery by vessel type or a fleet 2.1.17 Nephrops norvegicus (known as langoustine, prawn and Norway lobster, referred to by voyage type. as Nephrops) are limited to muddy habitats and therefore stock assessments are based on nine separate Functional Units (FUs) within the North Sea. The regional 2.2.2 Vessel types within the key fleets and fisheries that operate across the regional commercial fisheries study area lies across part of the Botney Gut – Silver Pit FU. commercial fisheries study area are described below. The Nephrops fisheries in the Botney Gut are solely bottom trawl fisheries. 2.1.18 For many years, Belgium was the only country exploiting Nephrops in this area; however since 2005, the Netherlands and the UK have become the most important exploiters of this stock. The state of this stock is unknown and Landings Per Unit Effort (LPUE) fluctuate without trend (ICES, 2013f). Landings peak during summer months (Figure 2.2).

350 2000 Sole Beam Trawling Fishery Plaice 1800 300 1600 2007 2.2.3 Figure 2.3 shows a typical beam trawler and associated gear and Table 2.2 describes 2007 250 1400 2008 2008 the profile of beam trawling vessels active across the regional commercial fisheries 1200 2009 200 2009 1000 study area. 2010 2010 800 150 2011 2011 2.2.4 Catches with beam trawl form the bulk of the annual landings (70% by value) from Live weight, tonnes weight, Live 600 2012 tonnes weight, Live 100 2012 400 Average Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area with the main target species being plaice 50 Average 200 and sole. These demersal flatfish species are not regarded as shoaling species; 0 0 J F M A M J J A S O N D therefore fishing effort is spread over a wide area and across various grounds J F M A M J J A S O N D throughout the North Sea. 45000 30000 40000 Sandeel Sprat 25000 2.2.5 It is recognised that in some cases, significant investments in quota have been made 35000 2007 2007 by vessels registered to other EU Member States in order to fish for these species 30000 2008 20000 2008 within ICES Division IVb. 25000 2009 2009 15000 20000 2010 2010 2011 15000 2011

Live weight, tonnes weight, Live 10000

2012 tonnes weight, Live 10000 2012 Average 5000 5000 Average

0 0 J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

250 700 Lobster Brown crab 600 200 2007 2007 500 2008 2008 150 2009 400 2009 2010 2010 100 300 2011 2011 Live weight, tonnes weight, Live 2012 tonnes weight, Live 200 2012 50 Average 100 Average

0 0 J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D

350 250 Nephrops Brown shrimp 300

200 2007 2007 250 2008 2008 150 200 2009 2009 2010 2010 150 100 2011 2011

Live weight, tonnes weight, Live 100 Live weight, tonnes weight, Live 2012 2012 50 Average 50 Average

0 0 J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D Figure 2.2 Seasonality of total landings (live weight, tonnes) by UK, Dutch, Danish and German vessels by species from 2007 to 2012 for the regional Figure 2.3 Typical beam trawler vessel and gear diagram (Sources: Visserijnieuws, commercial fisheries study area (Sources: MMO, 2011a; 2012; 2013a; 2010; FAO, 2005). IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 2013; Danish Fisheries Directorate, 2011a; 2012; 2013; BMELV, 2011a, 2012).

Table 2.2 Profile of typical beam trawling vessels active across regional commercial fisheries study area.

Beam trawling profile

Main Target species Plaice and sole Nationality UK, Dutch, Anglo Dutch and Belgian Vessel length 25 m to 45 m Horsepower 500 hp to 2,000 hp Typical towing speed 3.5 to 8 knots Typical gear Twin beam, max length 12 m each beam. Each beam weighing <10 tonnes. Chain matting or individual chains attached to underside.

Demersal Otter Trawling Fishery

2.2.6 Figure 2.4 shows a typical UK demersal trawler and associated gear and Table 2.3 describes the profile of demersal otter trawling vessels active across the regional commercial fisheries study area. 2.2.7 Vessel numbers vary and their presence is dependent upon the success of demersal and/or Nephrops catches elsewhere. Important Nephrops grounds are located north of the central portion of the Honrsea Zone and are approximately 6 to 12 km north of Subzone 1 and approximately 4 km north of Subzone 2. Demersal trawlers operating across the regional commercial fisheries study area tend to tow in directions which are in line with natural seabed contours.

Table 2.3 Profile of typical demersal otter trawling vessels active across regional commercial fisheries study area.

Demersal trawling profile

Main Target species Nephrops, plaice, cod, haddock, and whiting

Nationality UK, Dutch, Belgian, Danish, French Figure 2.4 Typical demersal otter trawler vessel and gear diagram (Sources: Vessel length 16 m to 35 m Visserijnieuws, 2010; FAO, 2005). Horsepower 300 hp to 850 hp

Typical towing speed 2.0 to 6.0 knots Industrial Trawling Fishery Typical gear Demersal otter trawl. Possible twin or multi-rig bottom trawl. 2.2.8 Industrial trawling is predominately defined by vessels targeting species that are used Two trawl doors approximately 1 tonne each hold the net in animal feed, such as sandeels, sprat etc. Figure 2.5 shows a typical Danish open horizontally. industrial trawler and Table 2.4 describes the profile of industrial trawling vessels Various forms of ground gear depending on target species. active across the regional commercial fisheries study area.

2.2.12 The offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area represents significant crab and lobster fishing grounds. The majority of potters are under 10 m or 10 to 15 m in length and operate as day boats; returning to port after hauling and re- setting fleets of pots. Pots are therefore not normally returned to shore, but left in the water.

Figure 2.5 Typical industrial trawler vessel (Source: Visserijnieuws, 2010).

Table 2.4 Profile of typical industrial trawling vessels active across regional study. Area.

Industrial trawling profile

Main Target species Sandeel

Nationality Predominantly Danish but some UK Figure 2.6 Typical inshore potting vessel (Source: Poseidon). Vessel length 30 m to 50 m

Horsepower 500 hp to 1200 hp Table 2.5 Profile of typical potting vessels active across regional commercial Typical towing speed 2.5 to 5.0 knots fisheries study area. Typical gear Demersal otter trawl. Large net with a small mesh. Potting profile Two trawl doors approximately 1.25 tonne each hold the net open horizontally. Main Target species Lobster, brown crab and velvet crab Nationality UK

Vessel length Under 10 m, or 10 to 15 m 2.2.9 Currently most sandeel fishing is conducted on and around the edge of Dogger Bank. However, due to annual recruitment variations in sandeel, fishermen undertake wide Horsepower 60 hp to 200 hp searches at the start of the fishing season covering grounds throughout the North Typical shooting speed 0.0 to 9.0 knots Sea, including across Subzone 2. Sandeel grounds across Subzone 2 were known to Typical gear Fleets of baited pots are placed on the seabed. be more productive historically (i.e., from 2000 to 2005, compared to 2006 to 2012). Pots are typically haul every week, but may be left for a 2.2.10 Industrial trawlers operating in this area of the North Sea tend to tow in directions number of weeks. which are in line with natural seabed contours. Generally day boats, but also vivier fleet (crabs stored live in water tanks). Potting Fishery 2.2.11 Figure 2.6 shows a typical potting vessel and Table 2.5 describes the profile of potting vessels active across the regional commercial fisheries study area.

Scallop Dredging Fishery 2.2.14 Scallop dredging grounds are located in the northwest of the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area. Scallop dredgers fish as the tooth bar of 2.2.13 Figure 2.7 shows a typical scallop dredging vessel and Table 2.6 describes the profile each dredge rakes through the sediment lifting out scallops and the spring-loaded of scallop dredging vessels active across the regional commercial fisheries study tooth bar swings back, allowing the dredge to clear obstacles on the seabed. The area. compression in the springs changes and is set up in order to work in stony grounds and to reduce incidence of stones in the dredge. The dredges are held in a series on two beams, which are fished on each side of the vessel. 2.2.15 Dredgers are not known to routinely fish across the offshore cable route corridor or Subzone 2, but are recorded to target areas west and inshore of the Hornsea Zone. Occasionally they will target a wider area that overlaps the offshore cable route corridor.

Figure 2.7 Typical scallop dredging vessel (Source: Poseidon).

Table 2.6 Profile of typical scallop dredging vessels active across regional commercial fisheries study area.

Scallop dredging profile

Main Target species Scallops Nationality UK Vessel length 10 m to 25 m Horsepower 200 hp to 400 hp Typical towing speed 2.0 to 6.0 knots Typical gear Scallop dredgers normally operate with 8 to 10 dredges per side of vessel. Each dredge consists of a triangular frame leading to an opening, a tooth bar with spring loaded teeth, and a bag of steel rings and netting back.

3 UK FISHERIES ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT 3.1.3 Landings in 2011 by the over 25 m fleet were of sole, plaice and turbot, with small quantities of brill, lemon sole and other demersal species (Figure 3.2). Due to

confidentiality issues, some data provided by the MMO are amalgamated into a 3.1 Subzone 2 ‘confidential’ category which represents any landings by fewer than 5 vessels. It can be seen that the majority of these ‘confidential’ landings are from ICES rectangle Landing Trends, Fishing Grounds and Key Species 36F2. Landings by the over 25 m fleet totalled £1.6 million across the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area in 2011. 3.1.1 The trends in UK vessel landings by weight and value from the Subzone 2

commercial fisheries study area are presented in Figure 3.1. The Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area is defined as ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2; Plaice therefore this section refers to landings data from this area, which is considerably Confidential larger than the Subzone 2 boundaries (i.e., 10,962 km2 compared to 462 km2). It Sole should be noted that the majority (89%) of Subzone 2 is located within ICES Lobsters rectangle 36F1. Brown crab 3.1.2 Landings from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area by UK registered Turbot vessels were worth just under £2.3 million in 2012, a drop of 22% compared with Brill 2011 (MMO, 2013). Landings from 2009 to 2011 were predominately caught by the Lemon sole 10m and under over 25 m vessels, and almost all landings in 2013 were by vessels over 10 m in Cod 10+ to 15m length (noting that further breakdown of vessel length categories is not available for Dabs 15+ to 20m 2012 data). Velvet crab 20+ to 25m Other Over 25m

3500 £0 £200,000 £400,000 £600,000 £800,000 100% 3000 90% 2500 80% 70% 2000 60% 50% 1500 40% 1000 30% 20% 500 10% 0%

Value (£'000) andlive weight (tonnes) 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 10m and under 10+ to 15m 15+ to 20m Live weight Value £'000 20+ to 25m Over 25m Over 10m Figure 3.1 Left: Live weight (tonnes) and value (£’000) of all landings by UK vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to 2012. Right: Proportion by value of landings

by vessel length (Source: MMO, 2011a; 2012; 2013a). Figure 3.2 Value (£) of all landings by UK vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) by species and vessel length category in 2011 (top) and species and ICES rectangle in 2012 (bottom) (Source: MMO, 2012; 2013a).

3.1.4 Vessels 15 m and under are targeting lobster and crab, with total value of £1 million Five-year Species 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 landed by all vessel lengths in 2012 (MMO, 2012), and landings are predominately total from ICES rectangle 36F1. The 15 to 25 m vessels operating in the Subzone 2 Skates and Rays 10.4 21.7 12.0 9.4 3.1 56.6 commercial fisheries study area are targeting Nephrops with small quantities of plaice and turbot taken as retained bycatch. Cod 12.8 15.9 12.8 7.6 1.9 51.0 3.1.5 Live weight landings by UK registered vessels from the Subzone 2 commercial Turbot 5.6 14.4 11.5 8.8 3.4 43.7 fisheries study area are presented separately for each ICES rectangle 37F1, 36F1 Brill 2.2 6.8 11.5 10.2 2.1 32.8 and 36F2 from 2008 to 2012 in Table 3.1. In 2012, brown crab landings reached 415 Crabs 0.3 3.1 13.4 14.6 0.9 32.3 tonnes from ICES rectangle 36F1 (an increase of 70% compared with 2011) and Other 12.6 30.1 41.8 16.5 5.5 106.5 lobster landings totalled 29.8 tonnes. A whelk fishery is noted in 2008 that has re- emerged in 2012 when 61 tonnes were landed from 36F1. ICES rectangle 37F1 Grand Total 498.0 2,134.5 437.4 631.9 513.5 4,215.3 Table 3.1 Live weight (tonnes) of landings by UK registered vessels from ICES Sandeel 1,511.9 1,511.9 rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2 (Source: MMO, 2011a; MMO, 2012; MMO, Plaice 246.9 360.1 200.8 343.8 270.5 1,422.2 2013a). Nephrops 73.2 74.2 147.3 98.3 93.3 486.4 Five-year Species 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Cod 52.5 71.6 33.0 32.1 10.8 199.9 total Crabs 41.7 17.5 13.3 36.5 74.4 183.5 ICES rectangle 36F1 Scallops 0.0 0.0 51.1 9.6 60.7 Grand Total 1,116.4 217.7 411.4 305.3 520.5 2,571.4 Lemon Sole 13.7 12.9 7.4 9.8 9.5 53.4 Crabs 190.0 138.2 328.4 244.7 415.0 1,316.2 Haddock 10.2 22.9 2.9 3.1 3.3 42.4 Sandeel 783.0 783.0 Other demersal 9.2 7.6 4.1 11.8 8.3 41.1 Whelks 107.8 0.6 4.8 16.9 61.3 191.3 Lobsters 15.7 1.0 3.4 8.7 9.8 38.7 Lobsters 15.3 11.6 37.6 29.0 29.8 123.2 Other 34.7 54.6 25.1 36.5 24.0 174.9 Nephrops 4.6 32.1 7.3 0.2 1.0 45.1

Plaice 2.6 14.3 17.9 0.8 1.8 37.5 3.1.6 VMS data for UK registered vessels have been analysed by the MMO to provide Cod 5.6 12.5 2.5 0.1 2.7 23.3 effort (hours fished) and value for mobile and static fishing activity. These data are Scallops 11.8 6.2 18.0 presented in Figure 3.3 for 2012 indicating the value of landings by mobile vessels Sole 0.1 1.1 6.3 0.0 7.5 that are ≥ 12 m in length (i.e., beam trawl, demersal trawl, demersal seine and other Whiting 1.4 1.3 1.6 1.3 5.5 gear types physically towed by fishing vessels). Appendix A provides VMS data for UK mobile vessels for effort and value for 2008 to 2012, noting that from 2008 to Other 6.2 6.0 5.0 0.6 2.9 20.7 2011 VMS covered vessels ≥ 15 m in length. VMS data for static vessels has not ICES rectangle 36F2 been presented as most potting vessels are under 12 m in length and therefore not Grand Total 245.5 456.8 488.9 1,243.8 956.8 3,391.9 represented within the dataset, thereby significantly underrepresenting the fleet’s Plaice 148.9 300.8 264.9 193.7 54.8 963.2 activity. Other pelagic 0.0 35.5 909.4 944.9 3.1.7 In addition to VMS data for UK registered vessels, the MMO have collated activity of non-UK vessels operating in the UK EEZ; these are presented in Appendix B. Other demersal 10.5 17.5 19.6 11.1 839.6 898.3 Nephrops 33.2 4.4 28.4 38.3 39.4 143.8 3.1.8 Surveillance data for UK registered vessels is presented in Figure 3.5 for all lengths of vessels, amalgamated for 2008 to 2012. Sole 9.1 42.3 37.5 24.2 5.9 118.9

3.1.9 In the VMS data analysed (2008 to 2012) for UK registered vessels, very little activity is seen within Subzone 2. For this reason, activity elsewhere within the Hornsea Zone has been described to provide context and perspective for displacement considerations. A full set of figures presenting UK mobile vessel VMS data in terms of hours fished and first sale value (£) is provided in Appendix A for 2008 to 2012. 3.1.10 VMS data for UK registered vessels5 actively fishing throughout 2012 (Figure 3.3) shows that activity within the Hornsea Zone is predominately in the eastern area of the Zone. These are beam trawling and demersal otter trawling vessels targeting plaice and sole, as well as other whitefish species such as turbot, brill, red mullet and lemon sole Microstomus kitt. Landings from this area (i.e., outside of Subzone 2) are likely to form the proportional majority of the landings from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area. Small levels of UK registered beam trawling and demersal otter trawling activity is seen sporadically throughout the remainder of the Hornsea Zone, but no other clearly focused activity appears for these UK fleets. This is somewhat corroborated by VMS data for UK vessels in 2008 to 2011 (see Appendix A) where effort is consistently highest in the east of Hornsea Zone, outside of the Subzone 2 boundary. Effort by demersal otter trawlers targeting Nephrops grounds is noted immediately north of Subzone 2, in the Outer Silver Pit. On these grounds the highest level of activity is seen approximately 4 NM (8 km) north of Subzone 2 and this has been consistent across the period for which VMS data has been analysed (2008 to 2012). This area forms key fishing grounds within the Nephrops Botney Gut FU. 3.1.11 UK potting vessels operate in the southwest corner of the Hornsea Zone and this is consistently shown in surveillance data from 2008 to 2012. Three to five potting vessels are known to fish as far offshore as Subzone 2, but are not shown within VMS data from 2008 to 2011, because vessels are less than 15 m in length. VMS data for static vessels indicating hours fished in 2012 is presented in Figure 3.4. Steaming times for the potters are up to 10 hours to these grounds within Subzone 2. 3.1.12 Landings of sandeel by UK vessels are recorded in 2008 from ICES rectangle 36F1 (Table 3.1), amounting to 70% of the total catch weight in that year; and in 2009 from ICES rectangle 37F1. This explains the higher total weight of catch in 2008, as shown on Figure 3.1. The 2008 VMS figure for UK vessels (Appendix A) shows activity in the northwest of 36F1 which is likely to be related to the sandeel landings.

5 Note that this includes UK owned vessels registered to the UK and Dutch owned vessels registered to the UK.

Figure 3.3 Vessel Monitoring System data for UK mobile vessels (≥ 12 m) actively fishing within regional commercial fisheries study area in 2012 indicating value of catch (Source: MMO, 2013b).

Figure 3.4 Vessel Monitoring System data for UK passive vessels (≥ 12 m) actively fishing within regional commercial fisheries study area in 2012 indicating value of catch (Source: MMO, 2013b).

Figure 3.5 Surveillance data for UK vessels (all lengths) actively fishing within regional commercial fisheries study area, amalgamated for 2008-2012 (Source: MMO, 2010, 2013d).

3.1.15 Landings of sole, plaice and related demersal species targeted by the beam trawl Ports and Vessel Fleets fleet are landed into Scheveningen, Harlingen, Urk and IJmuiden. These landings into 3.1.13 In 2010, UK vessels landed the highest value of total catch from the Subzone 2 Dutch ports are likely to be by the UK registered Dutch owned vessels. commercial fisheries study area into Bridlington (£412,000; MMO, 2011) (Figure 3.6). 3.1.16 Landings of Nephrops and related species targeted by the demersal trawl fleet are In 2011, UK potting vessels landed catch to the value of £518,000 into Bridlington landed into Whitby, North Shields and Scarborough. from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (details for UK vessel landings by gear type into all ports are not available for 2011 or 2012). The landings into 3.1.17 A number of organisations represent UK vessels operating across the regional Bridlington were all from potters and included lobster, brown crab and velvet crab commercial fisheries study area including: Eastern England Fish Producers Necora puber. As previously discussed, the majority of these landings are not from Organisation (EEFPO), Anglo Scottish Fish Producers Organisation and the within Subzone 2 since most vessels within the Bridlington fleet do not operate this Holderness Coast Fishing Industry Group (HCFIG). far offshore. Landings by potters are also recorded for Grimsby, Scarborough and 3.1.18 The Eastern England Fish Producers Organisation represents 48 members including Arbroath in 2010. approximately five UK registered Dutch owned vessels and approximately ten lobster and crab vessels. The remaining vessels are 12 to 16 m and 22 to 27 m demersal trawlers that target plaice and Nephrops in long, narrow muddy grounds of 60 to 74 m depth in the Outer Silver Pitt. These grounds are 8 km north of Subzone 2 and Bridlington outside the Hornsea Zone. Urk Scheveningen 3.1.19 The UK registered Dutch owned vessels are beam trawlers (>25 m) targeting plaice Harlingen and sole. Consultation with this group of vessels has been undertaken via the Grimsby EEFPO and through the Dutch meetings attended by vessel owners. It is understood North Shields Scarborough that these vessels currently target plaice and sole further north of Hornsea (namely Arbroath Dogger Bank). However, areas across the Hornsea Zone including Subzone 2 were IJmuiden targeted with more frequency in years preceding 2009 and notably pre 2005. An 11 Whitby year data set for the 24 Dutch vessels (including UK registered and Dutch registered) Hartlepool Montrose that operate throughout the regional commercial fisheries study area is presented in Stonehaven Section 4. Gourdon Johnshaven Beam trawls Den Helder Pots 3.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor Egersound Eyemouth Demersal otter trawl Landing Trends, Fishing Grounds and Key Species Aberdeen Demersal seines Peterhead 3.2.1 Within the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (i.e., ICES £0 £50,000 £100,000 £150,000 £200,000 £250,000 £300,000 £350,000 £400,000 £450,000 rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2), an average of 73% of the UK landings by value, across a five year period, are landed from the inshore ICES rectangles of 35F0 Figure 3.6 Value (£ ) of all landings by UK vessels from Subzone 2 commercial and 36F0 (Figure 3.7). This illustrates the importance of the inshore waters and the fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) in 2010 by port offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area to the UK vessels in of landings and gear type (Source: MMO, 2011a). comparison with the ICES rectangles 36F1, 36F2 and 37F1 (which are part of the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area). 3.1.14 It is noted that approximately three to five potting vessels (12 to 14.9 m in length) from the Bridlington fleet are known to deploy a proportion of their gear within Subzone 2. Pot fleets can be up to 1.5 miles long and tidal movement could pose a risk of gear becoming entangled with wind farm infrastructure.

12000 100%

10000 80%

8000 60% 6000 40% 4000

2000 20%

Value (£'000) andlive weight (tonnes) 0 0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 10m and under 10+ to 15m 15+ to 20m Live weight Value £'000 20+ to 25m Over 25m Over 10m Figure 3.8 Left: Live weight (tonnes) and value (£ ’000) of all landings by UK vessels from the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2006 to 2011. Right: Proportion of landings value by vessel length (Source: MMO, 2011a; 2012; 2013a). Figure 3.7 Value (£) of all landings by UK registered vessels from ICES rectangles that overlap with Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) and offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to 2012 (Source: MMO, 2011a; 2012; 2013a).

3.2.2 The trends in UK vessel landings weight and value from the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area are presented in Figure 3.8. Landings weight and value have remained fairly consistent since 2008, with an increase in weight in 2011 and an increase in weight and value in 2012, largely on account of increased crab landings. The majority of landings are consistently by the over 10 m and under 15 m fleet (Figure 3.8). The catches are dominated by lobster and brown crab (Figure 3.9) which are taken by the creel/pot fishery. Since these species are not subject to quotas or effort restrictions and principally managed by MLS, it can be interpreted that due to the consistency in landings this has been a relatively stable fishery over the last five years. The total value of lobster and crabs (including brown crab, and velvet crab) landed in 2012 from the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area was £6.4 million (Table 3.2), representing an increase of 14% from 2011.

Figure 3.9 Value (£ ) of all landings by UK vessels from the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) in 2012 by species and vessel length category (Source: MMO, 2013a).

Table 3.2 Live weight (tonnes) and value (£) of all landings by UK vessels from 3.2.6 Approximately £1.1 million of brown shrimp were landed from the offshore cable route offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES corridor commercial fisheries study area in 2012 by beam trawlers. Figure 3.5 rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) in 2012 (MMO, 2013a). indicates that those vessels catching brown shrimp target the inshore areas of 35F0, Species Live weight (tonnes) First sales value (£) with little effort seen in 36F0. Consultation with HCFIG corroborates that vessels targeting brown shrimp will predominately operate south of the offshore cable route Grand Total 6052.37 £9,546,956 corridor. Lobsters 356.42 £3,435,820

Crabs 2517.40 £2,934,734 £900,000 2008 Lobster £600,000 Brown shrimp 453.84 £1,125,095 £800,000 2009 2008 Brown crab £700,000 2010 £500,000 Scallops 605.47 £1,023,219 2011 2009 £600,000 2012 £400,000 Whelk 386.50 £251,923 £500,000 Average 2010 £400,000 £300,000 Cockles 350.86 £230,256 2011 £300,000 £200,000 Other demersal 842.76 £146,824 £200,000 £100,000 Nephrops 40.58 £112,111 £100,000 £0 £0 Mussels 378.25 £68,717 J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D Plaice 57.95 £65,354 120 500 2008 Lobster 2008 2009 450 Brown crab Sole 6.45 £59,407 100 2009 2010 400 2010 2011 2011 Cod 15.06 £28,410 80 2012 350 2012 Average 300 Average Turbot 3.58 £18,292 60 250 200 Skates and Rays 9.48 £13,188 40 150 Live weight, tonnes weight, Live Other 27.77 £33,607 20 tonnes weight, Live 100 50 0 0 J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D 3.2.3 Whelk vessels have decreased significantly since 1994 (when there where up to 34 vessels); there are currently 3 to 4 vessels with peak landings from February to June. Figure 3.10 Seasonality of value (£) and live weight (tonnes) of lobster and brown crab These vessels target inshore waters and are not known to operate across the Project landings by UK vessels from the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) from Two area. 2008 to 2012 (Source: MMO, 2013a). 3.2.4 Lobster peak landings occur in August (Figure 3.10), and from September lobsters begin to be kept for Christmas markets, with stock rotated throughout September to November. A spring crab fishery is targeted from March to May, before fishing effort 3.2.7 Potting survey results across the offshore cable route corridor show the most diverts to lobster as the main target species from April to October. A further winter abundant species to be brown crab, particularly in the western areas surveyed within crab fishery is targeted through October to December. Both velvet crabs and whelks inshore waters. On average at the western survey area, 85 % of the brown crab were are taken as bycatch with some targeting through the winter and spring periods undersize, suggesting the importance of this area as a nursery ground for brown (Holderness Coast FLAG, 2011). crab. As expected, other commercially important species encountered during the surveys included lobster, velvet crab and whelk. 3.2.5 The key grounds for this potting fishery are presented in Figure 3.5. Consultation with HCFIG indicates that the majority of effort is in inshore waters north of the offshore 3.2.8 Experimental potting surveys and observer trips have been corroborated with logbook cable route corridor. data collated through the voluntary scheme and presented as part of Volume 2, Chapter 3: Fish and Shellfish Ecology and Annex 5.3.1: Fish and Shellfish Technical Report.

Ports and Vessel Fleets 3.2.12 The HCFIG represents the fishing industry along the coast from Spurn Point to Flamborough Head with key landings ports at Bridlington, Withernsea, Spurn Point 3.2.9 Lobster and brown crab from the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries and Flamborough Head. It is noted that vessels from Grimsby are not represented on study area are predominately landed into Bridlington, as well as Grimsby, Wells, this industry group. Hornsea, Arbroath and Withernsea (Figure 3.11, based on 2011 statistics as 2012 data does not allow analysis by gear, ICES rectangle and port combined). Brown 3.2.13 The number of vessels and pots operated per key port along the Horderness Coast is shrimp are landed into Kings Lynn by the beam trawling fleet. presented in Table 3.3.

3.2.10 Potters represent 69% of the total landings from the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area by value in 2012, followed by dredge (14%) and Table 3.3 Inshore effort for the Holderness Coast in 2010 (Holderness Coast FLAG, beam trawl (13%). 2011). Port Number of vessels Number of fishermen Number of pots Bridlington 42 97 33,750

Bridlington Hornsea 7 14 4,440 Grimsby Tunstall 2 4 250 Kings Lynn Withernsea 9 18 4,850 Wells Eastlington 2 4 1,100 Scheveningen Spurn Point 1 2 500 Harlingen

Urk Hornsea 3.2.14 The HCFIG represents approximately 54 potting vessels, including 43 based at Arbroath Pots Bridlington (17 keel boats, five cobles/flat-bottomed fishing boats and 21 fast potters). Approximately 23 of the Bridlington vessels are under 10 m in length, 17 vessels are IJmuiden Beam trawls 10 to 15 m and three are ≥15 m. The number of pots deployed varies greatly from Withernsea Demersal otter trawl 500 to 6,000 per vessel. Pots are left in the water (since it is not feasible to transport Brancaster Staithe Scottish seines pots to shore, and there would not be adequate storage). Soak times range from Whitby Mechanized dredges days to weeks to months. If other gear is being fished then pots will be left in the North Shields water with doors open. No gentlemen’s agreements exist in relation to areas/grounds Set nets Scarborough fished. Hooks Hartlepool 3.2.15 Of the vessels within the HCFIG, five or six have a larger operational range and can £0 £1,000,000 £2,000,000 £3,000,000 £4,000,000 target waters outside 12 NM. Three vessels have VMS and are therefore represented within VMS figures. The offshore cable route corridor is at the southern extreme of where Bridlington vessels normally operate, but six vessels are known to extend Figure 3.11 Value (£ ) of all landings by UK vessels from the offshore cable route effort across this area, including two from Grimsby. corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) in 2011 by port of landings and gear type (Source: MMO, 2012).

3.2.11 The Holderness Coast fishery is important in socio-economic terms, supporting approximately 66 vessels and 145 men. The area contains approximately 45,000 registered commercial pots and the fishery is dependent upon the exploitation of brown crab and lobster (Holderness Coast FLAG, 2011).

4 NETHERLANDS FISHERIES ACTIVITY

4.1 Subzone 2

Landing Trends, Fishing Grounds and Key Species

4.1.1 The trends in Dutch vessel landings weight and value from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area are presented in Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2, across a ten year period for all species and in Figure 4.3 for sole and plaice landings only. Consultation with Dutch fisheries indicated that the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area has been more important (and targeted to a greater extent) from 2001 to 2005 compared to 2006 to 2011. During consultation it was requested that a ten year data set be analysed, as opposed to the normal approach of assessing five year trends. 4.1.2 The total live weight was significantly higher in 2003 compared to all other years, due to landings of herring in December from ICES rectangle 36F2. As expected this is reflected in the proportions of landings by gear type with 59% of landings by weight in 2003 by pelagic otter trawl vessels. The location of herring fishing is likely to be in the southern portion of ICES rectangle 36F2, based on information from VMS. Herring are highly mobile species, caught using pelagic trawl, and are therefore not associated with a particular seabed habitat when caught. No concern over Dutch herring grounds has been raised during consultation with Dutch fisheries organisations. 4.1.3 Sole and plaice are the target species of the Dutch beam trawl fleet, with smaller quantities of turbot, brill, cod Gadus morhua, dab Limanda limanda and lemon sole taken as retained bycatch. Landings of sole and plaice by Dutch registered vessels (Figure 4.3) across 2003 to 2012 show a straight linear regression trend for value and a slight upward trend on landings weight. Landings were significantly reduced in 2008 (both weight and value) compared to previous years, but have increased from 2009- 2012, with a total value of €4.3 million of sole and plaice landed from 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2 in 2012 (IMARES, 2013). The majority (average 98%) of the catch is consistently landed by beam trawl (Figure 4.3).

4.1.4 The quotas allocated to the Netherlands for both plaice and sole have increased from 2008 to 2011 with an overall increase of 11% for sole and 25% for plaice, explaining Figure 4.1 Top: Live weight (tonnes) and value (€’000) of all landings by Dutch the increase in landings over this period. It is important to note that an increase at registered vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES quota level was represented in the landings from 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2, implying rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2003 to 2012. Bottom: proportion of proportional increases throughout grounds targeted in the North Sea. Figure 4.2 landings value by gear type (Source: IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 2013). presents value landed by species from 2003 to 2012. Most of the other species taken by the Dutch fleet follow the same pattern as sole and plaice, since they are landed in conjunction with this fishery.

2003: Herring, €12.6million

€3,500,000 Sole Herring €3,000,000 Plaice Turbot €2,500,000 Nephrops Brill €2,000,000 Cod Dab €1,500,000 Lemon sole

€1,000,000

€500,000

€0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Figure 4.2 Value (€) of all landings by Dutch registered vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2003 to 2012 by species (Source: IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 2013).

4.1.5 VMS data has been examined for the Dutch fleet across eight gear types (beam trawl, demersal seine, demersal otter trawl, purse seine, pelagic otter trawl, pots, gill nets and trammel nets). The highest level of activity is seen by the beam trawling fleet, as shown in Figure 4.4 for 2012, where ≥ 25 m vessels dominate. Beam trawl effort based on VMS data for Dutch registered vessels ≥ 25 m in length is presented for 2009 to 2011 in Appendix C. Figure 4.4 and Figure 4.5 have been sourced from the 2013 report on Dutch VMS data, prepared by IMARES, which is available at the following link:http://edepot.wur.nl/248628.. VMS data collated by the MMO for Dutch mobile vessels indicating hours fished are presented in Appendix B. 4.1.6 The Dutch fleet as a whole predominately target areas south and east of Hornsea Zone, including the area between the Dutch and East Anglia coastlines. The fleet assessed within the commercial fisheries Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) consist of 19 vessels that are known to target areas within and around the Hornsea Zone. For these vessels, areas to the west, east and north of Subzone 2 are targeted Figure 4.3 Top: Live weight (tonnes) and value (€’000) of sole and plaice landings by with greater effort (Figure 4.4). Figure 4.5 presents this effort together with the actual Dutch registered vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2003 to 2012, including linear VMS data pings to illustrate the activity in a more detailed resolution. regression. Bottom: proportion of sole and plaice landings value by gear type (Source: IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 2013).

Figure 4.4 Vessel Monitoring System data for Dutch registered beam trawl vessels actively fishing within regional commercial fisheries study area in 2012 (Source: Hintzen et al., 2013).

Figure 4.5 Vessel Monitoring System data for Dutch registered beam trawl vessels actively fishing within regional commercial fisheries study area in 2012 indicating VMS data points (Source: Hintzen et al., 2013).

Ports and Vessel Fleets

4.1.7 The majority of Dutch vessels targeting the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area land into Den Helder and IJmuiden (€4.7 million from 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2 in 2012; 69% of total) (Figure 4.6). Other ports include Scheveningen, Harlesiel and Wieringen.

Figure 4.6 Value (€) of all landings by Dutch vessels from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to Figure 4.7 Top: Value (€) of all landings by Dutch vessels from the offshore cable 2012 by port of landing (Source: IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 2013a). route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to 2012. Bottom: Value (€) of all landings by Dutch vessels from ICES rectangles 35F0 and 36F0 from 2008 to 2012 4.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor by species (Source: IMARES, 2011a; 2012; 2013a).

4.2.1 The offshore cable route corridor overlaps ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2; within these ICES rectangles an average of 92% of the Dutch landings across a five year period are from 36F1 and 36F2. This demonstrates that the waters inshore from 36F1 and 36F2 are not as important to the Dutch fleet, which will largely be due to the proximity within the 12 NM limit.

5 FRANCE FISHERIES ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT Ports and Vessel Fleets

5.1.7 Two French Producer Organisations have been consulted in relation to Project Two: From Nord and Cooperative Maritime Etaploise (C.M.E.). Approximately two vessels 5.1 Subzone 2 within From Nord and 20 vessels from C.M.E. have the potential to fish across the Landing Trends, Fishing Grounds and Key Species Hornsea Zone, including within Subzone 2 boundaries. These vessels are >22 m in length and operate otter trawling gear to target mackerel and whiting throughout the 5.1.1 The French National Committee on Marine Fisheries and Aquaculture (CNPMEM) regional commercial fisheries study area. It is unknown whether specific grounds undertook a preliminary assessment of French fishing vessel activities within Round 3 within Subzone 2 boundaries are targeted, although VMS data indicate that within the zones, based on VMS data analysed by the French Research Institute for Exploration Hornsea Zone these areas are not as important. The French vessels mainly fish the of the Sea (IFREMER, 2009). During 2008, a total of 30 French vessels were Inner Silver Pit; however this depends on the presence of red mullet and squid within recorded active within the Hornsea Zone, with the majority undertaking demersal the English Channel. If the red mullet and squid fishery in the English Channel is and/or pelagic trawling. One purse seiner was also recorded. The average good then vessels will tend to remain in this area. dependence of these French vessels on the Hornsea Zone is assessed as 2 to 3% 5.1.8 Whiting and mackerel are targeted by the French in the Hornsea area, with demersal (i.e., 97 to 98% of their effort is exerted in other fishing grounds). Dependency values otter and pelagic otter trawls respectively, although this is dependent on the level of specific to Subzone 2 are not available. quota for IVb. It is estimated that approximately 50% of the catch is whiting. Whiting 5.1.2 Only demersal trawlers were recorded to operate within Subzone 2 (Figure 5.1). In is landed into Grimsby predominately from May to June. The mackerel fishery tends total, 19 demersal trawlers were found to be active within the Hornsea Zone, with up to end by November. Mackerel are highly mobile pelagic species and are not to 5 vessels (i.e., range from 0 to 5) operating within Subzone 2. The average associated with any particular benthic habitat type. It is therefore assumed that dependence of French demersal trawlers on the Hornsea Zone was calculated at mackerel (as well as other pelagic species) potentially caught within Subzone 2, 2.1% (CNPMEM, 2009). Dependency values specific to Subzone 2 are not available. would also be available to target outside Subzone 2. 5.1.3 Combined demersal and pelagic otter trawlers were not recorded within Subzone 2. Within the Hornsea Zone, ten combined demersal and pelagic otter trawlers were found to be active, based on 2008 VMS data (CNPMEM, 2009). The average 5.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor dependence of French combined demersal and pelagic otter trawlers on the Hornsea 5.2.1 As indicated in Figure 5.1, a small amount of effort occurs across the offshore cable Zone was calculated at 2.77% (CNPMEM, 2009). route corridor. As discussed above in paragraph 5.1.7, the French vessels target the 5.1.4 VMS data for 2008 and 2009 showing the number of vessels, number of hours fished Inner Silver Pit area, immediately north of the offshore cable route corridor. The and value of the catch consistently show that the east and west sections of the offshore cable route corridor avoids the deep areas of the Silver Pitt due to technical Hornsea Zone are targeted most frequently and that little effort or catch is taken from engineering considerations and therefore the impact to the fishing fleet is likely to be the Subzone 2 boundaries. limited to effects on the fish resource as a result of construction processes. 5.1.5 VMS data collated by the MMO for French mobile vessels indicating hours fished are presented in Appendix B, and corroborate the findings above. 5.1.6 No landings statistics are available to corroborate the quantities of catch associated with the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area. More recent VMS data are also not available.

Figure 5.1 Vessel Monitoring System data for French demersal trawl (top) and combined demersal and pelagic trawl (bottom)vessels (≥ 15 m) actively fishing within regional commercial fisheries study area in 2008 (Source: CNPMEM, 2009).

6 BELGIUM FISHERIES ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT Ports and Vessel Fleets

6.1.3 Belgian beam trawlers and otter trawlers ≥ 20 m in length operate within the Hornsea Zone and the regional commercial fisheries study area. 6.1 Subzone 2 6.1.4 There are 80 vessels within the Belgian fleet represented by the only Belgian Landing Trends, Fishing Grounds and Key Species Producer Organisation, Rederscentrale. Of the 80 vessels, approximately 10 vessels are not expected to be able to steam as far north as the Hornsea Zone. Of the 6.1.1 Belgian beam trawl and demersal otter trawl vessels operate within the Subzone 2 remainder, 20 to 65 vessels have the potential to operate across the Hornsea Zone, commercial fisheries study area targeting plaice, sole, turbot, cod and monkfish or to steam through it to other areas, the most notable being Dogger Bank. Catch is Lophius piscatorius and L. budegassa. In 2009, approximately €640,000 was landed landed into Oostende, Zeebrugge or UK ports. from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area. The total value of landings from

each ICES rectangle within the regional commercial fisheries study area is presented in Figure 6.1. More recent landing statistics are not available. 6.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor

6.2.1 In 2009, Belgian vessels landed up to €50,000 (range of €0 to 50,000) from the €800,000 offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area. Figure 6.2 indicates some activity within the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area, €700,000 adjacent to the Inner Silver Pit. €600,000

€500,000

€400,000

€300,000

€200,000

€100,000

€0 35F0 35F1 35F2 35F3 36F0 36F1 36F2 36F3 37E9 37F0 37F1 37F2 37F3

Figure 6.1 Value (€) of landings by Belgian vessels in 2009 across regional commercial fisheries study area (Source: Rederscentrale, 2011a).

6.1.2 VMS data for Belgian vessels actively fishing in 2009 indicate that the highest effort occurs immediately north of the Subzone 2 boundary and in the east of Hornsea Zone (Figure 6.2). Very little effort occurs within Subzone 2. VMS data collated by the MMO for Belgian mobile vessels indicating hours fished are presented in Appendix B, and corroborate the data provided by the Belgian fishing industry.

Figure 6.2 Vessel Monitoring System data for Belgian beam trawl vessels (≥ 15 m) actively fishing within the regional commercial fisheries study area in 2009 indicating hours fished (Source: Rederscentrale, 2011b).

7 DENMARK FISHERIES ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT

7.1 Subzone 2

Landing Trends, Fishing Grounds and Key Species

7.1.1 The trends in Danish vessel landings by weight and value from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) for 2008 to 2012 are presented in Figure 7.1. Across this five year period landings from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area have averaged €2.4 million. The Danish fleet target sandeel and sprat within the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area. Sandeel are caught using demersal otter trawl gear and dominated the landings in 2008 and 2009. 2010 saw an increase in the use of pelagic pair and otter trawls which were targeting sprat. Sprat taken from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area by the Danish fleet reached a high in 2010 at a value of €700,000 (Figure 7.2). Sprat made up the majority of Danish landings from this area in 2012, targeted by pelagic otter trawls as shown in Figure 7.1. Figure 7.2 Value (€) of all landings by Danish vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to 2012 by species (Source: Danish Fisheries Directorate, 2011a; 2012; 2013).

7.1.2 A 10 year trend in live weight landed by Danish demersal, semi-pelagic and pelagic otter trawlers is presented in Figure 7.3. Overall landings from the regional commercial fisheries study area were higher from 2003 to 2006, and specifically in 2004, compared to 2007 to 2012 landings. Notable 2012 landings have dropped significantly on account of the absent sandeel fishery in the regional commercial fisheries study area (largely due to the low recruitment in 2010 and 2011). 7.1.3 VMS data for Danish vessels active in the regional commercial fisheries study area are presented in Appendix B for all mobile vessels. Within Subzone 2 there is very little activity with some demersal otter trawling recorded in the north and east of Subzone 2. Figure 7.4 to Figure 7.6 present the key sandeel fishing grounds targeted by the Danish fleet based on historical VMS data and vessel tracking information

provided by the fishing industry across a 20 year period (1991 to 2011). Figure 7.1 Left: Live weight (tonnes) and value (€’000) of all landings by Danish vessels from Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 7.1.4 The north east portion of Subzone 2 overlaps a sandeel ground that has been 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to 2012. Right: Proportion of landings targeted by the Danish fleet. Figure 7.6 presents an indicative location of turbines weight by gear type from 2008 to 2012 (Source: Danish Fisheries (Layout 1 - see Volume 1, Chapter 3: Project Description) across this sandeel Directorate, 2011a; 2012; 2013). ground.

7.1.5 The Danish sandeel vessels have not heavily targeted the Hornsea Zone area for the 7.1.6 At the start of the season sandeel fishermen will sample different grounds and then past five years due to 80 to 90% of effort being focused on Dogger Bank. The fish where the catch rates are highest. This means they may focus on one area, or sandeel fishery is very dependent on recruitment; for example in 2010 the sandeel move about, dependant on catch rates. The sandeel ground that overlaps Subzone 2 catch was predominately year 1 (from 2009 year class), however in 2011 they were has not been as productive in the past five years, however historical trends show year 2 (also from 2009 year class) due to poorer recruitment in 2010. The sandeel higher catch rates within the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area in 2001, season runs from 01 April to 31 July each year. No sandeel fishery took place in the 2002 and 2004. VMS data provided by MMO for non-UK vessels clearly shows effort Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area during 2012. across the sandeel grounds overlapping Subzone 2 in 2006. These VMS data match the sandeel grounds provided by the Danish fishing industry and are therefore likely to be Danish sandeel vessels. This is corroborated by landing statistics with a higher catch from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area in 2006 compared with 2007 to 2010 figures. Based on this evidence it is reasonable to assume that the sandeel grounds overlapping Subzone 2 could be productive in the future.

Ports and Vessel Fleets

7.1.7 Approximately 30 to 40 Danish vessels (demersal and semi-pelagic otter trawlers), 35 to 75 m in length, targeting sandeels are capable of fishing in the Hornsea area, including across the sandeel ground that overlaps Subzone 2. 7.1.8 Key landing ports are Esbjerg and Thyborøn, with smaller amounts landed into Hanstholm and Skagen.

7.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor

7.2.1 Within the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (i.e., ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, 36F1 and 36F2) an average of 91% of the Danish landings

across a five year period are landed from the portion of the offshore cable route Figure 7.3 Live weight (tonnes) of landings by Danish demersal, semi-pelagic and corridor commercial fisheries study area that overlaps Subzone 2 commercial pelagic vessels from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES fisheries study area (i.e., ICES rectangles 36F1 and 36F2). Of the remaining, 8% is rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) and the other ICES rectangles overlapping the regional commercial fisheries study area (35F0, 35F1, landed from 36F0 and 1% from 35F0, representing a value of just under €66,000 of 35F2, 36F0, 37F0 and 37F2) (Source: Danish Fisheries Directorate, 2011a; sandeel in 2009; no landings were taken from 35F0 and 36F0 in 2010 or 2011 2012; 2013). (Figure 7.7). This illustrates that the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area is more important than the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area.

Figure 7.4 Map of key sandeel fishing grounds (yellow) for Danish fleet based on Vessel Monitoring System data (Source: DTU Aqua, 2011). [Note: red, white, green, blue and navy hashed boxes represent UK, Dutch, German and Danish proposed or designated European Marine Sites).

Figure 7.5 Map of key sandeel fishing grounds (yellow) for Danish fleet based on vessel tracking data (Source: Danish Fishermen's Association, 2011).

Figure 7.6 Map of key sandeel fishing grounds (yellow) for Danish fleet based on vessel tracking data showing Subzone 2 turbine layout 1 (Source: Danish Fishermen's Association, 2011).

8 GERMAN FISHERIES ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT

8.1 Subzone 2

Landing Trends, Fishing Grounds and Key Species

8.1.1 The trends in German vessel landings weight and value from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) for 2007 to 2011 are presented in Figure 8.1; landings statistics for 2012 were not available.

Sole

2500 Plaice

Nephrops 2000 Turbot

1500 Whiting

Cod 2011 1000 Other 2010 2009 500 Brill 2008

Value (£'000) andlive weight (tonnes) Sandeel 0 2007 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Dab

Live weight Value €'000 €0 €50,000 €100,000 €150,000 €200,000

Figure 8.1 Left: Live weight (tonnes) and value (€’000) of all landings by German vessels from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 37F1, 36F1 and 36F2) from 2007 to 2011. Right: Value (€) of all landings by German vessels from ICES rectangles 36F1 and 36F2 from 2007 to 2011 by species (Source: BMELV, 2011a; 2012).

Figure 7.7 Top: Value (€) of all landings by Danish vessels from the offshore cable 8.1.2 Landings have remained relatively low across this five year period. High quantities of route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 35F0, 36F0, sandeel landings by weight are indicated to make up the 2009 catch, with €265,000 36F1 and 36F2) from 2008 to 2012. Bottom: Value (€) of all landings by taken by German vessels from ICES rectangle 37F1. Species landed throughout Danish vessels from ICES rectangles 35F0 and 36F0 from 2008 to 2012 by species (Source: Danish Fisheries Directorate, 2011a; 2012; 2013). 2007 to 2011 include sole and plaice targeted by the beam trawl fleet. Nephrops are also taken by the demersal otter trawl fleet (Figure 8.1).

8.1.3 VMS data for German vessels actively fishing across the regional commercial fisheries study area are presented in Figure 8.2 for 2010. Demersal otter trawls fish immediately north of the Subzone 2 area targeting Nephrops and mixed demersal fisheries. Beam trawlers are seen to operate along the north edge of Subzone 2 (Figure 8.2), otherwise there is very little effort within Subzone 2 by the German fleet. 8.1.4 VMS data collated by the MMO for German mobile vessels indicating hours fished are presented in Appendix B, and corroborate the above findings.

Ports and Vessel Fleets

8.1.5 The majority of German catches from the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area are landed into Den Helder (91% in 2011). Other ports landed into include Harlingen, Den Oever and IJmuiden. 8.1.6 The majority of beam trawl and demersal otter trawl vessels operating in the Subzone 2 commercial fisheries study area are ≥ 25 m (78%).

8.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor

8.2.1 No landings by German vessels are recorded in the offshore cable route corridor commercial fisheries study area (ICES rectangles 36F0 and 35F0) from 2007 to 2011. 8.2.2 VMS data (Figure 8.2) confirms that German activity within the offshore cable route corridor is unlikely.

Figure 8.2 Vessel Monitoring System data for German vessels (≥ 15 m) actively fishing within the regional commercial fisheries study area in 2010 (Source: BMELV, 2011b).

9 NORWAY FISHERIES ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT 10 SWEDISH FISHERIES ACTIVITY ASSESSMENT

9.1 Subzone 2 10.1 Subzone 2

Landing Trends, Fishing Grounds and Key Species Landing Trends, Fishing Grounds and Key Species

9.1.1 VMS data provided for Norwegian vessels across the regional commercial fisheries 10.1.1 VMS data provided by the MMO for Swedish vessel activity based on hours fished study area; together with industry consultation with the Norwegian Fishing Vessel across the regional commercial fisheries study area is presented in Appendix B, Owners Union confirm that activity across Subzone 2 is not recorded. Figure B.6 for 2010. This indicates very little effort across the regional study area, 9.1.2 Norwegian industrial trawlers operate within the North Sea targeting sandeel with with some targeted grounds located in the northeast corner of Subzone 2 and demersal trawls and sprat with pelagic trawls. From time to time they may enter the immediately north of the Subzone 2 boundary. regional commercial fisheries study area, but significant activity is not likely. 10.1.2 Based on VMS evidence for other fishing fleets, together with surveillance data, it could be reasonable to assume that these vessels are demersal otter trawlers targeting Nephrops and mixed demersal finfish species. However, consultation 9.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor indicates that the only Swedish activity in the area is of demersal otter trawlers targeting sandeels. As with the Danish and Norwegian vessels targeting sandeels, 9.2.1 Activity by the Norwegian fleet is not expected to occur across the offshore cable activity within Subzone 2 has been very low across the past five years. In terms of the route corridor. Swedish sandeel fleet, from time to time they may enter the regional commercial fisheries study area, but significant activity is not likely within Subzone 2.

10.2 Offshore Cable Route Corridor

10.2.1 Activity by the Swedish fleet is not expected to occur across the offshore cable route corridor.

11 SUMMARY . Danish pelagic trawlers targeting sprat and herring (vessels >25 m in length), occasionally within Subzone 2, targeting highly mobile species that consistently move/shoal throughout the wider Southern North Sea; 11.1.1 This technical annex has presented baseline activity data for the following countries: . German (Dutch owned) beam trawl targeting sole and plaice (vessels >25 m in UK, Netherlands, Denmark, France, Belgium, Germany and Norway. Based on quota length), operating predominately to the east and north of Subzone 2, but along allocations and landing statistics for the regional commercial fisheries study area it is the northern edge of Subzone 2; understood that vessels registered to other countries do not operate across Project . Two and the wider Hornsea Zone. Norwegian demersal trawlers targeting sandeel throughout the North Sea with occasional effort within the regional study area; and 11.1.2 The key fleet metiers operating within Project Two, the Hornsea Zone and/or regional . commercial fisheries study area include (in no particular order): Swedish demersal trawlers targeting sandeel throughout the North Sea with occasional effort within the regional study area. . UK (Dutch owned) beam trawlers targeting sole and plaice (vessels >25 m in

length), operating predominately in the east area of the Hornsea Zone, but also within Subzone 2; . UK potters targeting lobster and crab (vessels 12 to 15 m in length), operating across the offshore cable route corridor and some effort within Subzone 2; . UK demersal otter trawlers targeting Nephrops (vessels 12 to 27 m in length), operating outside Hornsea Zone, immediately north of Subzone 2, with key grounds approximately 8 km north of Subzone 2; . UK shrimpers targeting brown shrimp (vessels 10 to 20 m in length), operating close inshore and not across the offshore cable route corridor (or Subzone 2); . UK scallop dredgers targeting scallop, operating west of Hornsea Zone and across a wider area encompassing the offshore cable route corridor; . Dutch beam trawlers targeting sole and plaice (vessels >25 m in length), operating predominately in the east area of the Hornsea Zone, but also within Subzone 2; . French demersal trawlers targeting whiting (vessels 15 to 25 m in length), operating within the Inner Silver Pit, south of the export cable and little activity within Subzone 2; . French pelagic trawlers targeting mackerel (vessels 15 to 25 m in length), occasionally within the Hornsea Zone (but not regularly in Subzone 2), targeting highly mobile species that consistently move/shoal throughout the wider Southern North Sea; . Belgian beam trawlers targeting sole and plaice (vessels >25 m in length), operating predominately to the east and north of Subzone 2, with very little effort within Subzone 2; . Danish demersal trawlers targeting sandeel (vessels >25 m in length), including specific fishing grounds within Subzone 2, and to the east and west of Subzone 2 (within the Hornsea Zone);

REFERENCES attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel length category; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and value.

German Federal Ministry for Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (BMELV) (2011b). BERR (2008). Fisheries Liaison with Offshore Wind and Wet Renewables group Vessel Monitoring System data for German registered vessels recorded in 2009 and 2011 with Recommendations For Fisheries Liaison: Best Practice guidance for offshore renewable data query attributes for: sighting date; ICES rectangle; ICES subsquare; latitude; longitude; developers. vessel/gear type; course; speed; and number of sightings.German Federal Ministry for Food, Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) (2004). Offshore wind Agriculture and Consumer Protection (BMELV) (2012). Landing statistics data for German farms – Guidance note for Environmental Impact Assessment in respect of FEPA and CPA registered vessels for 2011 with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel requirements Version 2. length category; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and value. Danish Fisheries Directorate (2011a). Landing statistics data for Danish registered vessels from 2006-2010 with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel length Hintzen, N., Coers, A. and Hamon, K. (2013). A collaborative approach to mapping value of category; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and fisheries resources in the North Sea. IMARES Report number: C001/13. value. ICES (2008). ICES Advice 2008 Book 6. 6.4.7 Advice June 2008. Ecoregion North Sea Stock Danish Fisheries Directorate (2011b). Vessel Monitoring System data for Danish registered Plaice in Subarea IV (North Sea). vessels recorded in 2009 and 2011 with data query attributes for: sighting date; ICES ICES (2011). ICES Advice 2011 Book 6. 6.4.10 Advice June 2011 Ecoregion North Sea Stock rectangle; ICES subsquare; latitude; longitude; vessel/gear type; course; speed; and number of Sole in Subarea IV (North Sea). sightings. ICES (2012). ICES Advice 2012 Book 6. 6.4.10 Advice June 2012 Ecoregion North Sea Stock Danish Fisheries Directorate (2012). Landing statistics data for Danish registered vessels for Sole in Subarea IV (North Sea). 2011 with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel length category; ICES ICES (2013a). ICES Advice 2013 Book 6. 6.4.10 Advice June 2013 Ecoregion North Sea Stock rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; and live weight (tonnes). Sole in Subarea IV (North Sea). Danish Fisheries Directorate (2013). Landing statistics data for Danish registered vessels for ICES (2013b). ICES Advice 2013 Book 6. 6.4.7 Advice June 2013. Ecoregion North Sea Stock 2011 with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel length category; ICES Plaice in Subarea IV (North Sea). rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; and live weight (tonnes). ICES (2013c). ICES Advice 2013 Book 6. 6.4.26 Advice June 2013 Ecoregion North Sea Stock Danish Fishermen’s Association (2011). Maps of key sandeel grounds based on vessel Turbot in Subarea IV and Division IIIa. tracking plots from Danish registered vessels from 1985 to 2010. ICES (2013d). ICES Advice 2013 Book 6. 6.4.21 Advice March 2013. Ecoregion North Sea Technical University of Denmark National Institute of Aquatic Resources (DTU Aqua) (2011). Stock Sandeel in Division IIIa and Subarea IV. Maps of key sandeel fishing grounds detailing locations of fishing grounds that have been targeted by Danish registered vessels. ICES (2013e). ICES Advice 2013 Book 6. 6.4.18 Advice June 2013. Ecoregion North Sea Stock Sprat in Subarea IV (North Sea). Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) (2011). National Policy Statement (NPS) for Renewable Energy Infrastructure (EN-3). ICES (2013f). ICES Advice 2013 Book 5 5.4.20 Advice October 2013 Ecoregion North Sea Stock Nephrops in Subarea IV (North Sea). European Union (EU) (2013). Fishing TACs and Quotas 2011. http://ec. europa. eu/fisheries/cfp/fishing_rules/tacs/index_fr. htm Ichthys Marine (2009). Options and opportunities for marine fisheries mitigation associated with windfarms has been studied to inform consultation and mitigation choices. Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) (2005). Fisheries Technical Paper 472. Impacts of trawling and scallop dredging on benthic habitats and communities. By Svein Løkkeborg Institute for Marine Resources and Ecosystem Studies (IMARES) (2011a). Landing statistics data for Dutch registered vessels from 2006-2010 with data query attributes for: landing year; FLOW (2006). Fisheries Liaison with Offshore Wind group Framework for dialogue between landing month; vessel length category; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; the fishing and wind farm industries on how to assess the value of fishing activities and any species; live weight (tonnes); and value. disruption or displacement caused to them by wind farm developments. Institute for Marine Resources and Ecosystem Studies (IMARES) (2011b). Vessel Monitoring French Research Institute for Exploration of the Sea (IFREMER) (2009). French Vessel System data for Dutch registered vessels recorded in 2009 and 2011 with data attributes Monitoring System data analysis. presented graphically for: year; month; vessel/gear type; and vessel size category. French National Committee for Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture (CNPMEM) (2009). French Institute for Marine Resources and Ecosystem Studies (IMARES) (2012). Landing statistics answer to the consultation on round 3 UK wind farms proposal. data for Dutch registered vessels for 2011 with data query attributes for: landing year; landing German Federal Ministry for Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection (BMELV) (2011a). month; vessel length category; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live Landing statistics data for German registered vessels from 2006-2010 with data query weight (tonnes); and value.

Institute for Marine Resources and Ecosystem Studies (IMARES) (2013). Landing statistics Rederscentrale (Belgian Producer Organisation) (2011a). Landing statistics data for Belgian data for Dutch registered vessels for 2011 with data query attributes for: landing year; landing registered vessels for 2009 with data query attributes for: ICES rectangle and value. month; vessel length category; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live Rederscentrale (Belgian Producer Organisation) (2011b). Vessel Monitoring System data for weight (tonnes); and value. Belgian registered vessels recorded in 2009 with data attributes presented graphically for: gear Løkkeborg, L. (2005). Impacts of trawling and scallop dredging on benthic habitats and type and hours fished per year. communities. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper 472. Visserijnieuws (2010). Online Fishing News. http://visserijnieuws.punt.nl/?home=1 [accessed Marchal, P. (2008). A comparative analysis of métiers and catch profiles for some French 12 July 2011]. demersal and pelagic fleets. – ICES Journal of Marine Science, 65: pp. 674–686.

Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2010). Surveillance data for 2009-2010 with data

query attributes for: sighting date; ICES rectangle; ICES subsquare; latitude; longitude; vessel/gear type; activity; nationality; course; speed; and number of sightings. Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2011a). Landing statistics data for UK registered vessels from 2006-2010 with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel length category; country code; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and value. Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2011b). Vessel Monitoring System data for UK registered vessels recorded in 2009 and 2011 with data query attributes for: sighting date; ICES rectangle; ICES subsquare; latitude; longitude; vessel/gear type; course; speed; and number of sightings. Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2012). Landing statistics data for UK registered vessels for 2011 with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel length category; country code; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and value. Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2013a). Landing statistics data for UK registered vessels for 2013 with data query attributes for: landing year; landing month; vessel length category; country code; ICES rectangle; vessel/gear type; port of landing; species; live weight (tonnes); and value. Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2013b). Vessel Monitoring System data for UK registered vessels for 2008-2012 indicating value of catch and hours fishing for mobile and static vessels to a resolution of 200th of an ICES rectangle. Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2013c). Vessel Monitoring System data for non-UK registered vessels for 2009 indicating hours fishing for mobile and static vessels to a resolution of 200th of an ICES rectangle. Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2013d). Surveillance data for 2011-2012 with data query attributes for: sighting date; ICES rectangle; ICES subsquare; latitude; longitude; vessel/gear type; activity; nationality; course; speed; and number of sightings. National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations (NFFO)., pers. comm. (2010). Hornsea Project One Scoping and Zone Characterisation Review. Interviewed by Nimmo, F., NFFO offices, York, UK. 16 September 2010. Norwegian Directorate of Fisheries (2011). Vessel Monitoring System data for Norwegian registered vessels recorded in 2009 and 2011 with data query attributes for: sighting date; ICES rectangle; ICES subsquare; latitude; longitude; vessel/gear type; course; speed; and number of sightings. Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management Consultants (2010). Photo gallery. http://www.consult-poseidon.com/photo-gallery.asp [accessed 20 July 2011].

42 sdf APPENDIX A VESSEL MONITORING SYSTEM (VMS) DATA FOR UK REGISTERED VESSELS

Figure A.1 VMS data for actively fishing UK registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2012 (Source: MMO, 2013).

43 sdf

Figure A.2 VMS data for actively fishing UK registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2012 (Source: MMO, 2013).

44 sdf

Figure A.3 VMS data for actively fishing UK registered mobile vessels indicating value of catch in 2011 (Source: MMO, 2013).

45 sdf

Figure A.4 VMS data for actively fishing UK registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2011 (Source: MMO, 2013).

46 sdf

Figure A.5 VMS data for actively fishing UK registered mobile vessels indicating value of catch in 2010 (Source: MMO, 2013).

47 sdf

Figure A.6 VMS data for actively fishing UK registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2010 (Source: MMO, 2013).

48 sdf

Figure A.7 VMS data for actively fishing UK registered mobile vessels indicating value of catch in 2009 (Source: MMO, 2013).

49 sdf

Figure A.8 VMS data for actively fishing UK registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2009 (Source: MMO, 2013).

50 sdf

Figure A.9 VMS data for actively fishing UK registered mobile vessels indicating value of catch in 2008 (Source: MMO, 2013).

51 sdf

Figure A.10 VMS data for actively fishing UK registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2008 (Source: MMO, 2013).

52 sdf APPENDIX B MMO VMS DATA FOR NON-UK VESSELS

Figure B.1 VMS data for actively fishing Belgian registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2010 (Source: MMO, 2013).

53 sdf

Figure B.2 VMS data for actively fishing Danish registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2010 (Source: MMO, 2013).

54 sdf

Figure B.3 VMS data for actively fishing Dutch registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2010 (Source: MMO, 2013).

55 sdf

Figure B.4 VMS data for actively fishing French registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2010 (Source: MMO, 2013).

56 sdf

Figure B.5 VMS data for actively fishing German registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2010 (Source: MMO, 2013).

57 sdf

Figure B.6 VMS data for actively fishing Swedish registered mobile vessels indicating hours fished in 2010 (Source: MMO, 2013).

58 sdf APPENDIX C IMARES VMS DATA FOR DUTCH REGISTERED VESSELS

Figure C.1 Dutch VMS Beam trawl value, 2011 (Source: IMARES, 2012).

59 sdf

Figure C.2 Dutch VMS Beam trawl for vessels > 25m, 2010 (Source: IMARES, 2011).

60 sdf

Figure C.3 Dutch VMS Beam trawl for vessels > 25m in length, 2009 (Source: IMARES, 2011).

61 sdf

APPENDIX D MEETING MINUTES 04 May 2011 North Sea Demersal Regional Advisory Committee: National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations (NFFO); VisNed (Dutch Producer Organisation) and Danish Fishermen's Association 04 May 2011 North Sea Demersal Regional Advisory Committee: National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations (NFFO); Visned (Dutch Producer Organisation) and Danish Fishermen's Association 03 September 2011 Vis Ned, Cpo Nederlandse Visserbond And Dutch Fish Product Board Minutes of Meeting 07 September 2011 From Nord, Cooperative Maritime Etaploise and CRPMEM Nord Project Title Hornsea Offshore Wind Farm - Project One 09 September 2011 Rederscentrale (Belgian Producer Organisation) Purpose of Workshop with North Sea Demersal RAC members on capture fisheries 29 September 2011 Danmarks Fiskeriforening/ Danish Fishermen's Association and Meeting within Hornsea Round 3 Offshore Wind Farm zone Sydvestjysk Fiskeriforening Date of Meeting: 4 May 2011 04 November 2011 Holderness Coast Fishing Industry Group Held at: Pescatori, Charlotte Street, London 04 November 2011 East of England Fish Producers Organisation Present: Zoe Crutchfield (ZC) – SMart Wind 14 January 2012 Vis Ned and Dutch Vessel Skippers Penny Pickett (PP) – SMart Wind 16 January 2012 Danish Fishermen's Association Fiona Nimmo (FN) – Poseidon 25 January 2012 North Shields Nephrops Demersal Otter Trawling Fleet Barry Deas (BD) – NFFO 07 June 2012 Bridlington Potting Fleet Arnold Locker (AL) – NFFO Pim Visser (PV) – Visned 30 August 2012 Holderness Coast Fishing Industry Group Willem De Boer (WDB) – Visned 30 August 2012 North Shields Nephrops demersal otter trawling fleet Nigel Proctor (NP) – Precision Marine 31 August 2012 National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations and East of Henrick Lund (HL) - Danish Fishermen's Association England Fish Producers Organisation Nick Garside – SMart Wind/ NFFO Services (Hornsea FLO) 07 September 2012 Rederscentrale (Belgian Producer Organisation) Copies to: All above 08 September 2012 Vis Ned and Dutch vessel skippers Compiled by: Zoe Crutchfield and Fiona Nimmo 12 September 2012 Danmarks Fiskeriforening/ Danish Fishermen's Association and Sydvestjysk Fiskeriforening

11 October 2012 From Nord, Cooperative Maritime Etaploise and CRPMEM Nord Item Notes: Action by: 06 June 2014 Holderness Coast Fishing Industry Group Introductions 25 September 2014 National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations (NFFO), 1 ZC: thanks attendees for joining, asks for introductions and hands over Holderness Coast Fishing Industry Group (HCFIG) and Visned to FN for presentation and workshop. (Presentation slides are provided in separate pdf document) Overview of approach to consultation 2 BD: Can provide details for Comité National for us to contact. BD PV: Change to Dutch Fishermen Association (not Federation) FN Data sourcing BD and AL: Noted that French landing data into Grimsby should be 3 available from Defra. FN: Explained that data from MMO does include French registered vessels landing into the UK, but that there have been issues with

62 sdf

Item Notes: Action by: Item Notes: Action by: obtaining French landing statistics for landings into France. trawling it is considered appropriate and conservative to leave the BD: France is currently having a big problem with their statistics and speeds as they currently are. All other speed ranges for different our case will not be isolated with others having the same difficulty in vessel/gears actively fishing are agreed by the group. obtaining data. ICES have expressed concern that France is not FN BD: Asks how England and Scotland are defined on landings figures? meeting its EU obligations. FN: Explains that this is based on where vessels are registered and BD and AL: In relation to issues with obtaining VMS data the NFFO not on where landings are made. FN meet with MMO and one of the items on the agenda discussed this. AL: Explains that vessels can be English owned but operating out of The NFFO made a number of points concerning the MMO charging Scotland and vice versa. Scottish registered Anglo-Dutch vessels – people for data. The NFFO do not think it is appropriate for the MMO flagged into England last year; most of the vessels are English, but to charge for data that does not belong to them – the fishermen pay for some Scottish. the VMS related equipment and they should therefore own the data. It is agreed that English, Scottish and Northern Irish data will be Shortly after these discussions the MMO took much harder line on amalgamated into ‘UK’ (without country separation). distributing VMS data – reason given was that NFFO objected. Species specific points are made by the group as follows: Baseline activity across zone and sub-zone The sandeel fishery is very changeable and the fishermen move to

AL: Notes that the first sub-zone looks to be right within the spawning where the fish are. Mostly target the Dogger Bank but also move into area for whiting. Whiting are thought to spawn in this area from the Hornsea area is that is where the sandeels are present. The January to March. Data from French fleet should show that whiting is sandeel fishery is from April to July. more important across this area than current figures indicate. Sole landings drop off in April/May as individuals go to the shore to NP: Notes that Coull et al. is out of date. spawn FN: Agree and reassures that both Coull et al. and newly published FN Plaice is a retained species from the targeted sole fishery – so when Cefas (2011) mapping on spawning and nursery grounds will be sole landings drop off so do plaice landings. considered. EMU Ltd are undertaking the natural fish surveys and impact assessment so the commercial fisheries chapter will link in with 5 Sprat landings are very sporadic – mainly in autumn/spring that process. Details of the whiting spawning area will be passed onto The value of lobster and crab goes up thru the year for Easter and EMU. Christmas markets.

AL: Considered that there may be problems with using a 40 mm cod Nephrops landings in 2010 had an unusual pattern. Explained that the

end trawl for the surveys because this is likely to fill up with fish and main Nephrops grounds are north of the zone and if this fishery is drag in the water becoming much less efficient. He questions whether being targeted then they will not tend to move south. But can move this is the right tool for the job. into the zone if this more northern fishery is not targeted. 4 ZC: Assures that the survey design has been provided by EMU to Noted that for ‘seasonality’ of catch there are many other paramaters NFFO and Cefas for approval. in play that impact when and how much fish is landed including management measures, quotas, etc. It is important to understand that BD: Notes that for whiting the statistics show the catch and do not quota restrictions are in place. provide perspective on the potential of the fishery. On the west side of North Sea there is a large abundance of whiting but the UK TAC only allows UK vessels to take a small amount, the Dutch for example can catch. The value of whiting fishery in this area is therefore based on what is caught when vessel s are restrained by quota, we should also consider future potential catch (e.g., if quotas increase). FN: Explains process of cleaning VMS data based on speeds and that the speeds presented had been discussed and agreed with NFFO

(Dave Bevan and Dale Rodmell) during the scoping phase of the project. Group are asked if they are happy with the speeds. The group discusses speed of beam trawlers and whether they tend to fish between 3 to 6 knots, or perhaps 3 to 7 knots, although it is also noted that the larger boats may well fish at slightly higher speeds. Since the current data sorting is based on 3 to 8 knots for beam

63 sdf

Item Notes: Action by: Item Notes: Action by: UK Landing Statistics and VMS Cumulative and in-combination impacts AL: Caution over information the data provided by the MMO; would FN BD: discussed SAC and MPAs and advised that the Regulatory Impact FN tend to have more confidence in earlier data that was entered by MFA. Assessments (RIA) are reviewed to inform our cumulative impact Of note gill net data, seine etc. assessment. The industry has also provided a response to management measures. The RIA considers various management BD: What is the quality control on the landing statistics and VMS data? ZC: To an extent this workshop forms part of the quality control (i.e., to options, but it could be reasonable to assume that there would be complete exclusion especially for mobile gears. ground truth the data with the industry).

AL: Where are Nephrops trawls included? 9 Position of turbines, cable burial and operational safety zones are touched upon and will be discussed in more detail at future FN: Within the demersal trawlers. consultation meetings. 6 FN: Asks re lack of data for beam trawlers in 2010. FN Attendees agree to assist in setting up future in country meetings with AL and BD: State there is no reason why there should be no landings the industry. It is envisaged these will take place in early September by UK beam trawlers and also that pots landings in 2009 appear much and that details of the turbine layout, offshore cable route corridor and lower than previous and preceding years. Further emphasises concern construction details will be discussed. Future meetings will focus more over MMO data. on impact assessment and meeting the fishermen that are active BD: Enquires when construction will start. Noting that it will be difficult across the Hornsea area. to predict what might happen; you can say this is of relative marginal; Thanks potential lost opportunity; fishery asset that will be removed; Botney 10 Gut is an important fishing ground of muddy areas and is a special Thanks are given to all those in attendance and the workshop is habitat for Nephrops and you can see this in the quality of fish that is adjourned. caught in the area. Dutch Landing Statistics and VMS PV: In 2008 fuel prices may have resulted in fewer Dutch vessels fishing as far north as Hornsea and instead targeting other areas. PV: Notes that some of the landing codes are wrong – HD is not FN 7 Halmstad but should be Den Helder. Also noted that Texel and Lemvig are not fishing ports FN: Explains colour coding and agrees that small landings into smaller ports will be amalgamated so as not to be misleading. Codes will be checked for landing ports. Danish Landing Statistics and VMS HL: explains Danish VMS sandeel figure is based on trawl lines for 20/30 years for vessels targeting sandeel, but also sprat. Fishing grounds tend to be the same year after year - if fishery is good on Dogger Bank the fleet will remain here and not move south to Hornsea area, but if Dogger Bank not good then the vessels will move south. The cumulative impact with Dogger Bank Round 3 zone will be 8 important for the Danish. The sandeel fishery is extremely valuable across the Dogger Bank. HL: notes that the ‘Demersal Danish VMS’ is also for sandeel grounds and shows historic fishing banks that have been targeted by 150/200 vessels; approximately 30/40 fish on the Dogger Bank. HL: notes that Norway is likely to have the second largest sandeel fishery and could catch sandeel within the Hornsea Zone. It is important to consider the full portfolio of fishing opportunities.

64 sdf Jan van der Vis - TX 36 03 September 2011 Vis Ned, CPO Nederlandse Visserbond and Dutch Fish Product Cora Seip - Dutch Fish Product Board Board Sandra Beekman - Dutch Fish Product Board Compiled by: Rod Cappell, Fiona Nimmo and Chris Jenner

Minutes of Meeting Notes: Action by: Project Title Hornsea Round 3 Zone and Project One Introductions Meeting to present details of Hornsea Zone and Project One; ground PV: Thanks attendees for joining, introduces Hornsea, Dogger Bank, East Purpose of truth baseline activity assessments of VMS and landing statistics and Anglia and JNCC teams before handing over to CJ and FN for presentations on Meeting consult and understand the level of activity across the zone. the Hornsea zone. (Presentations are provided in separate pdf documents) Date of Meeting: 3 September 2011 Hornsea Zone CJ: Presents current status for Hornsea zone development including details of Held at: 17 Treubstraat, Rijswijk, Netherlands ongoing surveys, indicative 4 GW layout and three layouts for Project One (the Present: W. (Pim) Visser (PV ) - Vis Ned first project which consists of Subzone 1, the offshore cable route corridor and Derk Jan Berends (DJB) - CPO Nederlandse Visserbond onshore infrastructure). Chris Jenner (CJ) - SMart Wind CJ: Provides details of metocean data which is streamed online and available Rod Cappell (RC) - Poseidon from the SMart Wind website www.smartwind.co.uk. Fiona Nimmo (FN) - Poseidon Group: The issue of cables raised and concern over the potential for EMF effects on fish. Stephen Appleby - Brown + May CJ: Clarifies that the offshore cable route corridor to shore will be DC rather than Nigel Proctor - PMSL AC so no impact from EMF. Inter-array cables will still be AC, however at a Johnny Murt - JNCC burial depth of 1m there is no evidence that measureable interactions with fish Magnus Eriksen - Forewind will occur. This impact will be thoroughly assessed within the Fish and Shellfish Declan Tobin - JNCC EIA chapter (being undertaken by EMU) and this information will be fed into the Commercial Fisheries EIA. Ian Rowe - NetGain UK Presentation is provided as a separate pdf J Hakvoort - Vis Ned Derk Jan Berends - NL Vissersbond Hornsea Zone - Dutch commercial fisheries A de Boer - Vis Ned/LFPO FN: Presents baseline assessment of Dutch fisheries operating within the Hornsea Zone and Project One area. Data includes landings statistics for the six R.J. de Boer - Wilhelmina BV LT 60 / LFBO ICES rectangles that overlap the zone and the two ICES rectangles that overlap Pieter Avis v/d Vis - Tx 68 Subzone 1 (36F1 and 36F2). VMS data is presented at a scale of 1/16th of an F. Krijnen - Tx 19 ICES rectangle; this is the resolution provided by IMARES. VMS data is Louwe de Boer - H-35 J Good- Hope presented by gear type and vessel length; the highest level of activity is seen J van Dam - GO- 14 from the over 25 m beam trawl fleet. S vd Vis - TX 3 Presentation is provided as a separate pdf. Hendrik de Boer - WN-1 Hornsea Zone - Break-out group 1 G.Groenendijk - GO - 9 Fishing grounds J. Tanis - GO - 48 The locations targeted are discussed by the fishermen in this first break out G Betsema - TX 38 group. M de boer - PD 63 The majority of the fishermen in this group target sole and take plaice as a retained bycatch. Vessels targeting plaice now tend to focus effort in the Dogger L de Boer - PD 63 Bank area. Hornsea is a mixed plaice/sole zone (mostly targeted by sole J. de Boer - PD 657 directed fishers at the moment). This year the area south of 55o is a sole and J vd Vis - TX 36 plaice fishery and the area north of 55o is mainly a plaice fishery. The main

65 sdf

Notes: Action by: Notes: Action by: fishing season for the mixed sole and plaice fishery is from September to March. DJB radius safety zones around oil and gas platforms and fishermen would not be It is initially suggested that 15 vessels operate across the zone, but when listing CSM insured if they were to fish within these areas). It is expected to be a similar case vessel numbers, 22 vessels are noted (perhaps 15 Dutch and seven Dutch- FN for wind turbines (i.e., they would not be insured to fish within safety zones, but owned UK flag vessels know to operate in the zone). DJB agrees to provide this would be to fish between turbines assuming not excluded from site). CJ stated list to CSM to provide data for these vessels. It is agreed that landing statistics, that safety zones on other wind farms has been set at 50 m – the Dutch earnings data and VMS will be provided for each vessel that operates across the fishermen confirmed they would not wish to fish this close to turbines in any zone with an indication of the level of effort within the zone and Subzone 1. CSM FN case. and FN to co-ordinate. Hornsea Zone - Break-out group 2 There is a general feeling from the fishermen that the landings statistics under- Andries de Boer: AdB (UK flag beam trawl vessel) and two others (Dutch) all represent the value taken from this area. It is agreed that the landing stats beam trawling vessels join the second break out group. provided by IMARES will be cross referenced with the data for individual vessels AdB targets plaice on the Dogger at present but two years ago fished regularly (as discussed in previous point). on the Hornsea area and is likely to fish there again. It is estimated that one vessel will land up to €1.5 million annually. It is suggest that a much longer time period (10 years) is considered for landings FN Potential for operating within a wind farm data to allow a truer picture of variable effort. From 1996 to two years ago fished The fishermen state that they are not permitted to fish in current Dutch or that area so need to look further back with data. German wind farms, but would look to fish in the area between turbines if (NOTE – there has been a lot of decommissioning in recent years of beam permitted and enough space to allow fishing operations including turning. trawlers so effort will have decreased substantially in all areas). CJ explains that current offshore wind farms in UK waters have a range of Existing wind farms not allowed to fish between but the turbines are much closer turbine spacing of approximately 800 to 1,200 m depending on turbine size and together. Found that fishing near the wind farm was good during construction, alignment with wind direction. There is no uniform rule for restriction or but now in operation the fish have moved elsewhere (German Bight experience). permission of static or mobile gear fisheries activity. The spacing of the turbines Concern is raised over AC cables and fish not crossing the cables to previously for the Hornsea project varied between a 3.6 MW and 6 MW spacing as good fishing grounds. provided in the presentation. The layouts of turbines are discussed. It is felt that either turbines spaced out to It is stated by CJ that the smaller turbines (3.6 MW) could be 924 m x 1,320 m maximize chance of fishing between turbines or turbines close together to apart and the larger (6 MW) 1,617 m x 1,155 m apart. Three turbine layouts are minimize the overall size of wind farm would be optimal for the fishermen. The being considered for Subzone 1 based on a combination of 3.6 MW and 6 MW fishermen also propose a layered layout of turbines as wind is mainly SW and turbines. The final layout (and turbine type) will be decided post consent. The would be less disruptive to fishing. CJ explains layout options and restrictions EIA will consider the worst case scenario. The fishermen expect that 1km would within the Hornsea zone and why certain options are not viable. Again it is allow fishing between the turbines. discussed that if 6 MW turbines are used then chances of fishing within the wind farm are maximized. Fishermen suggest that their beam trawl gear has approximately 20 cm depth penetration. If cables are buried to 1 m it may be possible to continue fishing As ground is hard across parts of the project area the fishermen suggest there is without damaging the cables - they do this already with existing cables and only 2 to 3 cm penetration by beam trawl gear. pipelines – they do not avoid this current infrastructure, they fish over them Concerns about electrical effects of cables given pulse trawls fish with far less without problems. than 33 kV and so would have to be buried much deeper. Explained not One sole fisherman indicated he took about 25% of his catch from the project attempting to transmit, but insulate to retain charge. area with the rest of the time spent fishing further south. Another suggested Fishing is very variable – will sometimes fish shallower and sometimes deeper. approximately 30% of catch is taken within the zone. The gear – 12 m beam x 2 Mainly between 20 to 55 m depth. Not as deep as the Silver Pit which gets to plus 9 m vessel breadth and some spread results in a 40 m width towed area. A 70 m. The size of areas fished varies and depends on the catch - sometimes the fishing line is 3 to 4 miles in length and they will go up and down this about three whole weeks trip will be towing across a small area. times per tow. There is an approximately 500 m turning circle suggesting they The beam trawlers never come across pots within the zone. could fish between the turbines. Again the values of the landings are queried. It is thought by the fishermen that The vessels will typically undertake ten to 15 trips per year, each trip is from the value is not correct as some years could spend 50 to 60% of time in area Monday to Friday/Saturday. The vessels support a crew of six and and av. trip earnings 40,000 x 200 days per year closer to 800,000 per vessel approximately three onshore personnel. per year and if 50 to 60% then 400,000 to 500,000 per vessel. The issue of insurance is discussed and whether it would be an increase in Close insurance to operate within a wind farm. The fishermen state that they are not Thanks are given to all those that attended and the meeting is adjourned. insured to fish in areas that are prohibited for fishing (e.g., there are 500 m

66 sdf

Notes: Action by: 07 September 2011 From Nord, Cooperative Maritime Etaploise and CRPMEM Nord show number of vessels, hours fished and value. Presentation is provided as a separate pdf. Discussion Species and fishing grounds Minutes of Meeting The French vessels mainly fish on Silver Pitt next to Grimsby, however this depends on the presence of red mullet and squid within the Channel. If the red Project Title Hornsea Round 3 Zone and Project One mullet and squid fishery in the Channel is good then vessels will tend to stay in Meeting to present details of Hornsea Zone and Project One; ground Purpose of the Channel. truth baseline activity assessments of VMS and landing statistics and Meeting Whiting and mackerel are targeted by the French in the Hornsea area, although consult and understand the level of activity across the zone. this is dependent on the level of quota for IVb. It is estimated that approximately Date of Meeting: 7 September 2011 50% of the catch is whiting. Whiting is landed into Grimsby predominately from May to June. The mackerel fishery tends to end by November. Chambre du Commerce et de l’industrie, 54 Quai de la Loire, 62100 Held at: Calais Concern is raised over the MCZs in relation to key fishing grounds across Silver Pitt. Currently the UK and French vessels have a gentlemen’s agreement Present: Angélique Merlet (AM) - From Nord regarding areas targeted by UK pots and French trawlers. The MCZ is proposed

Alexiane Brefort (AB) - Cooperative Maritime Etaploise (C.M.E.) to lie across the area for French trawlers, so they could lose this fishing ground.

Antony Viera (AV) - CRPMEM Nord Number of vessels

Penny Pickett (PP) - SMart Wind It is estimated that two vessels within the From Nord PO and 20 vessels from

Fiona Nimmo (FN) - Poseidon the C.M.E. PO fish across the Hornsea zone. This is to be confirmed with the PO members (as laid out in questions below). Compiled by: Fiona Nimmo and Penny Pickett Potential for operating within a wind farm FN enquires whether French vessels currently operate within wind farms or if they have considered operating within wind farms. Notes: Action by: PP explains the potential spacing between turbines within Project One: the Introductions smaller turbines (3.6 MW) are estimated to be spaced approximately 900 m x 1200 m apart and the larger (6.0 MW) 1,100 m x 1,600 m apart. Three turbine Introductions are made and the role of Poseidon (commercial fisheries consultants) and SMart Wind (developer for Hornsea zone) are explained. AM layouts are being considered for Subzone 1 based on a combination of 3.6 MW and AB outline their role in respective Producer Organizations (POs) and AV and 6 MW turbines. The final layout (and turbine type) will be decided post outlines his involvement in NetGain. consent. AM and FN explains that the EIA will consider the worst case scenario for commercial AB Hornsea Zone fishing. PP: Presents current status for Hornsea Zone development including details of AM and AB agree to feedback whether French vessels would consider operating FN ongoing surveys, indicative 4 GW Zone layout and three potential layouts for within a wind farm with their PO members. Project One (the first project which consists of Subzone 1, the offshore cable route corridor and onshore infrastructure). FN agrees to provide a series of questions to be put forward and discussed with AM and PO members (see below). PP: Provides details of the current surveys ongoing across the Zone including AB metocean data which is streamed live online and available for download from AM and AB agree to discuss these with their respective POs. the SMart Wind website www.smartwind.co.uk. Close AV: Requested shape files for Project One. PP confirmed that these would be PP Thanks are given to all those that attended and the meeting is adjourned. sent. Presentation is provided as a separate pdf Hornsea Zone - French commercial fisheries FN: presents baseline assessment of French fisheries operating within the Hornsea Zone and Project One area. No landings statistics by the French fleet are available. VMS data has been mapped by IFREMER for 2008 and 2009 to

67 sdf

Questions for members of From Nord and C.M.E. Do you currently fish within wind farms already constructed? If no, why? AM and AB kindly agree to discuss the Hornsea Zone with their PO members. Yes The following questions are put forward to the POs [answers received by From Would you consider fishing within a wind farm if spacing between turbines was Nord are provided in blue]: appropriate? How many vessels actively fish across the Hornsea Zone? What size Yes (length/power) are the vessels and what gear is used? What spacing would you consider to allow fishing between turbines? Two vessels: 300 to 500 m LE PRECURSEUR (899829) Length: 22.50 meters

Power: 455 Kw/ 103 UMS Gear: Trawl SAINT JEAN BAPTISTE (734689) Length: 24 meters Power: 441 Kw/163 UMS Gear: Trawl How many vessels actively fish within the Project One area (Subzone 1 and offshore cable route corridor)? Size and gear of vessels? As above What is the dependency on the Zone and Project One area (e.g., what percentage of time is spent annually fishing in a. the Hornsea Zone and b. the Project One area)? Per vessel: 2 months of fishing per year How many trips are taken annually, how long is each trip and how many days are fished annually? Around 8 trips every year, during 5 days each = 40 days What scale of area is fished in one trip? Hornsea zone: 45 miles / Project One: 20 miles What is the steaming time to the Hornsea Zone? 18 h

What is the fuel cost for steaming a distance of 1 NM? 120 liters of fuel per hour  10 minutes for 1 mile 0.60 € per liter 20 liters for 1 mile x 0.60 € = 12€ How many crew are on each vessel? 7 crew members What are the key species landed from the Hornsea Zone? Mackerel, whiting What are the key seasons for these species? Months: April, May, June Are landing statistics available for the vessels that operate across the Zone? Including details of year, month, species, live weight, value, ICES rectangle, gear type and vessel size? Not authorized to provide.

68 sdf

09 September 2011 Rederscentrale (Belgian Producer Organisation) Notes: Action by: Discussion Number of vessels and key species TC: There are 80 vessels within the Belgian fleet and Rederscentrale is the only

Belgian PO. Around 10 vessels are small and not expected to be able to steam Minutes of Meeting as far north as Hornsea. Of the remainder, 20 to 65 are likely to operate across Hornsea Zone, or to steam through it to other areas, most notable Dogger Bank. Project Title Hornsea Round 3 Zone and Project One SA: States that the key species are sole and plaice, with some cod and other Meeting to present details of Hornsea Zone and Project One; ground Purpose of species such as turbot taken as bycatch. truth baseline activity assessments of VMS and landing statistics and Meeting SA: Explains that the beam trawl gear operated by the Belgian fleet is much consult and understand the level of activity across the zone. lighter than the UK or Dutch and does not dig into the seabed. Operation over Date of Meeting: 9 September 2011 buried cable is therefore not thought to be a concern. Held at: Rederscentrale, H. Baelskaai 25, B-8400 Oostende SA and TC: Explain that there are approximately six crew on board vessels > 25 m and four crew on vessels < 25 m. The vessels fish for approximately 150 Present: Tom Craeynest (TC) - Rederscentrale days per year and trips are 5 to 10 days long.

Steyoent Albert (SA) - Vessel owner Data

Penny Pickett (PP) - SMart Wind FN: Explains that the data received for UK, Dutch, German, Norwegian and

Fiona Nimmo (FN) - Poseidon Danish are very detailed with five year landings statistics reported by gear, species, month and ICES rectangle. Currently the Belgian landing statistics cannot be amalgamated with the total data set because it does not have enough Compiled by: Fiona Nimmo and Penny Pickett detail to allow species profiles to be understood etc. TC: Explains that they are not happy to provide data due to previous experience where data they provided was used inappropriately. Notes: Action by: FN: States that the EIA can only currently be informed by the ICES rectangle Introductions statistics already provided and a clear understanding of the level of effort may

Introductions are made and the role of Poseidon (commercial fisheries not be possible. consultants) and SMart Wind (developer for Hornsea Zone) are explained. TC: States that the Belgian fisheries have had historical rights to fish this area for the past 65 years. Hornsea Zone Potential for operating within a wind farm PP: Presents current status for Hornsea Zone development including details of ongoing surveys, indicative 4 GW Zone layout and three potential layouts for FN: enquires whether Belgian vessels currently operate within wind farms or if Project One (the first project which consists of Subzone 1, the offshore cable they have considered operating within wind farms. route corridor and onshore infrastructure). PP explains the potential spacing between turbines within Project One: the PP: Provides details of the current surveys ongoing across the zone including smaller turbines (3.6 MW) are estimated to be spaced approximately 900 m x 1200 m apart and the larger (6.0 MW) 1,100 m x 1,600 m apart. Three turbine metocean data which is streamed live online and available for download from the SMart Wind website www.smartwind.co.uk. layouts are being considered for Subzone 1 based on a combination of 3.6 MW and 6 MW turbines. The final layout (and turbine type) will be decided post Presentation is provided as a separate pdf. consent. If all turbines are 3.6 MW then Project One would consist of 332 Hornsea Zone – Belgian commercial fisheries turbines; if all turbines are 6 MW then Project one would consist of FN: Oresents baseline assessment of Belgian fisheries operating within the approximately 200 turbines, Hornsea Zone and Project One area. FN: Explains that the EIA will consider the worst case scenario, but we are very interested to know whether vessels would consider operating within a wind farm. 2009 landings statistics per ICES rectangle are presented as are amalgamated VMS data for Belgian vessels fishing from 2006 to 2009. The VMS shows that TC: Believes that Belgian vessels will not operate within a wind farm, regardless the majority of the activity within The Hornsea Zone is in the eastern section and of turbine spacing, due to health and safety. Should a vessel suffer any engine immediately north of the Zone. The landing statistics indicate that 36F2 is more failure then collision risk with a turbine would be of immediate concern. important than 36F1, which corroborates VMS data. TC: Explains the distance between turbines has been previously discussed with Presentation is provided as a separate pdf. the fishing industry. A minimum distance of 2 km between turbines was

69 sdf

Notes: Action by: 29 September 2011 Danmarks Fiskeriforening/ Danish Fishermen's Association and expected to be required if fishing between turbines were to be possible. Sydvestjysk Fiskeriforening SA: Also explains that wind turbines can impact radar and GPS systems PP: Explains that the UK Marine and Coastguard Agency (MCA) and industry bodies are currently investigating mitigation measures for radar interference and this would be considered within the EIA. Minutes of Meeting TC: Would prefer to see turbines closer together to reduce the overall area of the wind farm. Project Title Hornsea Round 3 Zone and Project One

PP: Explains that this is not possible due to need for wind recovery. SMart Wind Meeting to present details of Hornsea Zone and Project One; ground are keen to find workable situations, working with the fishing industry to co-exist Purpose of truth baseline activity assessments of VMS and landing statistics and with them. SMart Wind have committed to develop 4 GW from the Hornsea Meeting consult and understand the level of activity across the zone. Zone. Due to hard constraints of depth etc and safety issues (distance from oil and gas infrastructure for safe helicopter flight paths and shipping lanes for safe Date of Meeting: 29 September 2011 navigation passage), the zone is already heavily constrained. Held at: Danish Fishermen's Association, Nordensvej 3, Taulov, Fredericia TC: Explains that while Hornsea Zone may not be the most concern compared

to the other Round 3 zones and MCZ proposals, it does represent loss of Present: Henrik Lund (HL) - Danmarks Fiskeriforening/ Danish Fishermen's potential ground and also additional steaming time to northern grounds. TC Association FN: Enquires about steaming times and the cost of steaming 1 nautical mile. Jesper Juul Larsen (JL) - Sydvestjysk Fiskeriforening SA: Confirms it takes approximately 20 hours to steam from Oostende or Luna Hensen (LH) - Journalist, Danish Fishermen's Association Zeebrugge to Hornsea Zone and approximately 10 hours from the east section PP Newspaper of Hornsea Zone to Netherlands. The Belgian vessels often land into UK ports Penny Pickett (PP) - SMart Wind also (and catch is transported by lorry to Belgian markets). Fiona Nimmo (FN) - Poseidon TC: Agrees to speak with members of Rederscentrale regarding data and further Compiled by: Fiona Nimmo and Penny Pickett details of the number of vessels currently operating across the Hornsea Zone. FN: Has provided additional questions to ask PO members, as laid out below. PP: Suggests supplying a map of the Hornsea Zone and Project One with a Notes: Action by: background admiralty chart, to assist with consultation. Introductions Close Introductions are made and the role of Poseidon (commercial fisheries Thanks are given to all those that attended and the meeting is adjourned. consultants) and SMart Wind (developer for Hornsea Zone) are explained. HL, JL and LH explain their positions and responsibilities. JL was previously a sandeel fishermen and is current the Vice President of the Danish Fishermen's Association. Further questions for member of Rederscentrale:

How many vessels actively fish across the Hornsea Zone? Hornsea Zone

How many vessels actively fish within the Project One area (Subzone 1 and PP: Presents current status for Hornsea Zone development including details of offshore cable route corridor)? ongoing surveys, indicative 4 GW Zone layout and three potential layouts for Project One (the first project which consists of Subzone 1, the offshore cable What is the dependency on the zone and Project One area (e.g., what route corridor and onshore infrastructure). percentage of time is spent annually fishing in a. the Hornsea Zone and b. the Project One area)? (for example: 90% elsewhere in North Sea/Channel, 10% in Presentation provided as separate pdf. Hornsea Zone, of which 3% in the Project One area) HL: Enquires whether Siemens will own half of the wind farms upon construction and during operation. What is the fuel cost for steaming a distance of 1 NM? PP: Explains that the current consortium is 50/50 between Mainstream and Are landing statistics available for the vessels that operate across the zone? Including details of year, month, species, live weight, value, ICES rectangle, Siemens Project Ventures (the capital investment arm of the company). It is

gear type and vessel size? difficult to predict who will own the individual Projects following consent and who has the capital to invest in these projects. The Projects will be built according to the conditions of consent which include mitigation measures assessed within the

70 sdf

Notes: Action by: Notes: Action by: EIA process. Hornsea Zone - Danish commercial fisheries HL: Enquires about the size/power of the turbines highlighting that the 3.6 MW FN: Presents baseline assessment of Danish fisheries operating within the turbines are at least 10 years old. Hornsea Zone and Project One area. Landing statistics from the Danish PP: Explains that the Project One area will have a maximum capacity of 1.2 GW Directorate of Fisheries Dynamic Tables are presented for sprat and sandeel and will consist of either 3.6 MW, 6 MW or a combination of these turbines. The showing live weight and value from 2001 to 2011 for ICES Division IVb. Landing 3.6 MW turbine is still being considered as it is proven technology. The 6 MW is statistics for the six ICES rectangles that overlap the Hornsea Zone are not yet proven technology, however they may be by time of construction which is presented. These data are cross referenced with the data for IVb to establish why they are included as an option within the layouts being assessed within the approximate values. EIA. Presentation provided as separate pdf. PP: Presents timescales for Project One which includes submission of The group discusses that sandeel fishing grounds figure produced by DTU Aqua Environmental Statement in July 2012. In March/April 2012 further consultation which maps sandeel fishing grounds of the past 20 years based on consultation will be undertaken prior to submission of Environmental Statement. with the fishing industry and vessel plotter data. This figure shows activity within

PP: Provides details of the current surveys ongoing across the Zone including Subzone 1, but does not provide info on the most commonly targeted grounds or

metocean data which is streamed live online and available for download from specific areas which are most important to the sandeel fishery.

the SMart Wind website www.smartwind.co.uk. HL: Shows figures of vessel plotter data which presents more detailed sandeel JL: Asks whether cables will be buried. grounds. There are three important sandeel banks that have been targeted HL PP: Confirms that cables will be buried to a minimum target depth of 1.5 m historically within the Hornsea Zone (i.e., not necessarily targeted in the past five where possible. If this is not possible then rock armour or rock dumping may be PP/FN years, but important in the past ten years). necessary, however it is not expected that significant amounts of scour HL: Agrees to provide these figures a screen shots. protection will be necessary for either the cable or turbine foundations. The proportion of effort/importance for these sandeel areas within the Hornsea JL: Agrees this is a good approach zone are as follows: area in north west of Zone: 60%; area within Subzone 1: 20%; area in eastern portion of Zone: 20%. PP: Presents some images of the geotechnical surveys. FN and PP: Refer back to the indicative layout which shows that much of the HL: Enquires when the survey with the trawl scar was undertaken, what the PP/FN scale of the image is and at what depth the trawl scar was found. sandeel area in the north west and eastern portions of the Zone are currently not being investigated for development due to other restrictions (namely oil and gas PP: Agrees to provide this information. platforms and helicopter buffers). The Danish fisheries are encouraged to PP: Presents marine mammal and bird surveys confirming that the prominent ensure this figures is provided as soon as possible so that it can be taken into

marine mammals are Harbour porpoise and white beaked dolphin and birds are consideration for future Project layouts. gannet, guillemot and razorbill. Benthic grab and fisheries surveys are The group discusses potential for trawling within an offshore wind farm. discussed. HL: Confirms that they do not currently operate within wind farms since turbines HL: Enquires whether the sandeels (shown in the presentation picture) are from are too close together. For Danish wind farms, Horns Rev 1 has had no fishing the beam trawl or the benthic grabs. for 7 to 8 years. HL refers to scientific research that concludes no difference of PP: Agrees this detail will be provided once checked with survey team. fish populations (species or size) within and out with the wind farm. PP: Presents three layout options and confirms that the spacing between FN: Asks whether this paper is publically available and whether it can be turbines will be approximately 900 m by 1.2 km (for 3.6 MW turbines) or 1.6 km provided. by 1.1 km (for 6 MW turbines). HL: Goes on to explain that static gear is allowed within Horns Rev 2, but mobile HL: Enquires about the turbines affecting the wider sandy habitats. gear is restricted.

PP: Explains that there is no evidence of change to the wider area and that It is enquired whether the Danish vessels would consider operating within the

impacts on habitats and sediment is localised around turbine foundations and in Project One area. the immediate areas of construction. HL and JL: Confirm that if it is possible then the vessels would operate within the HL: Enquires about optimisation of turbine position for wind recovery and wind farm. The vessels would require approximately 1 km to operate, nets would whether wind restrictions have been considered. be approximately 200 m wide. When turning the vessels would lift gear and PP: Confirms that SMart Wind has an in-house team of full-time wind analysts therefore could turn between turbines. and that the layouts are optimized for this Project. JL: Expresses concern over the layout of the turbines in that it would potentially cross sandeel fishing area and even if vessel were allowed to operate within the

wind farm (and were happy to do so) they still may not be able to target the sand

71 sdf

Notes: Action by: Notes: Action by: bank in a northnorthwest and southsouthwest direction as required for the are capable of fishing in the Hornsea area, ranging from 35 to 75 m in length. All fishery. of these vessels will potentially fish in the Hornsea area although have not PP and FN: Emphasis that the vessel plotter data is very important in assessing heavily targeted the area for the past five years due to 80 to 90% of effort such an impact. focused on Dogger Bank. Historically the Hornsea area has been more heavily fished and a longer period of data should reflect this. FN: Enquires about general fishing patterns of the Danish fleet targeting sandeel and sprat. FN and PP: Agree to obtain landing statistics for the ICES rectangles that

HL: Explains that if fishing for species for consumption (e.g., whitefish) then a overlap the zone for a ten year period (current data set cover five years). vessel can fish for up to six hours in one direction for around 15 NM. JL: Steaming times to the Hornsea zone are 30 to 40 hrs depending on HL: Discusses the fact that over the past five years 80 to 90% of the effort has steaming speed which ranges from 10 to 18 knots (depending on power/size of been on the Dogger Bank. HL goes on to explain the trends of this fishery it is vessel). likely (based on previous experience) that currently targeted sandeel grounds HL: At the start of the season sandeel fishermen will sample different grounds and then fish where the catch rates are highest. This means they may focus on may become less productive over time, and other historic grounds may become productive again (and vice versa over a period of time). Therefore, taken one area, or move about, dependant on catch rates. For example in one day a vessel could catch 500 to 1,000 tonnes of sandeel across are area of 10 km2, literally, the fishery could become less productive in the Dogger Bank and more 2 productive in the Hornsea and other North Sea areas. This is considered a while on another trip it may fish for ten days across 200 km to catch the same natural pattern of recruitment and not in relation to other Round 3 Zone amount. developments. FN JL: An average there are seven to 15 trips per sandeel vessel per year which HL: Confirms that the sandeels are predominately targeted by demersal trawl each last from four to nine days. At the start of the season the trips tend to be longer (eight to nine days), but at the end of the season they will tend to be gear, although on occasion this gear can be operated as semipelagic when the sandeel are found up to 5m off the seabed. The majority of effort is has bottom shorter (four to five days) to ensure quality and freshness. contact. JL: One vessel can catch up to 15,000 tonnes annually, over a period of three FN: Enquires about trawl otter doors months fishing. HL: Discusses that the trawl doors can vary depending on vessel power and HL: Sandeel is an important summer fishery for Danish fishermen and supports size and can range from 1 to 5 tonnes depending on how the gear is rigged and extensive secondary industries including processing, distribution etc. Sprat is the bottom sediment. Penetration of the doors into the seabed is likely to be caught all year, but predominately in spring and summer. around 10 cm. FN: Highlights the importance of the additional figure for informing the EIA and ensuring an accurate impact assessment and due regard to sandeel grounds in FN: Presents additional figure provided by HL on demersal grounds. proceeding Projects. HL: Explains that this was provided for Declan Tobin from JNCC how translated information into map with shapefiles. HL: Agrees to providing additional data and it is agreed that an additional

FN: Agrees to contact Declan with regard to this data. meeting is required to present impact assessment results based on the provision of additional data. FN: Asks about the species and seasons targeted by the Danish fleet.

HL and LH: Confirm that the sandeel fishery is open from 1 April to 1 August. Close

Sprat is all year round, but predominately targeted in the autumn. Thanks are given to all those that attended and the meeting is adjourned.

JL: Discusses the new management approach adopted at an EU level for sandeels which has only been introduced this year. This management splits the FN sandeel quota into management areas with quota is allocated to each area. The Dogger Bank and Hornsea Zones both fall into Area 1. HL: Explains that the sandeel fishery is very dependent on recruitment, for example in 2010 the sandeel catch was predominately year 1 (from 2009 year class), however in 2011 they were year 2 (also from 2009 year class) due to poorer recruitment in 2010. LH: Agrees stating that is the reason for the late ICES advice and quota setting for the sandeel fisheries which is normally in February/March. FN: Enquires about the fleet characteristics. HL: explains that there are 30 to 40 Danish vessels (each with 5 to 6 crew) that

72 sdf

Notes: Action by: 04 November 2011 Holderness Coast Fishing Industry Group therefore EMF impacts are not expected to be an issue. GH notes that other wind farms are having issues with cables (Triton Knoll) and enquires whether cables will be laid at the same time for Projects One and Two. CJ explains that subject to timing of consents and procurement strategy, the onshore cabling ducts might be laid for 2 GW and cables could be pulled Minutes of Meeting through for second. Ducts are not laid for offshore cables and it is not yet Project Title Hornsea Round 3 Zone and Project One decided whether cables will be laid at the same time. Burial issues are raised by the group. Meeting to present details of Hornsea Zone and Project One; ground Purpose of CJ confirms that there will be regular surveys to check integrity of the offshore truth baseline activity assessments of VMS and landing statistics and Meeting cable route corridor once installed. It is recognized that savings in terms of consult and understand the level of activity across the zone. projects costs, timing and effort can be made by ensuring the cable is installed Date of Meeting: 4 November 2011 properly first time. In terms of servicing of the offshore cable route corridor after Held at: Rags, South Pier, Bridlington installations, this is likely to follow normal oil and gas practices. Further updates include the installation of the met mast in September/October. Present: Mike Cohen (MC) – Chief Executive of Holderness Coast Fishing Other offshore infrastructure for Project One will include up to five collector Industry Group (HCFIG) stations and two converter stations which could be manned. It is expected that Joe Ackers (JA) – Secretary of HCFIG flotels will be used during construction to reduce personnel fatigue, weather Gary Hodgson (GH) – Board member of HCFIG dependency and costs of transport. Gary Redshaw (GR) – Board member of HCFIG Project timings are confirmed with a Draft Environmental Statement ready for consultation in April 2012 and submission of application to IPC in summer 2012. Tony Pockley (TP) – Board member of HCFIG George Traves (GT) – Board member of HCFIG Fish and shellfish ecological surveys Ian Rowe (IR) – NFFO Services MDC presents an outline of the surveys that have been undertaken over the past 18 months to collate information on the fish and shellfish ecology of all Nick Garside (NG) – NFFO Services species, including: Chris Jenner (CJ) - SMart Wind Subtidal Trawling Surveys – April and September/October 2011, using otter Matthew Crabb (MDC) - EMU trawl gear. Fiona Nimmo (FN) – Poseidon Aquatic Resource Management Ltd Potting Surveys – June and Oct 2011. Compiled by: Fiona Nimmo Observation Potting Survey – September 2011. Collation of logbook data from commercial potting and North East IFCA data on landings of brown crab and lobster at sub ICES rectangle level. Notes: Action by: Epibenthic 2 m beam trawl surveys (it was noted that whilst 2 m beam trawls are not ideal for targeting demersal fish, however as part of the benthic surveys, Introductions and Project update they provided useful information on prey species). Introductions are made and the role of Poseidon (commercial fisheries Intertidal Fish Surveys – April and September 2011, using seine, push and fyke consultants) and EMU (lead environmental consultancy) are explained. nets. CJ provides an update on the project developments. MDC explains that reviews on noise, vibration and EMF effects are being Offshore cable route corridor – out of the three offshore cable route corridors updated regularly based on new research and scientific papers as they become that were being considered, the southern route has been chosen. This decision available. A literature review on noise and EMF impacts will be presented within has been influenced by the level of potting activity north of the Humber, as well the Environmental Statement, but can currently be made available if requested. as engineering constraints related to reaching grid connection at Killingholme. UK Commercial fisheries activity across Project One: Subzone 1 and offshore A press release was issued this morning confirming that Project Two export cable route corridor. cable corridor will follow the same route as Project One. The Project One cable FN presents commercial fisheries baseline information including VMS data, (transporting 1 GW) will consist of up to four cables. Project Two will have the surveillance data and landings statistics for ICES rectangles that overlap with same generating capacity and therefore also consist of up to four cables. Both the offshore cable route corridor (35F0, 36F0 and 36F1) and Subzone 1 (36F1 Projects (total up to eight cables) will be located within the 1 km wide lease area and 36F2). Data shows the scale of landings by under 15m potters targeting from the Crown Estate. The export cable will be HVDC (rather than AC) and lobster and brown crab.

73 sdf

Notes: Action by: Notes: Action by: FN enquires about the velvet crab fishery which has decreased from 2007/8 The recovery time of the offshore cable route corridor is understood to be levels. variable based on habitat conditions, but expected to be at least 12 months and GH explains that the velvet crabs went as fast as they came, with landings going up to two years, based on experience elsewhere (mercury). from 15 to 400 tonnes across a five year period, having since dropped off again. GH explains current lobster management including v-notching crippled and soft This is not due to market conditions, but abundance of velvet crab on the lobster. Soft lobster are brought back to shore, v-notched, kept in tanks before grounds. 2011 landings have seen a slight increase in velvets. Velvet seasonal being returned, this allows specific areas to be re-stocked with reproductive peaks occur in spring and end of the year. lobsters. There is no Maximum Landing Size for lobster. FN enquires about the number of vessels fishing from Bridlington and It is noted that data has become more credible in the past few years. Bridlington Holderness Coast FIG. reports figures from April to April and so direct comparisons with MMO data The group explain that 48 vessels operate from Bridlington including 43 potters cannot be made easily. (17 keel boats, five cobblers and 21 fast potters), as well as five salmon boats. The issue of second point of sale is raised by the group and it is enquired There are approximately 23 under 10 m vessels. whether this will be taken into account within the EIA. 54 vessels are members of the Holderness Coast FIG which covers the coast FN confirms that if these data can be provided by the HCFIG, to show first point from Spurn Point to Flamborough Head with key landings ports at Bridlington, of sale and second point of sale, then it can be taken into consideration. Withernsea, Spurn Point and Flamborough Head. The group confirm that the extent of impact from Hornsea Project One is limited It is estimated that 80,000 to 100,000 pots are in the water across the fleet. The to around five to six vessels that operate as far south as the offshore cable route number of pots used per vessel varies greatly from 500 to 6,000 per vessel. corridor and as far offshore as Subzone 1. Steaming times are approximately 6

Pots are left in the water (since it is not feasible to transport pots to shore, and to 12 hours to these grounds. there would not be adequate storage). Soak times range from days to weeks to GH mentions potential of a lobster hatchery. months. If other gear is being fished then pots will be left in the water with doors Presentation on Sustainable Access to Inshore Fisheries open. GH presents an overview of the Bridlington fishing fleet based on information No gentlemen’s agreements exist in relation to areas/grounds fished. compiled in 2010. Of the vessels within HCFIG five to six can cover a bigger area. Three vessels The harbour is the largest single employer within Bridlington supporting 85 have VMS and are therefore represented within VMS figures. Approximately businesses and employing approximately 400 people. three vessels operate within Subzone 1 on a regular basis, but do not focus all There are 45 vessels operating from Bridlington supporting 112 jobs. There are effort in this area. The offshore cable route corridor is at the southern extreme of where Bridlington vessels operate, but two to three vessels operate across this three established landing companies; which was recently increased to four, area. although this fourth trades relatively small quantities.

GH explains that the number of developments including aggregate extraction The types of boats include Yorkshire cobles, catamarans, fast worker, keel boat and modern design. and oil and gas infrastructure dictate the areas that can be fished. There are significant concerns in relation to the current Round 2 sites (notably GH presents a figure showing indicative fishing grounds targeted, based on

Westernmost Rough) and MPAs. effort in 2005. This includes primary targeted areas, as well as secondary and GH and Brown shrimp grounds are located further south than the offshore cable route tertiary areas. Many areas considered secondary in 2005 are now primary and MC corridor, within 35F0, and are not anticipated to be affected by the offshore the tertiary area has been extended both in eastern and southern directions. cable route corridor or Subzone 1 development. FN enquires whether it would be possible for this figure to be updated to inform Whelk vessels have decreased significantly from 1994 to 2004 (when there the EIA. GH and MC agree that this will be possible. where approximately 34 vessels), there are currently three to four vessels with Issues are raised with how the Westernmost Rough EIA was undertaken and peak landings from February to June. the details within the Environmental Statement are considered to down-play the Lobster peak landings occur in August, and from September lobsters begin to be extent of effort. The Stat Oil Environmental Statement is considered a good kept for Christmas markets, with stock rotated throughout September to example. The approach by SMart Wind is commended by the group. November. MC explains how the presence of pots across the grounds has protected the FN enquires about potential opportunities to fish within wind farms. lobster fishery. It is considered that they provide a safe haven for juvenile lobster to feed from bait within pots, while being protected from other predators and still GH explains that pot fleets can be up to 1.5 miles long and therefore it is being able to leave pots. The presence of pots across the grounds prevents expected to be dangerous to fish within a wind farm. The risk of tangling gear effort from mobile trawling gear, therefore protecting lobster habitat. with wind farm infrastructure is expected to be higher for static potters than mobile gears. Fleets of pots can and do move with the tides; they could Close therefore enter 50 m exclusion zones around turbines. Thanks are given to all those that attended and the meeting is adjourned.

74 sdf

04 November 2011 East of England Fish Producers Organisation Notes: Action by: consultation in April 2012 and submission of application to IPC in summer 2012. Fish and shellfish ecological surveys MC presents an outline of the surveys that have been undertaken over the past Minutes of Meeting 18 months to collate information on the fish and shellfish ecology of all species, including: Project Title Hornsea Round 3 Zone and Project One Subtidal Trawling Surveys – April and September/October 2011, using otter Meeting to present details of Hornsea Zone and Project One; ground trawl gear. Purpose of truth baseline activity assessments of VMS and landing statistics and Potting Surveys – June and October 2011. Meeting consult and understand the level of activity across the zone. Observation Potting Survey – September 2011. Date of Meeting: 4 November 2011 Collation of logbook data from commercial potting and North East IFCA data on landings of brown crab and lobster at sub ICES rectangle level. Held at: Crown Hotel, Scarborough Epibenthic 2 m beam trawl surveys. Present: Arnold Locker (AL) – EEFPO, NFFO Intertidal Fish Surveys – April and September 2011, using seine, push and fyke Fred G. Normandale (FGN) - EEFPO nets. Ian Rowe (IR) – NFFO Services MC explains that reviews on noise, vibration and EMF effects are being updated Nick Garside (NG) – NFFO Services regularly based on new research and scientific papers as they become Chris Jenner (CJ) - SMart Wind available. A literature review on noise and EMF impacts will be presented within the Environmental Statement, but can currently be made available if requested. Matthew Crabb (MC) - EMU Fiona Nimmo (FN) - Poseidon UK Commercial fisheries activity across Project One: Subzone 1 and offshore cable route corridor. Compiled by: Fiona Nimmo FN presents commercial fisheries baseline information including VMS data, surveillance data and landings statistics for ICES rectangles that overlap with the offshore cable route corridor (35F0, 36F0 and 36F1) and Subzone 1 (36F1 Notes: Action by: and 36F2).

Introductions and Project update AL states that it is not accurate to say the project area is 6% of the area of ICES rectangles 36F1 and 36F2. FN tries to explain that the area of Subzone 1 wind Introductions are made and the role of Poseidon (commercial fisheries 2 2 consultants) and EMU (lead environmental consultancy) are explained. farms (407 km ) is ~6% of the total area of 36F1 and 36F2 (7,347 km ). Al states this is misleading. FN notes his concern. CJ provides an update on the project developments. AL provides information on the EEFPO which has 48-52 members and hold the Offshore cable route corridor – out of the three offshore cable route corridors majority of the quota in the area. They represent some Scottish vessels, UK that were being considered, the southern route has been chosen which is 139 registered Dutch owned vessels and approximately ten lobster and crab vessels. km (offshore) and 40 km (onshore) with grid connection at Killingholme. The remaining vessels are 12 to 16 m and 22 to 27 m demersal trawlers that A press release was issued this morning confirming that Project Two export target plaice and Nephrops. Their members include UK registered Dutch owned cable will follow the same route as Project One. The Project One cable vessels. (transporting 1 GW) will consist of up to four cables. Project Two will have the FGN enquires if the navigational channel will be buoyed. CJ confirms that it same generating capacity and therefore also consist of up to 4 cables. Both turbines will be lit and it will be a navigational channel. Projects (total up to eight cables) will be located within the 1 km wide lease area from the Crown Estate. The export cable will be HVDC (rather than AC) and FGN enquires re number of turbines. CJ confirms there will be 150 to 332 turbines in Project One (1 GW), so 600 to 1,328 for entire 4 GW area. therefore EMF impacts are not expected to be an issue. FGN notes that the habitat is like a dessert of sand with many areas of sand Further updates include the installation of the met mast in September/October. Other offshore infrastructure for Project One will include up to five collector waves.

stations and two converter stations which could be manned. It is expected that AL anticipates serious potential for future issues relating to impact of EMF on flotels will be used during construction to reduce personnel fatigue, weather shellfish and skates and rays. dependency and costs of transport. MC explains that EMF, as well as noise impacts, are being examined within the Project timings are confirmed with a Draft Environmental Statement ready for EIA with weekly literature searches to ensure the most up-to-date studies are

75 sdf

Notes: Action by: reviewed. 14 January 2012 Vis Ned and Dutch vessel skippers CJ explains that the export cable will be HVDC, rather than AC. HVDC is understood to minimize any EMF concern. It is also noted that de-coupling issues and parameters with cause and effect would be difficult. FGN notes that if the cables are trenched then effects are unlikely to be of Minutes of Meeting concern and notes that there is significant effort across oil and gas pipelines, perhaps due to a build-up of food (due to artificial structures) or warmth. Project Title Hornsea Project One Impact Assessment

FGN and AL emphasize importance of Nephrops grounds immediately north of Purpose of Meeting to present Hornsea Project One Impact Assessment and newly

Subzone 2. These are long narrow, muddy grounds of 60 to 74 m depth. Meeting obtained ten year data set. FN explains that the Hornsea Zone does not overlap with this area, but that any potential impact of smothering during construction will be considered, as will Date of Meeting: 14 January 2012 potential for displacement to cause competition for grounds. Held at: Visned PO, Urk, Netherlands FGN raises potential issue of gear snagging discarded construction material Present: W. (Pim) Visser (PV) - Vis Ned citing the experience with the oil and gas industry during construction of oil and Pieter Avis van der Vis - Tx 68 gas platforms and infrastructure. CJ explains that there will be licence conditions in relation to construction practices including post construction geo-physical and Jan van der Vis - TX 36 side scan surveys to locate any debris which will then be removed through M. de Boer - PD 63 ROVs etc. K. Romkes - UK 1 FGN enquires about rate of breakdown and level of maintenance. CJ explains Albert Romkes - UK 1 (Zeevisserybedryf Albert BV) that scheduled maintenance will include two days per year for each turbine. AL A. Vonk - TX 1 (P.O. Texel) points out that for 1000 turbines that could be 2,000 days of maintenance per year. CJ confirms this. Klaas van den Berg - KvdB GY 127 AL expresses concern about maintenance vessels being present within the Penny Pickett (PP) - SMart Wind Nephrops grounds north of the zone. CJ states that the Fisheries Liaison Officer Fiona Nimmo (FN) - Poseidon will produce regular Notice to Fishermen to ensure knowledge of scheduled Compiled by: Fiona Nimmo works are disseminated. FGN enquires about procedure for snagging of cables, currently if any gear is snagged on oil and gas infrastructure, the gear is slipped and the fishermen are Notes: Action by: reimbursed for gear and catch. CJ confirms that it will be a similar model to the oil and gas industry practices and that there will be a guard vessel in operation Introductions during cable laying. PV: Thanks attendees for joining, highlighting the importance of the fishermen FN enquires about overall concern of Project One including Subzone 1 and attending, before handing over to FN to lead the presentation. (Presentation is export cable. provided in separate pdf document) AL and FGN confirm that Project One is of less concern, but that the other Ten year baseline data projects are likely to be of more concern. FN presents new baseline data obtained across a ten year period (2001 to Close 2010) for two data sets: Thanks are given to all those that attended and the meeting is adjourned. All Dutch registered vessels landing from 36F1 and 36F2 (Subzone 1 commercial fisheries study area); and The 24 vessels identified at the consultation meeting on 3 September 2011 from regional commercial fisheries study area (14 ICES Rectangles) and 36F1 and

36F2 (the Subzone 1 commercial fisheries study area).

The first data set shows landings of herring in December 2003 from 36F2 by the pelagic otter trawl fleet. FN enquires whether this is likely to be south of Subzone 1? A Dutch pelagic fishery has not been mentioned before or flagged up within the initial five-year data set. PV

76 sdf

Notes: Action by: Notes: Action by: PV agrees to check with the pelagic PO to confirm activity in this area. FN explains that while fisheries will not be excluded the impact assessment has FN presents data for the 24 vessels identified at last consultation meeting, been undertaken on the worst case scenario turbine layout 1 (332 turbines) with including UK and Dutch registered, Dutch owned vessels. a minimum spacing of 960 m column x 600 m row. Based on last consultation KvdB enquires which vessels are included. FN agrees to provide list (see end of meeting it is understood that at least 1 km is required to fish between turbines and therefore the impact assessment assumes fisheries will be completely minutes). KvdB operates a 40 m twin-rigging vessel which requires approximately 3,000 to 4,000 m to fish normally, therefore making operation excluded from Subzone 1 boundaries. within a wind farm unlikely. The group confirms that no twin-rigging occurs within The group discusses the practicalities of fishing within a wind farm. They discuss Subzone 1 boundaries. the potential for escape routes to be considered within the design of the wind FN explains that while consultation at last meeting indicated catches where farm or certain turbines being removed to allow turning after fishing a length between turbines. higher from 2001 to 2005 within Subzone 1 commercial fisheries study area, this PP explains that the Hornsea Zone is heavily constrained by a number of is not supported by the landings statistics. Within 36F1 and 36F2 an overall increase of 22% is seen in weight and value for landings from 2006 to 2010, factors, which is why the commercial fisheries impact assessment assesses the FN compared to 2001 to 2005. However, when considering the regional commercial worst case scenario of total exclusion. fisheries study area, proportionally more landings by weight were taken from FN presents the impact assessment. The exclusion during construction, 36F1 and 36F2 from 2001 to 2005 (i.e., 34% of the regional catch was from operation and maintenance of Subzone 1 is assessed as having a moderate 36F1 and 36F2 in 2001 to 2005, compared to 19% in 2006 to 2010). significant effect on the Dutch commercial fisheries (UK and Dutch registered) PV asks if the landings statistics data can be provided, to allow the PO to with medium uncertainty and considered probable to occur. undertake their own assessment. FN and PP agree that the landing statistics Note that probability does not assess the probability of the worst case scenario data sets will be provided. happening, it assesses the probability of the effect occurring assuming worst FN presents VMS data provided by IMARES. case scenario is in place (i.e., it is probable that the exclusion of Dutch fisheries from Subzone 1 will have a moderate significant effect). The group expresses concern over the large scale of the VMS (which equates to 1/16th of an ICES rectangle). FN explains that originally data to 1/3600th of an PV and the group discuss the impact assessment. PV explains that for some ICES rectangle was provided, but re-tracked. This is due to the decision on vessels it will be a major effect and others a minor effect, however overall at a which data can be provided being made by IMARES (Frans van Beek), and they fleet level it is appropriate to assess a moderate significance. require aggregation to ensure commercially sensitive data is not issued (i.e., FN confirms that the assessment has been undertaken at a fleet level. fishing grounds). PV explains that some vessels will spend up to 80% of their effort within FN presents VMS data provided by MMO illustrating UK registered beam Hornsea Zone. However, at a fleet level the majority of vessels are currently trawlers (including Dutch owned, that are likely to form majority of UK beam targeting the Dogger Bank where they can fish at a lower cost based on trawl effort). abundance of catches. Based on group discussions (in Dutch) PV explains that The group confirms that they agree with the VMS data presented. it is the adventurous fishermen that fish across Subzone 1. FN presents mitigation measures and further impacts that have been assessed Commercial Fisheries Impact Assessment including shipping and navigation and disruption to natural fish ecology (see FN presents the methodology for undertaking the impact assessment, the three presentation for full list of effects discussed). turbine layouts being considered (with a fourth introduced by PP), and the FN presents cumulative effects for the Hornsea Zone Development Envelope exclusion and safety zones proposed during construction, operation and (Projects Two, Three and Four), other Round 3 zones and nature conservation maintenance and decommissioning. designations, explaining that a worst case scenario of exclusion has again been FN summarises exclusion and safety zones as follows: assumed. Phased precautionary area (including 1 km buffer) during construction of wind PV and the group express concern over Project Three and Four, East Anglia, turbines; Dogger Bank and the nature conservation designations and agree with the 50 m safety zone around wind turbines during normal operation; assessment of major significance. Roaming 500 m safety zone around installations undergoing maintenance FN describes the next steps including submission of planning application to the works; and Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) and the formal consultation process. Phased precautionary area during construction of export cable. PV asks whether they will be able to review the commercial fisheries PP emphasizes that fisheries will not be excluded from Subzone 1 and decisions Environmental Statement chapter prior to formal submission. PP confirms that of whether or not to fish within the wind farm should be made by individual the chapter is currently under legal and SMart Wind review, after this process it fishing vessels based on safety. can be distributed to PV for review. Where possible comments will be addressed

77 sdf

Notes: Action by: 16 January 2012 Danish Fishermen's Association prior to formal submission and formal consultation process. Close Thanks are given to all those that attended and the meeting is adjourned.

Minutes of Meeting Project Title Hornsea Project One Impact Assessment List of 24 vessels cited as being active across the Project One area at consultation meeting on Purpose of Meeting to present Hornsea Project One Impact Assessment and newly 3rd September 2011: Meeting obtained ten year data set. OM 2, TX 1, TX 14, TX 19, TX 36, TX 38, TX 68, TX 94, UK 1, UK 47, UK 172, UK 227, UK Date of Meeting: 16 January 2012 246, KW 34, KW 45, KW 88, HD 4, HD 70, ST 27, LT 60, WN 1, PD 63, SC 25, KW 88. Held at: Danish Fishermen's Association, Nordensvej 3, Taulov, Fredericia

Present: Henrik Lund (HL) - Danmarks Fiskeriforening/ Danish Fishermen's Association Jesper Juul Larsen (JL) - Sydvestjysk Fiskeriforening Penny Pickett (PP) - SMart Wind Fiona Nimmo (FN) - Poseidon Compiled by: Fiona Nimmo

Notes: Action by: Introductions FN thanks HL and JL for attending this follow up consultation meeting and presents additional ten year baseline data and impact assessment for Danish fisheries (the presentation is provided in a separate pdf).

Ten year baseline data FN presents new baseline data obtained across a ten year period (2001 to 2010) for Danish registered vessels. This data was requested at previous consultation on 29 September 2011, based on the fact the fisheries knowledge that the Hornsea Zone was targeted more frequently during the previous five year period.

FN presents figures to show that significantly higher landings occurred from the

regional commercial fisheries study area and Subzone 1 commercial fisheries study area (36F1 and 36F2) during 2001 to 2005 compared to 2006 to 2010. Highest landings from 36F1 and 37F2 occurred in 2004 at 39,000 tonnes landed by demersal and semi-pelagic otter trawlers worth approximately €4.6 million. HL enquires as to our definition of semi-pelagic trawlers. FN states that the otter doors of semi-pelagic trawls do not touch the seabed, however the net has the same level of contact as normal demersal otter trawling. HL agrees with this description, but highlights that semi-pelagic gear is not currently in operation to a great extent, but it is expected the industry will move towards this fishing technique to reduce fuel use and maximize chance of operation within nature conservation designations. HL enquires as to how the value of landings has been determined.

78 sdf

Notes: Action by: Notes: Action by: FN explains that the Danish Fisheries Directorate did not provide value of turbines; landings within the statistics. The web based Dynamic Tables were used to HL 50 m safety zone around wind turbines during normal operation; provide a average value of €120 per tonne of sandeel. HL and JL consider this Roaming 500 m safety zone around installations undergoing maintenance to be low, with approximate value in 2004 likely to be around €0.15 per kg (€150 works; and per tonne) and present prices €0.22 per kg (€220 per tonne). Phased precautionary area during construction of export cable. FN asks if yearly average values for sandeel landings can be provided to allow value calculations to be more accurate. PP emphasizes that fisheries will not be excluded from Subzone 1 and decisions of whether or not to fish within the wind farm should be made by individual HL and JL confirm that these will be provided. fishing vessels based on safety.

FN presents vessel track data provided by HL mapped against Hornsea Project FN explains that while fisheries will not be excluded the impact assessment has One and Zone Development Envelope (ZDE: Projects Two, Three and Four). been undertaken on the worst case scenario turbine layout 1 (332 turbines) with FN notes that of the three distinct sandeel grounds within the Hornsea Zone, two HL a minimum spacing of 960 m column x 600 m row. Based on last consultation are located within 36F1 and 36F2. The third located in 37F0 and 37F1 equates meeting it is understood that at least 1 km is required to fish between turbines to 60% of effort within Hornsea Zone. The two remaining that overlap with 36F1 and therefore the impact assessment assumes fisheries will be completely and 36F2 each relate to 20% of effort within Hornsea. excluded from the Subzone 1 boundaries. FN enquires about the proportion of effort that occurs outside the Hornsea Zone PP explains that the Hornsea Zone is heavily constrained by a number of within 36F1 and 36F2 (i.e., the five or six sandeel grounds located south of factors, which is why the commercial fisheries impact assessment assesses the Hornsea Zone. worst case scenario of total exclusion. HL and JL cannot provide an immediate answer, but agree to consider this FN presents the impact assessment. The exclusion during construction, further. operation and maintenance of Subzone 1 is assessed as having a moderate FN enquires about the turquoise marks on the sandeel map. These look like significant effect on the Danish demersal and semi-pelagic otter trawlers with numbers marked on the map. It is confirmed that these are not tracks. HL medium uncertainty and considered probable to occur. confirms that the yellow and grey lines are sandeel tracks. Note that probability does not assess the probability of the worst case scenario FN presents ten year landing weight data for 36F1 and 36F2, compared with happening, it assesses the probability of the effect occurring assuming worst total North Sea landings for sandeel. case scenario is in place (i.e., it is probable that the exclusion of Danish HL and JL overall agree with the proportions of landings from 36F1 and 36F2, demersal and semi-pelagic sandeel fisheries from Subzone 1 will have a noting that the areas targeted change depending on the productivity of the moderate significant effect). grounds and also the level of quota available. HL enquires about the assessment of the magnitude and sensitivity, suggesting FN presents VMS data provided by MMO with all non-UK vessels shown in grey that the sensitivity should perhaps be medium. FN goes through the justification (including all non-UK nationalities). The figure clearly shows sandeel grounds for the sensitivity assessment which focuses on the number of grounds targeted targeted in 2006 which are consistent with the tracks provided by HL. HL and JL by the sandeel fleet and the ability of the fleet to operate throughout the North agree. Sea (compared to, for example, smaller inshore vessels). While HL and JL cannot comment on the specific justifications for assessment, Commercial Fisheries Impact Assessment (IA) they do agree with the overall moderate significance, assuming sufficient FN explains that the impact assessment is undertaken on a fleet basis. Danish warning can be given about any construction works. PP and FN confirm that fisheries are assessed based on two fleets: demersal and semi-pelagic trawlers fortnightly Notice to Mariners are currently issued with all details of surveys etc., targeting sandeel and pelagic trawlers targeting sprat and herring. FN enquires and these would continue with updates on the project timescales including all about the number of vessels targeting sprat and herring. planned construction. This information is also linked and available through JL and HL confirm that 12 to 14 vessels operate across the North Sea targeting Kingfisher. HL confirms that NTM are received and highlights that FOGA is the herring and 20 vessels targeting sprat. The pelagic vessels are all >30 m in Danish equivalent to Kingfisher, although they do also use Kingfisher. length. FN presents significance of effect on the herring and sprat pelagic fisheries as FN presents the methodology for undertaking the impact assessment, the three minor, based on the low level of landings across the ten year period combined turbine layouts being considered (with a fourth introduced by PP), and the with VMS data showing pelagic trawlers outside Subzone 1. JL confirms that exclusion and safety zones proposed during construction, operation and pelagic trawlers targeting sprat operate to the east of the Hornsea Zone. JL maintenance and decommissioning. explains that herring fishing generally takes place north of the central section of FN summarises exclusion and safety zones as follows: Hornsea Zone, however highlights the sporadic nature of this fishery and the Phased precautionary area (including 1 km buffer) during construction of wind fact they can remove up to 10,000 tonnes of herring in five minutes of fishing.

79 sdf

Notes: Action by: 25 January 2012 North Shields Nephrops demersal otter trawling fleet FN presents mitigation measures and further impacts that have been assessed including shipping and navigation and disruption to natural fish ecology (see presentation for full list of effects presented). Potential impact on steaming time is also discussed. JL and HL explain that smaller sandeel vessels will use 500 l of fuel steaming at ten to 12 knots, while larger vessels will use 700 to 800 l of Minutes of Meeting fuel steaming at 14 knots. Fuel costs approximately €0.7 per l. FN presents cumulative effects for the Hornsea Zone Development Envelope Project Title Hornsea Project One Impact Assessment (Projects Two, Three and Four), other Round 3 zones and nature conservation Meeting to present details of Hornsea Zone and Project One; ground designations, explaining that a worst case scenario of exclusion has again been Purpose of truth baseline activity assessments of VMS and landing statistics and assumed. Meeting consult and understand the level of activity across the zone and HL and JL express concern specifically over Projects Three and Four, Dogger potential impacts. Bank and the nature conservation designations and agree with the assessment of major significance. Date of Meeting: 25 January 2012 PP confirms that the Round 3 developers meet regularly and continue to discuss Held at: Fisherman’s Mission, North Shields, UK cumulative effects. Present: Adam Ferguson (AF) - MMO North Shields HL enquires about the construction timetable for the Hornsea projects. Neil Robinson (NR) - MMO North Shields PP explains that the earliest construction will commence for Project One is Nik Hanlon (NH) - MMO North Sheilds 2015; Project Two in 2017; Project Three in 2018 and Project Four in 2020. It Willie Ritchie (WR) - Headway x WY319 should be noted that within this timescale construction of projects may run con- currently. Mrs. D Ritchie (DR) - Headway x WY319 Andy Dixon (AD) - Caleys NS Close R. Leighton (RL) Thanks are given to all those that attended and the meeting is adjourned. David Price (DP) - Caleys Edward Whittle (EW) - Whitby Seafoods Andrew Leadley (AL) - Success J. Polloch (JP) - Ocean Maid G. Polloch (GP) - Ocean Maid Nick Garside (NG) - NFFO Services Penny Pickett (PP) - SMart Wind Matthew Crabb (MC) - EMU Fiona Nimmo (FN) - Poseidon Compiled by: Fiona Nimmo Copies to: All present, plus CJ, LL, RT

Notes: Action by: Introductions FN thanks the attendees for joining the meeting. FN explains that Poseidon are an independent fisheries consultancy undertaking the commercial fisheries Environmental Impact Assessment and commercial fisheries Environmental Statement chapter for the Hornsea Project One. PP explains that SMart Wind are the developer of the consenting process for

80 sdf

Notes: Action by: Notes: Action by: the project and MC explains EMU are the lead environmental consultancy that Garside. Timing the surveys during the spring and autumn periods was are delivering the Environmental Statement on Hornsea Project One. considered important to ensure spawning and nursery periods could be captured. Hornsea Zone PP explains that they are in the process of carrying out their EIA and that this PP presents an introduction to the Hornsea zone development including details meeting was schedule during this process so that the fishermen can feed into of ongoing surveys, indicative 4 GW layout (four projects) and location of the assessment process Project One (the first project which consists of Subzone 1, the offshore cable route corridor and onshore infrastructure). Presentation is provided as a Commercial Fisheries separate pdf FN outlines the purpose of the commercial fisheries consultation to corroborate PP provides details of metocean data which is streamed live online and data, understand the Nephrops fleet characteristics and discuss potential impacts including ecological impact to the Nephrops. available for download from the SMart Wind website www.smartwind.co.uk. RL questioned why nuclear power or onshore wind farms are not being FN explains that the impacts to commercial fisheries are being assessed on a considered as an alternative to offshore wind farms, stating that it is related to fleet basis (i.e., country, gear and species) and that this goes down to (for politics. example) three potting vessels operating across the offshore cable route PP explains the Round 3 process whereby developers were awarded the rights corridor. to develop within Round 3 zones by the Crown Estate. SMart Wind (owned FN explains that all concerns will be noted and addressed within the EIA. The equally by Mainstream Renewables and Siemens Project Ventures) won the purpose of the EIA is to present the current levels of activity and the impact to developing rights for the Hornsea Zone. The locations and boundaries of the each fleet. nine Round 3 zones were established prior to any developers’ involvement in FN confirms that consultation with other European fleets occurred the previous the process. The UK Offshore Energy Strategic Environmental Assessment week. (SEA) (January, 2009), assessed the proposed offshore wind capacity in UK FN states that consultation with the UK fleets has also been undertaken through waters, including Round 3 zones. the North Sea Demersal RAC, the NFFO and the East of England Fish PO. PP explains that SMart Wind have a commitment to produce 4 GW from the Furthermore, Nick Garside, the Fisheries Liaison Officer (FLO), has been in Hornsea Zone and that turbine layouts for Project One equate to approximately post for over two years. NG provides the first point of call for UK fishermen to 1 GW. raise concerns and has issued fortnightly Notice to Mariners detailing all of the PP explains that DONG Energy have taken a 33% stake in Project One. ongoing and proposed surveys in the Hornsea Zone. PP explains that 1 GW would provide approximately 1% of the UK’s energy NG confirms that he has issued fortnightly Notice to Mariners. requirements and 4 GW would provide 4%. FN explains that the purpose of this meeting is to introduce the Hornsea Zone PP explains that Round 3 zones are classified as Nationally Significant and Project One and corroborate the data already obtained to inform the EIA.

Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) that, if consented, will account for a large portion FN presents Hornsea Zone including the location of Projects One and the of the UK’s commitment to provide 15% of all energy from renewable sources indicative locations of Projects Two, Three and Four. The majority of Hornsea by 2020. This translates into a UK goal for renewable energy electricity Zone, and all of the Hornsea Projects, are located within the Botney Gut generation of approximately 30% by 2020. Nephrops Functional Unit. AL questioned what vessels have been doing within the area and what are they FN presents VMS data per gear type for 2010 sourced from MMO. surveying, stating that they tried to speak to a vessel that would not provide any RL enquires where the VMS data has come from stating that it would have been information. nice to have been consulted before his VMS data for his vessel could be used. PP explains that marine mammal and bird observations have been undertaken FN explains that data is distinguished by gear type and that individual vessels since 2010 and are collating two years of observation data. Geophysical, cannot be identified. VMS data was obtained from the MMO for UK vessels; the geotechnical, benthic ecology and subtidal fish surveys were also carried out in data set also included non-UK vessels, but did not distinguish nationality. VMS 2011. data have also been obtained from European fleets. FN explains that MMO MC explains that benthic ecology surveys have been undertaken using a 2 m undertook an internal legal check to ensure data could be provided in the format beam trawl and subtidal fisheries surveys using a 4 m otter trawl were presented. undertaken in April and September/October 2011. FN asks if the VMS data from 2006 to 2010 looks representative of the locations AL stated that the highest fishing effort occurs in summer and that is when targeted by the Nephrops fleet (i.e., north of the Hornsea Zone boundary and surveys should have been undertaken. east of Project One).

PP explained that survey methodology was developed in consultation with Attendees agree that while the specific locations and level of effort vary from

Cefas, JNCC, MMO and our onshore fisheries liaison representative Nick 2006 to 2010, the general fishing grounds within the Outer Silver Pit and

81 sdf

Notes: Action by: Notes: Action by: Markhams Hole are correct. demersal trawl gear used by the North Shields Nephrops fleet. FN explains that AL and other attendees confirm that they fish in deep water, up to 55 m (30 ftm) since the fleet does not operate within the wind farm boundaries the effect of depth, but no shallower. exclusion from grounds is considered to be of minor significance. PP states that Project One does not go deeper than 33 m due to building FN confirms the EIA will therefore be undertaken on this basis for this fleet and asks about gear configuration. constraints and that any future development to the north of Project One is likely to be in waters shallower than 55 m. Attendees agree that the majority of vessels are 15 to 20 m in length and use

FN states the potential impact of Project One to the North Shields Nephrops twin rigged gear. One vessel uses single rigged gear and one uses quad-rigged fishing fleet is in relation to the disruption or disturbance to the Nephrops gear. The quad rigged vessel has an approximate spread of 110 m across the resource, rather than construction over targeted fishing grounds. gear width. Normally nets of 95 mm mesh are used, although the single rigged The attendees agree that they do not fish within Project One boundaries. gear uses 80 mm mesh. The gear is categorized as TR1. The attendees are concerned about the potential impact to the Nephrops FN asks about seasonality and proportion of effort split between Botney Gut and other grounds. grounds of noise during construction and vibration and noise during operation. The group confirm the effort in the Outer Silver Pit and Markhams Hole is during PP explains that fish and shellfish ecology experts are undertaking the impact summer months (June to August). Fishing trips are normally seven days in assessment on natural resources, which links with the potential disruption to species targeted by commercial fisheries. PP explains that the level of length. Throughout the remainder of the year other grounds in the North Sea, uncertainty will be taken into consideration when assessments are being made. and in some cases West Scotland and Irish Sea, are targeted. The Outer Silver Pit and Markhams Hole represent some of the most important grounds to the FN explains that the commercial fisheries assessment will draw on the fleet and account for 30 to 50% of total annual landings by this fleet. assessment on fish and shellfish ecology, as well as shipping and navigation. FN asks whether gear is swapped to target other species or grounds. RL states that the offshore wind farm construction at Barrow (Walney) - targeted by vessels from Whitehaven - appears to have had a negative impact on the The group confirms that the gear cannot be changed due to days at sea restrictions under the Common Fisheries Policy. Nephrops grounds. The Nephrops have not re-established in this area and as a FN enquires whether other retained species form an important part of the catch. result vessels have moved to target North Sea grounds. The group confirms that plaice and turbot are also landed. RL states that Project One will impact the Outer Silver Pit and Markhams Hole Nephrops grounds, adding that the first project may have an impact, so it does AL raises concern over the potential for the wind farm to act as an artificial reef not matter if Projects Two to Four are sited across the grounds. and attract higher levels of cod that may move north out of the wind farm and EW states that Nephrops are very sensitive creatures and that not much MC/FN/PP enter the waters targeted by the Nephrops fleet. The concern relates to real scientific work has been undertaken to assess impacts to them. time closures as part of the cod recovery plan which closes an area (for up to 28 days) when the total catch consists of more than 1.5% cod by weight. PP confirms that the Barrow experience will be looked into in further detail and fish and shellfish ecologists will ensure Nephrops are assessed, with any FN notes these concerns, but also reiterates that other national fleets are likely to continue operating within the wind farm including Dutch beam trawlers. uncertainties highlighted and acknowledged in the assessment. FN The group noted that other whitefish vessels can cause area closures when FN moves on to discuss the fleet characteristics of the vessels targeting the Outer Silver Pit and Markhams Hole grounds. greater than 5% cod is caught. FN EW advises that the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) assessment for The group raises concern over shipping and navigation impacts including

Southern North Sea Nephrops contains information on the North Shields fleet. additional steaming time to land to port (e.g., if landing to Scarborough). The FN agrees to obtain this report from her Poseidon colleague who was involved shipping channel between Projects One and Three is also questioned with in the MSC process. concern that this will cause large ships to be channelled directly into the Nephrops grounds. FN asks how many vessels port at North Shields and target the Outer Silver Pit and Markhams Hole grounds and the size of the vessels. PP confirms that these issues will be addressed within the EIA and that the shipping channel will have on average five to seven vessels per day. Attendees agree that 20 vessels port at North Shields, and 12 of these target FN moves on to present landings statistics from 2006 to 2010 on a regional Outer Silver Pit and Markhams Hole grounds. The vessels are all thought to be over 15 m in length, although it is possible that one or two are under 15 m. basis (14 ICES rectangles) and for Subzone 1 commercial fisheries study area

Irrespective of this the VMS data is representative of the areas fished. (36F1 and 36F2). FN and PP introduce the fact that other nationalities have expressed a desire to The group express concern over the landings statistics stating that they under operate between turbines. represent the catch levels. FN/MC The group state that fishing between turbines will not be possible for the FN confirms that this is the second set of data obtained from the MMO and

82 sdf

Notes: Action by: consultation with the NFFO corroborated catch levels for sole and plaice. 07 June 2012 Bridlington potting fleet FN agrees to obtain further data from local MMO representatives present at the meeting. FN explains the methodology for assessing impacts and presents the preliminary impact assessment for the Nephrops fleet. Minutes of Meeting The group agrees that the wind farm is not proposed across fishing grounds targeted by the Nephrops fleet. The group agrees with a minor significance Project Title Hornsea Offshore Wind Farm effect of exclusion. Purpose of Offshore Surveys Update and Commercial Fisheries Preliminary EIA FN goes on to describe the effect of construction to have a potential moderate Meeting Presentation significant effect to Nephrops and other fish and shellfish species. However, there may be opportunity to implement mitigation measures such as soft start Date of Meeting: 6 June 2012, 1900hrs piling to reduce noise impact to minor. Held at: Manor Court Hotel, Bridlington FN recognizes that the impact assessment on fish and shellfish ecology has not Present: Nick Garside (NG) – SMart Wind Fisheries Liaison Officer (FLO) been undertaken specifically for Nephrops, but combined for all species. FN suggests a separate assessment specifically for ecological impacts to Chris Jenner (CJ) – SMart Wind Consents and Environment Manager Nephrops. Fiona Nimmo (FN) – Fisheries Consultant, Poseidon The group re-emphasises their concern and anticipate a major impact to the Gary Redshaw (GR) – Fisherman (vessel Innovator MR1) Nephrops grounds. Ian Gray (IG) – Fisherman (vessel Galwad-y-mor) FN and PP confirm that the impact assessment will be progressed to take on Steve Cowan (SC) – Fisherman (vessel Magdalene Ann) board all the points provided and the new information sources will be reviewed. Neil Robson (NR) – Fisherman (vessel) PP states that a follow up meeting with the fishermen will be arranged for approximately 6 weeks time. Copies to: PP, JL Close Compiled by: CJ, FN Thanks are given to all those that attended and the meeting is adjourned. Item: Introduction: Action by: CJ gave an update on Hornsea Project One and proposed surveys for 1 summer 2012. Presentation attached. Project Two benthic survey - GR requested coordinates of trawls for proposed Project Two benthic survey campaign (EMU, MV Shannon) 2 CJ well in advance for fishermen to check on plotters that areas are clear of pots. CJ to issue coordinates asap Experimental Potting Strings - SC, IG and GR noted that frequency of experimental pots is not enough to provide meaningful pre- and post- 3 CJ construction data. SMW to discuss with Rayner (EMU) the merits of increasing frequency to bolster evidence base. Voluntary Log Book Scheme – all fishermen reinforced value of this approach and wondered why it has stopped. All have desire to continue 4 CJ voluntary scheme. SMW to discuss with EMU reasons for stopping and merits of continuing scheme for the long term.

83 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: Offshore Cable Route Corridor Geophysical Survey – following Offshore Cable Safety Zone – Regarding roaming exclusion/safety CJ aftermath of BP West Sole survey and disparate nature of pots, all around construction vessels/activities during offshore cable (emailed fishermen agreed that a scout vessel would be the best approach to construction. It is acknowledged that the Project Design Statement 5 NFFO compliment the provision of an FLO on board the MV Aquarius. Start needs to be updated as follows: Offshore cable route corridor, Services 10 CJ/EMU date 1 July. Duration four to six weeks. SMart Wind to make necessary construction phase and operational and maintenance phase (works on 8/6) arrangements through NFFO Services. underway): Roaming 500 m safety zone around construction operations. [This is to replace current ‘no exclusion’ which is not Offshore Cable Route Corridor Geophysical Survey – all fishermen realistic.] require high res maps of the precise offshore cable route corridor survey boundary noting requirements for line turns on cross lines. SMW Gear Conflict – fishermen provide account of recent gear interaction to advise if flexibility for positioning of cross lines to circumvent any gear whereby Scottish scallopers targeted the grounds across offshore cable found by scout vessel. If no flexibility in positioning of cross lines, then and towed/destroyed up to 200 pots from one fisherman. This highlights 6 maps/coordinates to provide precautionary 1 km buffer around entire CJ the concern of increased conflict with mobile fleets (excluded from offshore cable route corridor. SMart Wind to request high res maps from Subzone 1), as well as need to consult with the scalloping fleet. FN GEMS of survey specification. All agreed that it was sensible to assume 11 agrees to contact John Hermse – chair of Scallop Association. FN that GEMS would require clearance of entire area from start of survey The impact assessment on significance of conflict from mobile gears as as sequencing of areas is often too difficult to manage with varying a result of Subzone 1 and resulting effect on potters was discussed. It is weather conditions and uncertainty in offshore operations. agreed, that for the potting fleet, this impact is more appropriately FN gave presentation on commercial fisheries preliminary EIA. assessed as having a moderate significance. FN to update PEIR. 7 Presentation attached. High Voltage Direct Current (HVDC)/High Voltage Alternating Current (HVAC) Offshore Cable – FN explains that the HVDC option Number of Vessels - Clarification was provided by the fishermen is assessed due to higher levels of rock armoring/scour protection. CJ regarding the number of vessel operating across Subzone 1 and the presents schematic of cable layouts for HVDC and HVAC. HVAC offshore cable route corridor: 12 represents higher impact based on number of cables and area of FN 3 vessels (12-14.9 m in length, therefore not represented within VMS) trenching, as well as potential higher EMF effects. from Bridlington operate across Subzone 1. FN to change assessment, and confirm with EMU consistent approach 4 vessels (12-14.9 m in length) from Bridlington and 2 vessels from 8 FN for Fish and Shellfish Ecology chapter. Grimsby (targeting more inshore areas) operate across the offshore cable route corridor. Impact Assessment of Exclusion from Subzone 1 During – FN explains this has been assessed between a minor and It is noted that up to 25% of pots can be deployed across an area of the Operation moderate significance; the fishermen confirm this represents a smaller offshore cable, at any one time. 13 FN impact than the displacement from the offshore cable route corridor and FN to update Preliminary Environmental Information Report (PEIR to is therefore more appropriately assessed as a minor significant impact. reflect above. FN to update PEIR. VMS and Surveillance Data – the accuracy of these data in reflecting Impact Assessment of Displacement or Disruption to Fish and spatial coverage of the potting fleet was discussed. FN acknowledges Shellfish Resource – An assessment of significance has not yet been that the 12 to 14.9 m vessels are not included within the VMS and that undertaken for this impact. FN explains that further noise modelling is surveillance data presents a snapshot of activity, and is not carried out being undertaken and will be presented during Phase 4 Consultation at sufficient frequency for a representative account of effort. FN clarifies (and in the Environmental Statement), together with a full impact that VMS and surveillance data have not been used for quantitative 14 9 FN assessment of this potential effect. FN discusses the review of EMF assessment (as is sometimes the case for economic impact effects undertaken for the Fish and Shellfish Ecology section. assessments). Fishermen express their concern over this potential impact. CJ confirms GR confirms that potting vessels can shoot pots at 6 to 7 knots; if the that a study on EMF from HVDC and HVAC has been undertaken and VMS is to be accurate then a scale of 0 to 10 knots for active fishing is will further inform this assessment. more appropriate (rather than current 0 to 3 knots). FN confirms this will be updated for Phase 4 Consultation (i.e., but not within the PEIR).

84 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: 30 August 2012 Holderness Coast Fishing Industry Group Potential for Subzone 1 to Act as Refuge to Fish and Shellfish – GR points out that it is not possible to improve the best shellfish grounds in Europe by building a wind farm and offshore cable route. FN confirms that this (minor) positive effect focuses on potential for 15 exclusion of fishing activities within Subzone 1 (where there is less Minutes of Meeting effort for crab compared to the offshore cable route corridor) and potential consequential effects re recruitment of shellfish. SC adds that Project Title Hornsea Offshore Wind Farm the Blyth et al. (2004) study focused on four vessels in a small area and Purpose of Present and discuss outcomes of Project One PEIR; provide update on would not be representative of the situation under assessment. Meeting offshore surveys and introduce Project Two Grimsby Vessels – It is confirmed that approximately two potting Date of Meeting: 30th August 2012, 13:00 vessels are likely to target areas across the offshore cable route 16 corridor. CJ recognizes importance of consulting with these vessel NG Held at: Rags, Bridlington owners and providing info re surveys etc. NG agrees to update vessel Present: Mike Cohen (MC) - Holderness Coast Fishing Industry Group (HCFIG) owners and organize a meeting at an appropriate date. Gary Redshaw (GR) - Fisherman (vessel Innovator MR1) Circulation of Presentations – Fishermen ask that copies of the 17 NG Nick Garside (NG) - SMart Wind Fisheries Liaison Officer (FLO) presentation are circulated to Mike Cohen. NG to circulate minutes. Chris Jenner (CJ) - SMart Wind Consents and Environment Manager Fiona Nimmo (FN) - Fisheries Consultant, Poseidon Emily Boram (EB) - Environmental Consultant, RPS Copies to: PP, PH Compiled by: FN

Item: Introduction: Action by: CJ provides an overview of the timescales for development within 1 Hornsea Zone and an update on surveys for Projects One and Two. MaxSea Program: MC and GR provide an overview of the MaxSea program. Currently all vessels use the MaxSea program to record start and end positions of gear. If MC were to obtain and install the

professional version of the program it would be possible to collate and map effort by the potting fleet, with the view to establish catch per unit effort (CPUE) patterns (cross referenced with IFCA data on ICES sub- rectangles). GR explains that it is also possible to record notes on the MaxSea program such as number of juvenile lobsters etc.

2 The MaxSea program provides the most efficient means of

communicating survey locations to the fishing fleet, whereby coordinates are provided to MC who then disseminates in MaxSea format. MC The MaxSea program would also provide outputs sought by the Voluntary Logbook Scheme, making the scheme unnecessary. CJ to explore possibility of SMart Wind funding MaxSea program software for MC. MC to provide quotation to CJ. 3 Surveys: Geophysical surveys for Subzone 1 are complete;

85 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: geophysical surveys along the offshore cable route corridor are due to physical processes perspective, while monopiles represent worst case finish towards the end of September. for noise impacts. Benthic surveys for Subzone 1 and Subzone 2 are complete. Electromagnetic field impacts: Both HVAC and HVDC are being Bird and marine mammal surveys will continue until February 2013, considered within the EIA – the former would require a standalone after which bird surveys will be largely undertaken via aircraft with high reactive compensation station near the Silver Pitt area..

resolution video analysis. FN explains that the EIA assumes the burial of cables within a range of Intertidal surveys are completed. 0 to 1.5 m burial for inter-array cables and a range of 0 to 3 m for the CJ to notify when ‘triangle offshore’ surveys are completed. CJ export cables, and appropriate rock dumping/scour protection GR asks if further cable surveys will be undertaken for Project Two. depending on ground conditions. FN outlines recent research CJ confirms that there are no plans for further offshore cable route (Normandeau, 2011 – see below) which confirms insignificant EMF effects when cable is buried to 1.5 m. corridor surveys as current studies cover the area associated with up to GR outlines concerns regarding increase in rays and skate attracted to 8 cables for transporting 2 GW for Projects One and Two (assuming that the survey data provides sufficient data quality and coverage). the cable due to EMF and the potential for increased consumption of

There has been no decision on the location of the offshore cable route juvenile lobster and crab as prey. corridors for Projects Three and Four. FN and EB agree that the potential for an increase in rays and skates FN + EB MC enquires about the sampling methodology for benthic surveys. 8 and subsequent impact on crab and lobster will be considered further CJ confirms that 161 grab samples and 163 video transects were within the commercial fisheries and fish ecology assessments. undertaken for Subzone 1. Each were single samples (i.e., no MC enquires whether there will be maintenance procedures for replicates), however a total of approximately 400 stations were sampled ensuring cable burial. across Subzone 1, Subzone 2, Zone and offshore cable route corridor. CJ confirms that there will be routine monitoring and maintenance of the Detailed survey reports will be included within the Technical interarray and export cables to ensure the integrity of the cable is Appendices published as part of the Environmental Statement and maintained. available for consultation during Phase 4. [Normandeau (Normandeau Associates, Inc.), Exponent Inc., T. Tricas, Timescales: Project One PEIR is currently within Phase 3 Consultation T. and Gill, A., (2011). Effects of EMFs from Undersea Power Cables (1 August to 12 September). Phase 4 Consultation will be undertaken in on Elasmobranchs and Other Marine Species. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, late January/early February on the Draft Environmental Statement prior Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement, to submission of planning application in April 2013. Pacific OCS Region, Camarillo, CA.OCS Study BOEMRE 2011-09. 4 Available at: Scoping Report for Project Two is due to be submitted in October 2012. ] The PEIR for Project Two will be available for consultation in late January/early February, to coincide with Project One Phase 4 Resource disruption: FN explains that the impact of displacement or Consultation. disruption of fisheries resources during construction has not been assessed within the PEIR as it is dependent on ongoing noise and Dong Energy: are partners in Project One with the option of purchasing sediment transportation modelling. FN outlines the potential ecological all Project One after consent has been awarded. Dong Energy brings impacts being considered including noise, smothering and habitat 5 construction and operation expertise to the consenting process and disturbance. while maintaining contact throughout this process, overall responsibility for consenting remains with SMart Wind. MC discusses significant concern over potential smothering of lobsters which are likely to be more sensitive (compared to crab) due to their FN + EB Commercial fisheries: FN provides a summary of the baseline and more sedentary lifestyle and lower larval dispersal. impact assessment presented within the PEIR. It is noted that an 9 FN and EB agree that sensitivity of lobsters to smothering will be 6 extended baseline is provided within the Commercial Fisheries considered further within the commercial fisheries and fish ecology Technical Appendix, which will be published with the Draft assessments. Environmental Statement during Phase 4 Consultation. GR notes that there have been significant increases in the number of Impact assessment: FN describes the process of assigning minor, juvenile lobsters caught (and returned) within the fishery (e.g., up to 200 moderate and major significance categories to each impact affecting the to 300 juveniles per 50 pot fleet). 7 crab and lobster potting fleet. The EIA considers worst case scenario MC confirms that lobster catches are becoming more important for the for each type of impact parameter being assessed. For example, gravity fleet with 12% increases in catches year on year for the past three based structures represent worst case from an ecological footprint and years.

86 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: 30 August 2012 North Shields Nephrops demersal otter trawling fleet GR notes that location of fishing is often defined by market demand. For example with crab market demand, vessels will fish further offshore, particularly from September to December, otherwise further inshore areas are favoured for higher lobster returns. FN enquires whether the increase in juvenile lobsters is something that Minutes of Meeting could be monitored as part of the MaxSea program. MC and GR agree there is potential to record juvenile catches on a Project Title Hornsea Offshore Wind Farm random sampling basis (e.g., by recording number of juveniles returned Purpose of Present and discuss outcomes of Project One PEIR; provide update on on 10th pot of each fleet). This could be recorded as a note within the Meeting offshore surveys and introduce Project Two MaxSea program. It is agreed to consider this further when the MaxSea program is up and Date of Meeting: 30 August 2012, 19:00 running to record effort. Held at: Fish Quay, North Shields Project Two: FN introduces Project Two and explains the impact Present: Andrew Leadley (AL) - Skipper/Owner FV Success assessment is likely to be similar to Project One, given the consistent David Price (DP) - Skipper FV Avoset offshore cable route corridor. Ryan Whitehead (RW) - Skipper/Owner FV Rachael Jane FN enquires about effort within Subzone 2.

GR confirms that the same three vessels (<15 m in length) that fish Terry Reed (TR) - Caley Fisheries within Subzone 1 also operate within Subzone 2, and that effort levels Sandie Ritchie (SR) - Anglo Scottish Fishermen’s Association are similar in each area. There may be slightly more effort towards the Andrew Collin - Anglo Scottish Fish Producers Organisation west of Subzone 2 where fishing areas are often dictated by location of Nick Garside (NG) - SMart Wind Fisheries Liaison Officer (FLO) beam trawling. Chris Jenner (CJ) - SMart Wind Consents and Environment Manager FN outlines the data provided by the MMO for VMS and their change in Fiona Nimmo (FN) - Fisheries Consultant, Poseidon position for provision of data. VMS data is no longer provided as ping positions, but as shapefiles at a resolution of 200th ICES rectangle. Emily Boram (EB) - Environmental Consultant, RPS VMS data is linked to logbook data to provide tonnage and value, as Copies to: PP, PH 10 well as effort. A blanket speed of 2 to 6 knots is adopted to clean for Compiled by: FN actively fishing vessels, independent of gear type. MC expresses concern that the VMS figure for passive gear is not representative of activity.

FN agrees; the figure does not include effort for vessels <15 m and the Item: Introduction: Action by:

speed assumption is not appropriate for potting. It is agreed that the Introductions: After introductions AL questions the outcome of studies

VMS figure for passive gear will not be used within the EIA. that are funded by the developer. CJ stated that the commercial FN enquires about the figure presented by Gary Hodgson in November MC fisheries EIA is funded by SMart Wind (via the lead environmental 1 2011 illustrating key potting grounds. It was acknowledged that the consultancy RPS) but the assessment is completely independent and figure required updating and FN asks whether this could be undertaken follows industry best practice and guidance on Environmental Impact in time to inform the Project One or Two EIAs. Assessment. AL agrees to read PEIR in detail and provide comments. MC agrees to speak with GH and ascertain whether this figure can be Commercial fisheries: FN provides a summary of the baseline and updated and provided. Although MaxSea mapping will supersede this 2 impact assessment presented within the PEIR. figure. Voluntary Logbook Scheme (VLS): FN outlines the approach to the VLS and the new recording sheet. 11 It is agreed that the MaxSea program will replace requirement for a VLS. The VLS will therefore be dropped. Circulation of Presentations – NG to circulate minutes and 12 NG presentations.

87 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: Baseline data: AL highlights that the last meeting in January Gear snagging: Assessment of gear snagging is described. AL questioned validity of data obtained from MMO, commenting that the questions the potential of rock dumping along the inter-array cables and weight and value of landings are under-represented. therefore the risk of large boulders being towed by beam trawlers from FN explains that a new dataset was sought from the MMO, which Subzone 1 into Nephrops grounds. FN explains that locations of any corresponds with the original dataset. Furthermore, values have been rock dumping/scour protection will be provided to all fleets to minimize cross-referenced with ICES stock assessment reports and found to such occurrences, adding that in reality it is unknown whether beam trawlers will be able to operate within Subzone 1. However, for the have similar figures for UK vessel landings from the Botney Gut Functional Unit. The data used by ICES is likely to have been provided 6 purpose of the EIA, this impact to the Nephrops fleet should assume FN by the MMO, however this illustrates that there is not a user-error with beam trawlers will operate and therefore include this potential impact.

the data provided to FN from the MMO and confirms the data within the FN will update the EIA to more accurately reflect this. baseline correlate with officially reported data. MMO data shows AL questions whether changes in water movements due to the wind £810,000 being landed from three ICES rectangles that overlap the farm are being considered. EB and CJ describe the physical processes Botney Gut area. AL states that three vessels will land £300,000 in modelling and assessments that are being undertaken by HR three months from the grounds north of Subzone 1. Wallingford – one of the UK’s leading engineering and environmental 3 consultancies. FN recognizes that these data may not be accurate, but has no other sources of data as evidence. Resource disruption: FN explains that the impact of displacement or RW questions why we need these data when the issue should be how disruption of fisheries resources during construction has not been the wind farm will impact the Nephrops grounds. assessed within the PEIR as it is dependent on ongoing noise and FN highlights the importance of accurate baseline descriptions for sediment transportation modelling. FN outlines the potential ecological understanding the scale of potential impacts and also for monitoring any impacts being considered including noise, smothering and ecological change to the fishery as a result of the wind farm. changes in predator/prey relationships. FN states that it may be possible to obtain individual vessel data if the FN explains that the potential for Subzone 1 to act as a refuge for cod, thereby increasing cod stocks and affecting predator/prey relationships skippers/vessel owners present could provide written consent for this to NG, AL within the Nephrops grounds will be difficult to attribute to the project be obtained from the MMO. and FN AL, DP and TR agree they are happy for individual vessel data to be given that the entire Cod Recovery Plan has an aim to increase cod obtained and agree to provide such data directly from Caley Fish, where stocks. their catch is landed to. It is agreed that NG will liaise with Al to obtain AL and the group express significant concern over this potential impact. these data. Cod congregate around artificial structures and therefore abundance is 7 likely to increase in this area. Impact assessment: FN describes the process of assigning minor, FN and EB agree that this will be considered further within the moderate and major significance categories to each impact affecting the FN and Nephrops fleet. The EIA considers worst case scenario for each type of commercial fisheries and fish ecology assessments. EB impact parameter being assessed. For example, gravity based FN confirms that noise modelling is ongoing and will inform the structures represent worst case from an ecological footprint and assessment. FN summarises research undertaken for American lobster 4 physical processes perspective, while monopile represents worst case exposed to seismic air guns, acknowledging that research on noise for noise impacts. impacts to Nephrops is lacking. RW and the group question the usefulness of the American lobster study given the difference in habitat Both HVAC and HVDC are being considered within the EIA – the former preference (i.e., burrows) and sensitivity of Nephrops. would require a standalone reactive compensation station near the (inner) Silver Pit area. RW explains that a recent oil and gas seismic survey affected Nephrops grounds for months. CJ stated that the geophysical surveys undertaken Exclusion: The fishing grounds are 6 to 12 km north of Project One and 5 within the Hornsea Zone are of a much smaller magnitude with the therefore exclusion from Subzone 1 is of minor significance. objective of only surveying the top 50m of the seabed with much smaller noise sources.

88 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: Ecological impact of Walney: FN presents data on landings from Surveys: CJ provides an overview of surveys that have been ICES rectangle 37E6 which overlaps the Walney wind farm in the completed and are ongoing. Geophysical surveys for Subzone 1 are Eastern Irish Sea. Although landings reduced during the beginning of complete; these constituted small air guns across a short spread so are construction, overall the data show no evidence of reduced landings (at not comparable to oil and gas seismic surveys. Geophysical surveys 8 an ICES rectangle level) as a result of the wind farm. along the offshore cable route corridor are due to finish towards the end The group has little confidence in the data provided by MMO and also FN of September. highlights the difficulty in differentiating changes at a scale of an ICES Benthic surveys for Subzone 1 and Subzone 2 are complete. Bird and rectangle. FN acknowledges this and will explore further using new data 13 marine mammal surveys will continue until February 2013, after which provided by MMO for VMS effort at a scale of 1/200th ICES rectangle. bird surveys will be undertaken largely via aircraft with high resolution video analysis. Project Two: FN introduces Subzone 2 which is 2 km from the Nephrops grounds. FN explains that the impact assessment is likely to RW accuses survey vessel (Geo Caspian) of displacing his fishing be similar to Project One, with exception for and dependant on the vessel from Nephrops grounds north of Subzone 1 without warning. noise and sediment transportation modeling. CJ explains that Geo Caspian is not linked with the Hornsea project and The group express significant concern over the proximity of Subzone 2 that all survey details related to Hornsea are provided in advance within to the Nephrops grounds. Notice to Mariners issued fortnightly by NG. FN outlines the data provided by the MMO for VMS and their change in Project One design evolution: CJ outlines the key constraints that position for provision of data. VMS data is no longer provided as ping have impacted the location of Subzone 1 and the offshore cable route positions, but as shapefiles at a resolution of 200th ICES rectangle. corridor. Three cable corridors were initially considered. Constraints VMS data is linked to logbook data to provide tonnage and value, as including minimizing pipeline crossings, avoiding large physical 9 well as effort. A blanket speed of 2 to 6 knots is adopted to clean for structures such as the inner Silver Pit and sand waves, avoiding actively fishing vessels, independent of gear type. The group questions disposal sites, existing wind farms, oil platforms, aggregate extraction, the usefulness of MMO effort data linked to logbooks, when the overall potting grounds and crossing the Humber have led to the selection of landings appear under-represented. Furthermore it is recognized that at the southern offshore cable route corridor. least three vessels are under 15 m and therefore not included within Subzone 1 is being progressed as the first project within the Hornsea VMS data. FN agrees this should be acknowledged within the EIA with Zone based primarily on water depth, but also other parameters data to be provided from Caley Fish. 14 including oil and gas platforms, helicopter access routes and shipping FN enquires about other Nephrops grounds located within 37F1, 37F2 and navigation. and 36F2. The group confirm that the key grounds are located within Project Two will consider turbines of 5 to 15 MW. Larger turbines will the Outer Silver Pit and Markhams Hole, but that other grounds are require greater distances between turbines. located in the north east of 37F2 and along a narrow trench from DP enquires whether larger turbines will mean the Subzone 1 and Markhams Hole to the Outer Silver Pitt. Subzone 2 areas could be extended. CJ gave an overview of the timescales for development within Hornsea 10 CJ explains that each subzone will generate capacity of up to 1.2 GW Zone and an update on surveys for Projects One and Two. and therefore the higher the MW of turbines, the fewer turbines Timescales: Project One PEIR is currently within Phase 3 Consultation required. Therefore, the areas of Subzone 1 and Subzone 2 will not be (1 August – 12 September). Phase 4 Consultation will be undertaken in extended. late January/ early February 2013 on the Draft Environmental Circulation of Presentations: NG to circulate minutes and Statement prior to submission of planning application in April 2013. 15 NG 11 presentations. Scoping Report for Project Two is due to be submitted in the coming weeks. The PEIR for Project Two will be available for consultation in late January/early February 2013, to coincide with Project One Phase 4 Consultation. Dong Energy: are partners in Project One with the option of purchasing all Project One after consent has been awarded. Dong Energy brings 12 construction and operation expertise to the consenting process and while maintaining contact throughout this process, overall responsibility for consenting remains with SMart Wind.

89 sdf

31 August 2012 National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations and East of Item: Introduction: Action by: England Fish Producers Organisation Design parameters: The EIA considers worst case scenario for each type of impact parameter being assessed. For example, gravity based structures represent worst case from an ecological footprint and physical processes perspective, while monopiles represent worst case for noise impacts. Minutes of Meeting DR comments that the monopole foundations represents the simplest Project Title Hornsea Offshore Wind Farm design when considering safety zone distances. CJ confirms that 50 m safety zones around turbines will be in place Purpose of Present and discuss outcomes of Project One PEIR; provide update on during operation, but notes there is no exclusion for sailing/transiting Meeting offshore surveys and introduce Project Two through the wind farm during operation. Date of Meeting: 31 August 2012, 10 am 4 A stand-alone Safety Zone Statement will be submitted as part of the Held at: NFFO offices, York application. This will be available for review during Phase 4 Consultation. Present: Dale Rodmell (DR) – Assistant Chief Executive NFFO Both HVAC and HVDC are being considered within the EIA – the former Nick Garside (NG) – SMart Wind Fisheries Liaison Officer (FLO) would require a standalone reactive compensation station near the Chris Jenner (CJ) – SMart Wind Consents and Environment Manager Silver Pitt area. Fiona Nimmo (FN) – Fisheries Consultant, Poseidon DR enquires about the boundary between Subzone 1 and Subzone 2. Emily Boram (EB) – RPS CJ explains this follows the depth contour with Subzone 1 being the least constrained in terms of depth as well as other parameters. Project Apologies Arnold Locker – East of England Fish PO and NFFP Two EIA will consider 5 to 15 MW turbines with a maximum rotor Copies to: PP, PH diameter of 250 m. Compiled by: FN Dong Energy: are partners in Project One with the option of purchasing all Project One after consent has been awarded. Dong Energy bring 5 construction and operation expertise to the consenting process and Item: Introduction: Action by: while maintaining contact throughout this process, overall responsibility for consenting remains with SMart Wind. DR provides an overview of NFFO who represent individual members and organizations including seven Producer Organisations (PO) such Operation within the wind farm: DR questions practicality of fishing as East of England Fish PO, Lowestoft PO and North Sea Fishermen’s vessels operating between turbines. 1 Organisation. Members include domestic (UK) vessels and Dutch FN explains that individual fleets have been consulted on this aspect vessels fishing under UK flag. The NFFO have links with Spanish, with varying responses. For example the UK potting fleet would not Icelandic and French fisheries and are representatives on the North consider operating within the wind farm due to safety and the risk of Sea Regional Advisory Council. fleets being moved via currents into safety zones therefore being irretrievable. While, the Dutch beam trawl fleet would be able to operate CJ gives an overview of the timescales for development within Hornsea 2 in areas where there is 1 km width between turbines. For the purpose of Zone and an update on surveys for Projects One and Project Two. the EIA, minimum turbine spacing relates to turbine layout 1 with 600 m, 6 Timescales: Project One PEIR is currently within Phase 3 Consultation row and 960 m column, including allowance for micrositing by up to (1 August – 12 September). Phase 4 Consultation will be undertaken in 50 m in any direction [and 924 m row, 1320 m column excluding late January/early February 2013 on the Draft Environmental Statement micrositing]. Therefore, total exclusion from Subzone 1 is assumed for prior to submission of planning application in April 2013. If the assessing impact to all commercial fisheries. This is true for all forms of application is successful, construction of Project One is likely to be impact, with the exception of instances where operating within the wind 3 undertaken from 2015 to 2018. farm would represent worst case scenario (e.g., gear snagging). Scoping Report for Project Two is due to be submitted in October 2012. CJ explains that alignment of turbine rows are optimized for the south o The PEIR for Project Two will be available for consultation in late westerly prevailing wind direction. Deviations of more than 1 to 2 from January/early February 2013, to coincide with Project One Phase 4 this would affect economics of energy generation. Consultation.

90 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: Commercial fisheries impact assessment: FN provides a summary CJ agrees to look into this further with SNSOWF (the group set up of the impact assessment presented within the PEIR, describing between Hornsea, East Anglia and Dogger Bank developers to consider cross-cutting issues strategically). justifications for each of the significance assessments on a fleet by fleet basis. Statement of Common Ground: DR explains that the NFFO will be FN provides justification for the impact assessment of UK registered looking to develop/provide a joint Statement of Common Ground (SGC) Dutch owned beam trawlers in relation to exclusion from Subzone 1. with the Dutch fisheries for this project. SCGs are currently being This fleet currently targets alternative grounds within the North Sea, developed by NFFO for Galloper and Triton Knoll. namely across Dogger Bank, and have done so for the past five years. The SCG will address acceptable mitigation and monitoring, ideally to However the impact assessment recognizes that Subzone 1 was fished be linked with the conclusions of the Environmental Statement and targeted by this fleet pre-2006 and therefore a 10 year data set was 8 developed in conjunction with MMO. analysed to inform the assessment. Based on the duration of the CJ + DR CJ agrees with this approach and will consider timing, process and construction phase, together with the likelihood that current practices content. It is agreed that developing the SCG before final submission of (governed by Common Fisheries Policy etc) are unlikely to change Environmental Statement would be beneficial for all parties involved. In significantly in the near future; the impact during construction is relation to Project One, this would require development of SGC by considered to be minor. However given the 50 year lifespan of the December 2012. operation and maintenance phase, the impact is considered to be moderate. Circulation of Presentations: NG to circulate minutes and 9 NG FN explains that the impact of displacement or disruption of fisheries presentations, ensuring EEFPO obtain copies.

resources during construction has not been assessed as it is dependent on ongoing noise and sediment transportation modelling. FN outlines the potential ecological impacts being considered and summarises concerns raised by industry in relation to Nephrops and lobsters.

Mitigation for EMF assumes burial of cable to depths of up to 1.5 m for

7 inter-array cables and up to 3 m for export cable. FN outlines the data provided by the MMO for VMS and their change in position for provision of data. VMS data is no longer provided as ping positions, but as shapefiles at a resolution of 200th ICES rectangle. VMS data is linked to logbook data to provide tonnage and value, as well as effort. A blanket speed of 2 to 6 knots is adopted to clean for

actively fishing vessels, independent of gear type. Data is presented amalgamated for mobile and passive gear. It is noted that the passive gear data is less useful on account of the number of under 15 m vessels represented in this fleet and the speeds used to asses active fishing. FN outlines mitigation measures that have been considered for assessing residual significance including ongoing liaison, advance warning of construction activities, program of construction to minimize CJ disruption where practical, safety zones etc. A full list is presented within the PEIR. DR asks of the potential for monitoring to assess outstanding issues including underwater noise and EMF impacts. CJ describes the process of drafting and agreeing marine license conditions with the MMO for pre, post and during construction processes. The opportunity for strategic monitoring of noise and EMF impacts of Project One to inform future Projects Two to Four is recognized, as is the potential for research to be industry wide, rather than developer/project specific.

91 sdf

07 September 2012 Rederscentrale (Belgian Producer Organisation) Item: Introduction: Action by: TC agrees to obtain consent from the Belgian vessel owners and FN coordinate obtaining these data. FN agrees to provide a suitable basemap of an admiralty chart and

Hornsea Zone. Minutes of Meeting Operation within the wind farm: Project Title Hornsea Offshore Wind Farm FN explains that individual fleets have been consulted on this aspect Purpose of Present and discuss outcomes of Project One PEIR; provide update on with varying responses. For example the Dutch beam trawl fleet would Meeting offshore surveys and introduce Project Two be able to operate in areas where there is 1 km width between turbines, while other fleets have expresses concern over safety of operating Date of Meeting: 07 September 2012, 10 am within a wind farm. Held at: Fish Auction, 201 Noordstraat, Zeebrugge, Belgium For the purpose of the EIA, minimum turbine spacing relates to turbine layout 1 with 600 m, row and 960 m column, including allowance for Present: Tom Craeynest (TC) – Rederscentrale 3 micrositing by up to 50 m in any direction [and 924 m row, 1,320 m Norbert Neyts (NN) - owner of vessel Z.47 Marie Louise column excluding micrositing]. Therefore, total exclusion from Subzone Penny Pickett (PP) – SMart Wind Offshore Environment Manager 1 is assumed for assessing impacts to all commercial fisheries. This is Fiona Nimmo (FN) – Fisheries Consultant, Poseidon true for all forms of impact, with the exception of instances where operating within the wind farm would represent worst case scenario Copies to: PP, PH (e.g., gear snagging). Compiled by: FN TC explains that the Belgian fleet may begin to consider the potential of operating within wind farms due to the extent of current North Sea wind

farm developments. Item: Introduction: Action by: Impact assessment: Commercial fisheries impact assessment: FN provides a summary of FN outlines the methodology for assessing impact significance which the impact assessment presented within the PEIR, describing considers both magnitude of the impact and the sensitivity. TC enquires 1 justifications for each of the significance assessments for the Belgian how sensitivity is defined. FN explains that for commercial fisheries the fleet. sensitivity considers the resilience of the fleet and their ability to adapt, including the operational range of fleets and their normal fishing patterns Baseline description: including scale of alternative grounds targeted. FN presents VMS data obtained from the Marine Management FN provides justification for the impact assessment of Belgian demersal Organisation (MMO) which includes non-UK vessels. otter trawlers and beam trawlers in relation to exclusion from Subzone 1 TC enquires whether these data take into consideration vessel speed. and the export cable. From the available evidence there is very little FN confirms VMS data has been cleaned to assume active fishing at a effort by the Belgian fleet within Subzone 1, it is therefore assessed that

range of speeds dependant on gear type – demersal otter trawl is the impact of exclusion to the Belgian fleet is of minor significance. assumed to be actively fishing at speeds of 2 to 6 knots and beam trawl 4 TC agrees with the assessment for Subzone 1, but explains that some at 3 to 8 knots. individual vessels may target the eastern section of Hornsea Zone

FN presents the data obtained for the Belgian fleet which includes 2009 (outside Subzone 1).

2 VMS data and total landings value per ICES rectangle. FN outlines mitigation measures that have been considered for FN explains that these data show some effort by the Belgians assessing significance including ongoing liaison, advance warning of immediately north of the Hornsea Zone (outside the zone) and to the construction activities, program of construction to minimize disruption east of Subzone 1 (outside Subzone 1, but within Hornsea Zone). where practical, safety zones etc. A full list is presented within the PEIR. TC and NN agree that this is representative of the fleet, however it is TC confirms they receive fortnightly Notice to Mariners and acknowledge acknowledged that these data are not detailed and that the assessment that this will outline construction details. would be further informed by higher resolution data. FN outlines the minor significance for each further impact assessed, FN agrees and adds that a longer time period would greatly inform the including gear snagging, increased gear conflict, longer steaming EIA, VMS data presented annually for a five year time period would be TC distances and resource refuge. ideal (i.e., one figure per year). TC agrees with the assessment for these impacts in relation to Project

92 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: One. which can accommodate both 5 MW and 6 MW may be considered a FN explains that the impact of displacement or disruption of fisheries more realistic layout at this point in time. Layout 3 has turbine spacing of resources during construction has not been assessed as it is dependent approximately 1.6 km between columns and 1.2 km between rows. on ongoing noise and sediment transportation modeling. Mitigation for Indicative spacing between turbines for each layout are presented below EMF assumes burial of cable to depths of up to 1.5 m for interarray (excluding micro-siting) and discussed further within the PEIR Project cables and up to 3 m for export cable. Description Chapter (Volume 1, Chapter 3). FN introduces Project Two, consisting of Subzone 2 and the same offshore cable route corridor as Project One. Subzone 2 is located north and west of Subzone 1. FN explains that the impact assessment for Project Two is likely to be similar as that presented for Project One. It is however noted that Subzone 2 is located closed to the edge of grounds targeted by the Belgian and many other fleets. The ecological impact to the fisheries Project Two EIA will consider 5 to 15 MW turbines with a maximum rotor 5 resource as a result of the construction will take this into consideration. diameter of 278 m. TC acknowledges that effort is similar in Subzone 2, as described for Subzone 1. TC expresses some concern over the proximity of Subzone Dong Energy: Dong has acquired a 33% stake in Project One. Dong Energy bring construction and operation expertise to the consenting 2 to the grounds immediately north of this area. 9 PP outlines the fish ecology assessment methodology and potential process and while maintaining contact throughout this process, overall recoverability of fish resources. FN confirms that noise modeling is being responsibility for consenting remains with SMart Wind. assessed for dab, which is likely to be representative of the impacts to Circulation of Presentations: FN to circulate minutes and sole and plaice. 10 presentations, noting that pdfs of presentations were provided (via FN PP gives an overview of the timescales for development within Hornsea memory stick) during the meeting. 6 Zone and an update on surveys for Projects One and Two. Timescales: Project One PEIR is currently within Phase 3 Consultation (1 August to 12 September). Phase 4 Consultation will be undertaken in late January/early February 2013 on the Draft Environmental Statement prior to submission of planning application in April 2013. If the application is successful, construction of Project One is likely to be 7 undertaken from 2015 to 2018. PP confirms that the consultation phase for PEIR ends on 12 September and if Rederscentrale were to submit any written comments on the PEIR it would be appreciated by this date. TC confirms he will review the PEIR and submit any comments, aiming for the 12 September deadline. Design parameters: The EIA considers worst case scenario for each type of impact parameter being assessed. For example, gravity based structures represent worst case from an ecological footprint and physical processes perspective, while monopiles represent worst case for noise impacts. 8 Both HVAC and HVDC are being considered within the EIA – the former would require a standalone reactive compensation station near the Silver Pitt area. PP presents the four turbine layouts being considered for Project One. The four layouts are indicative of the potential spacing between turbines based on their capacity. Given advances in turbine technology, layout 3

93 sdf

08 September 2012 Vis Ned and Dutch vessel skippers Item: Introduction: Action by: vessels to a scale of 1/16th ICES rectangle. IMARES data provided for 2011 representing effort by the entire Dutch beam trawling fleet across the North Sea; and value based on cross

reference with VMS, logbooks and average trip prices. PV comments Minutes of Meeting that the IMARES data requires validation by the skippers and is contacting IMARES in this regard. Project Title Hornsea Offshore Wind Farm AdB asks why only data from 2009 to 2011 is being considered. Purpose of Present and discuss outcomes of Project One PEIR; provide update on FN explains that a ten year data set for landing statistics has been Meeting offshore surveys and introduce Project Two obtained for the 24 vessels identified as fishing in this Hornsea Zone Date of Meeting: 08 September 2012, 10 am area. These data are presented within the Commercial Fisheries Technical Appendix which will be available for review in the next Held at: Crowne Plaza Hotel, Schiphol, Amsterdam consultation phase. Present: Pim Visser (PV) – Visned AdB asks for exact co-ordinates of Subzone 1 to allow entry into his Andries De Boer (AdB) – WN-1 Sola Fide plotter system. Jan Van Der Vis – TX36 Jan Van Toon PP confirms co-ordinates are provided within the PEIR for Subzone 1 Jaap Van Der Vis – TX36 Jan Van Toon as follows: Klaas Romkes – UK1 Albert Jelle M. Romkes – UK1 Albert Harnen Romkes – UK1 Albert Penny Pickett (PP) – SMart Wind Offshore Environment Manager Fiona Nimmo (FN) – Fisheries Consultant, Poseidon Copies to: PP, PH Compiled by: FN

Item: Introduction: Action by: Commercial fisheries impact assessment: FN provides a summary of the impact assessment presented within the PEIR, describing 1 justifications for each of the significance assessments for the Dutch fleets (including UK registered Dutch owned and German registered Dutch owned vessels). Baseline description: FN presents baseline data including: VMS data for 2006 to 2010 obtained from the UK MMO which includes non-UK vessels. Crown Estate data indicating effort for beam trawlers based on vessel plotter/tracker data collated by the Crown Estate from a representative 2 sample of vessels operating in this area including UK and non-UK

vessels. Data represent fishing effort across a long time span (up to 25 years) and shows higher effort in the east of the Hornsea Zone. AdB [Coordinates are also provided in degrees, minutes, seconds] comments that he has provided vessel plotter data as part of this project and that the Dutch have been consulted on the development of this figure. It is considered representative.

IMARES data provided for 2009 and 2010 indicating effort for Dutch

94 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: Operation within the wind farm: grounds currently fished. For the purpose of the EIA, minimum turbine spacing relates to turbine FN provides justification for the impact assessment of Dutch beam layout 1 with 600 m, row and 960 m column, including allowance for trawlers in relation to exclusion from Subzone 1 and the export cable. micro-siting by up to 50 m in any direction [and 924 m row, 1320 m During construction and operation and maintenance the impact to Dutch registered, Dutch owned vessels is assessed as moderate significance. column excluding micro-siting]. Therefore, total exclusion from Subzone 1 is assumed for assessing impacts to all commercial fisheries. This is During operation and maintenance the impact to UK and German true for all forms of impact, with the exception of instances where registered, Dutch owned vessels, is assessed as moderate, based on operating within the wind farm would represent worst case scenario 50 year lifespan of the wind farm. (e.g., gear snagging). The group agrees with the assessments at a fleet level, but explain that PV explains that skippers are becoming more reluctant about the on an individual vessel basis it may be major for some and minor for others. prospect of fishing within a wind farm based on spacing and weather conditions, for example fishing/navigation within a wind farm would FN goes on to discuss the moderate assessment for the Dutch

become difficult in fog or severe storms. registered Dutch owned vessels and the potential for this to be reduced

3 FN outlines the turbine layouts for Subzone 1 that are being assessed. to minor based on the new data obtained from IMARES (2011) and Layout 1 consists of 332 3.6MW turbines while layout 4 consists of 150 MMO (2007 to 2009). The MMO data indicates little effort across 8 MW turbines, with spacing increasing progressively from layouts 1 to Subzone 1 for the Dutch registered vessels during 2007 to 2009; 4 based on turbine size. IMARES data shows an approximate value of € 200,000 landed from within Subzone 1 during 2011. PV again expresses concern that the PP explains that SMart Wind engineers are currently investigating IMARES data requires skipper validation, and that the IMARES data potential inter-array cable layouts and likely extent of potential rock assesses the entire Dutch fleet, rather that the vessels known to be dumping. Total exclusion is considered worst case, and it is hoped that operating across the area and may appear disproportionately small parts of the wind farm will be accessible to fisheries. PP when compared to the fleet as a whole. For these reasons the PP agrees to circulate the cable burial assessment when it has been moderate assessment should remain. completed. FN explains that for UK and German registered, Dutch owned vessels PP asks whether our assumption of total exclusion based on layout 1 is the impact of exclusion during the construction process is assessed as over-precautionary. minor, due to the fact that evidence and previous consultation shows PV and the group agree it is not over-precautionary to assume total effort is currently focused elsewhere. With management unlikely to exclusion based on the 600 m minimum turbine spacing for layout 1. change significantly across the period of construction (two to three Southern North Sea Offshore Wind Forum (SNSOWF) years), it is considered reasonable to assume that the current fishing patterns will remain largely unchanged. For this reason a minor is PP explains the background to SNSOWF which provides a forum for assessed as appropriate. Dogger Bank, Hornsea and East Anglia developers to discuss interfaces and cumulative impacts between these Round 3 zones. PV and the group express concern that this assessment is not consistent with the Dutch registered Dutch owned assessment. AdB 4 PP outlines the understanding that fisheries will not be excluded from adds that two to three years can be a long time in relation to fisheries Dogger Bank or East Anglia. with significant changes in distribution driven by changes in water PV explains that it is hoped the Dogger Bank wind farm and European temperature. Sites can be aligned and fisheries will be excluded. The situation and FN acknowledges this, but stresses that for UK registered vessels the status for East Anglia is unknown. effort within Subzone 1 has been consistently low in the past five years. Impact assessment - exclusion Higher levels of effort are acknowledged to have occurred pre-2006, FN outlines the methodology for assessing impact significance which however this is addressed within the operational and maintenance assessment which covers a 50 year lifespan. considers both magnitude of the impact and the sensitivity. FN explains FN outlines mitigation measures that have been considered for that for commercial fisheries the sensitivity considers the resilience of 5 the fleet and their ability to adapt, including the operational range of assessing significance including ongoing liaison (including fortnightly fleets and their normal fishing patterns. PV raises concern that the Notice to Mariners), advance warning of construction activities, program sensitivity does not take into consideration the time required for of construction to minimize disruption where practical, safety zones etc. skippers to explore new grounds, if they are displaced. FN appreciates A full list is presented within the PEIR. this and explains the emphasis on considering range of alternative

95 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: Impact assessment – other impacts Hornsea Zone update: PP gives an overview of the timescales for FN outlines the minor significance for each further impact assessed for 9 development within Hornsea Zone and an update on surveys for the Dutch fleets, including gear snagging, increased gear conflict, Projects One and Two. longer steaming distances and resource refuge. Timescales: Project One PEIR is currently within Phase 3 Consultation PV and the group agree with the assessment for these impacts in (1 August to 12 September). Phase 4 Consultation will be undertaken in relation to Project One. late January/early February 2013 on the Draft Environmental Statement FN enquires about the potential displacement impact of beam trawlers prior to submission of planning application to the Planning Inspectorate on potting grounds located inshore of Subzone 1. (PINS) in April 2013. If the application is successful, construction of 6 PV states it is highly likely that beam trawlers will explore grounds 10 Project One is likely to be undertaken from 2015 to 2018. currently targeted by potters and that the gear conflict impact on potters PP confirms that the consultation phase for PEIR ends on 12 is appropriately assessed as moderate. September and if written comments on the PEIR are to be submitted it FN enquires about the potential risk of beam trawlers dragging large would be appreciated by this date. rocks (used as cable protection) into the grounds north of Hornsea. PV confirms he will review the PEIR and submit any comments, aiming PV states that the grounds north of Hornsea are also fished by the for the 12 September deadline. Dutch fleet and considers this a minor impact. AdB agrees and adds Design parameters: The EIA considers worst case scenario for each that fishermen do not dump rocks in clean ground, as they are likely to type of impact parameter being assessed. For example, gravity based catch them in the future. structures represent worst case from an ecological footprint and physical processes perspective, while monopiles represent worst case Impact assessment – resource disruption for noise impacts. FN explains that the impact of displacement or disruption of fisheries resources during construction has not been assessed as it is dependent Both HVAC and HVDC are being considered within the EIA – the former on ongoing noise and sediment transportation modeling. Mitigation for would require a standalone reactive compensation station near the EMF assumes burial of cable to depths of up to 1.5 m for interarray Silver Pitt area. cables and up to 3 m for export cable. FN outlines recent research PP presents the four turbine layouts being considered for Project One. (Normandeau, 2011 –see below) which confirms insignificant EMF The four layouts are indicative of the potential spacing between turbines effects when cable is buried to 1.5 m. based on their capacity. Given advances in turbine technology, layout 3 PV raises EMF as a potential concern that requires further investigation. which can accommodate both 5 MW and 6 MW may be considered a more realistic layout at this point in time. Layout 3 has turbine spacing 7 PP outlines work currently underway by the MMO to collate pre and of approximately 1.6 km between columns and 1.2 km between rows. post construction surveys undertaken by offshore wind farms to explore 11 EMF effects. It is considered unlikely that primary research into EMF Indicative spacing between turbines for each layout are presented will be required for this project. below (excluding micro-siting) and discussed further within the PEIR Project Description Chapter (Volume 1, Chapter 3). [Normandeau (Normandeau Associates, Inc.), Exponent Inc., T. Tricas, T. and Gill, A., (2011). Effects of EMFs from Undersea Power Cables on Elasmobranchs and Other Marine Species. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Enforcement, Pacific OCS Region, Camarillo, CA.OCS Study BOEMRE 2011-09. Available at: ] Project Two Project Two EIA will consider 5 to 15 MW turbines with a maximum rotor diameter of 278 m. PV enquires whether there are prototypes for FN introduces Project Two, consisting of Subzone 2 and the same 15 MW turbines. PP confirms there are prototypes for 8, 9 and 10 MW offshore cable route corridor as Project One. Subzone 2 is located north turbines, but not 15 MW. and west of Subzone 1. 8 FN explains that the impact assessment for Project Two is likely to be similar as that presented for Project One. PV acknowledges that effort is similar in Subzone 2, as described for Subzone 1.

96 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: 12 September 2012 Danmarks Fiskeriforening/ Danish Fishermen's Association and Dong Energy: Dong has acquired a 33% stake in Project One. Dong Sydvestjysk Fiskeriforening Energy bring construction and operation expertise to the consenting 12 process and while maintaining contact throughout this process, overall responsibility for consenting remains with SMart Wind. Surveys: PP outlines the surveys completed to date including geophysical, benthic, intertidal, fish surveys and bird and marine Minutes of Meeting mammal observation surveys. Project Title Hornsea Offshore Wind Farm AdB asks about the potential for commercial fishing vessels to be commissioned to undertake fish surveys. Purpose of Present and discuss outcomes of Project One PEIR; provide update on PP explains that fish surveys were completed in the spring and autumn Meeting offshore surveys and introduce Project Two 13 of 2011 using 4 m otter trawls and 2 m beam trawls, with all Date of Meeting: 12 September 2012, 2 pm methodology agreed by Cefas. The surveys have been completed for Projects 1 and 2, however SMart Wind continue to be keen to involve Held at: Danish Fishermen's Association, Nordensvej 3, Taulov, Fredericia commercial fishing vessels in our surveys where possible (e.g., Present: Henrik Lund (HL) - Danmarks Fiskeriforening/ Danish Fishermen's Magdelene Anne used for potting surveys and scout vessels for Association geophysical surveys) and will investigate further for future benthic and Jesper Juul Larsen (JL) - Sydvestjysk Fiskeriforening fish surveys for Project Three and Project Four. Penny Pickett (PP) – SMart Wind Offshore Environment Manager Statement of Common Ground: PV explains that the Dutch fisheries Emily Boram (EB) – EIA Consultant, RPS will be looking to develop/provide a Statement of Common Ground Fiona Nimmo (FN) – Fisheries Consultant, Poseidon (SoCG) in relation to Hornsea Project One. SoCGs are currently being developed by the Dutch for Galloper offshore wind farm and many Copies to: PP, PH valuable lessons have been learnt from this process. Compiled by: FN 14 PV confirms that SoCGs will be developed in conjunction with the UK, Belgian and French fisheries and that either one SoCG or individual SoCGs will be produced. Item: Introduction: Action by: It is agreed to commence drafting Position Papers which will form the basis of SoCGs during the PINS examination phase should this be Definitions and acronyms: FN, PP and EB provide an overview of the required. current status of Project One. EIA - the Environmental Impact Assessment process is currently Circulation of Presentations: FN to circulate minutes and 15 FN ongoing. presentations. PEIR – the Preliminary Environmental Information Report presents the current status of the EIA for Project One. Environmental Statement – the Environmental Statement is the reporting output of the EIA process. The Draft Environmental Statement is due to be completed by 28 January 2013, when the next phase 1 (Phase 4) of consultation will commence. Following the completion of Phase 4 Consultation, SMW will submit a final Environmental Statement in April 2013. For commercial fisheries the PEIR chapter represents a Draft Environmental Statement chapter, as the majority of studies and consultation have been completed to inform this assessment for Project One. In addition to the Project One assessment, a cumulative assessment will also be presented in the Draft Environmental Statement. PINS – the final Environmental Statement will be submitted to the UK Planning Inspectorate (PINS), a national body responsible for planning

97 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: decisions related to nationally significant projects. All offshore wind Organisation (MMO) which includes non-UK vessels. to the farms which have a capacity greater than 100 MW are considered Danish sandeel tracks based on 25 year data set from vessel plotter north of nationally significant and will be consented through PINS. This includes data. Subzone all Round 3 wind farms. 1 are Sandeel landings by Danish vessels from 36F1 and 36F2 compared sandeel Operation within the wind farm: HL discusses the legalities of with total North Sea landings across a ten year period. catches operating within a wind farm stating that in Germany it is illegal to FN enquires about the areas immediately north of Subzone 1 and or operate within a wind farm; while in Denmark certain gears are whether these are sandeel grounds. herring. permitted (static gear) while others are excluded (mobile gear) based a JL explains they may be herring grounds. HL to confirm if these are regulation that does not allow mobile vessels to operate within 200 m sandeel grounds or related to herring catches. radius from cables. In Denmark new wind farm sites will be required to bury cables and therefore it is expected that fishing will be possible FN confirms with JL that the herring fishery is not associated with any within future Danish wind farms. specific benthic habitat type. JL confirms they are pelagic and caught within the water column. FN explains that the EIA assumes pelagic For the purpose of the EIA, minimum turbine spacing relates to turbine species landings will not be impacted (in relation to exclusion from the layout 1 with 924 m row, 1,320 m column excluding micrositing. At this wind farm) because it is assumed these highly mobile/migratory stage, it is unknown what extent of cable protection may be required species will be caught elsewhere. JL and HL agree with this and therefore, total exclusion from Subzone 1 is assumed for assumption. assessing impacts to all commercial fisheries. This is true for all forms

of impact, with the exception of instances where operating within the FN enquires about the proportion of effort within ICES rectangles 36F1 wind farm would represent worst case scenario (e.g., gear snagging). and 36F2 and whether it is appropriate to assume an even split between the prominent three grounds in this area? JL confirms that the Danish follow guidelines within the Merchant Sea Plan which set out procedures and protocols for instances where gear HL agree that on average an even split can be assumed, although it is 2 snag cables: vessels must cut their nets and alert the cable owners of very variable year on year, noting that this year due to bad recruitment, the sandeel quota was cut by 90%. the location of snagging before they are compensated for loss of gear and earnings associated with that trip/gear. Impact assessment - exclusion

FN confirms that similar procedures are in place within UK waters as FN outlines the methodology for assessing impact significance which

part of the Fishing Liaison with Offshore Wind and Wet Renewables considers both magnitude of the impact and the sensitivity. FN explains Group (FLOWW) Best Practice guidance for offshore renewable that for commercial fisheries the sensitivity considers the resilience of developer. See Section 9 of guidance available at: the fleet and their ability to adapt, including the operational range of http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.berr.gov.uk/files fleets and their normal fishing patterns. /file46366.pdf FN provides justification for the moderate impact assessment for FN presents location of turbines within layout 1. HL confirms that parts Danish sandeel demersal trawlers in relation to exclusion from of the sandeel ground would be accessible based on this layout, Subzone 1 and the export cable during construction and operation and however this is dependent on inter-array cable burial. maintenance. PP explains that SMart Wind engineers are currently investigating HL and JL agree with the assessment. potential inter-array cable layouts and likely extent of cable protection. 5 FN provides justification for the minor impact assessment for Danish Total exclusion is considered worst case and used within the Project pelagic trawlers in relation to exclusion from Subzone 1 and the export

One assessment, but it is expected that with further engineering cable during construction and operation and maintenance. studies, large sections of the wind farm will be accessible to fisheries. HL and JL agree with the assessment.

Commercial fisheries impact assessment: FN provides a summary FN outlines the minor significance for each further impact assessed for of the impact assessment presented within the PEIR, describing the Danish fleets, including gear snagging, increased gear conflict, 3 justifications for each of the significance assessments for the Danish longer steaming distances and resource refuge. fleets (including demersal otter trawlers targeting sandeels and pelagic HL and JL agree with the assessment. HL notes that static gear can otter trawlers). also potentially snag cables due to the use of anchors to secure gill Baseline description: Action: nets or pot strings to the seabed. 4 FN presents baseline data including: HL to FN outlines mitigation measures that have been considered for confirm if VMS data for 2006 to 2010 obtained from the UK Marine Management assessing significance including ongoing liaison (including fortnightly grounds

98 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: Notice to Mariners), advance warning of construction activities, Consultation. program of construction to minimize disruption where practical, safety Dong Energy: Dong has acquired a 33% stake in Project One. Dong zones etc. A full list is presented within the PEIR. Energy bring construction and operation expertise to the consenting 10 Impact assessment – resource disruption process and while maintaining contact throughout this process, overall FN explains that the impact of displacement or disruption of fisheries responsibility for consenting remains with SMart Wind. resources during construction has not been assessed as it is Design parameters: The EIA considers worst case scenario for each dependent on ongoing noise and sediment transportation modelling. type of impact parameter being assessed. For example, gravity based Mitigation for EMF assumes burial of cable to depths of up to 3 m for structures represent worst case from an ecological footprint and inter-array and export cables. FN outlines recent research physical processes perspective, while monopiles represent worst case (Normandeau, 2011 –see below) which confirms insignificant EMF for noise impacts. effects when cable is buried to 1.5 m. Both HVAC and HVDC are being considered within the EIA – the PP outlines work currently underway by the MMO to collate pre and former would require a standalone reactive compensation station near 6 post construction surveys undertaken by offshore wind farms to explore the Silver Pitt area. EMF effects. It is considered unlikely that primary research into EMF PP presents the four turbine layouts being considered for Project One. will be required for this project. The four layouts are indicative of the potential spacing between [Normandeau (Normandeau Associates, Inc.), Exponent Inc., T. Tricas, turbines based on their capacity. T. and Gill, A., (2011). Effects of EMFs from Undersea Power Cables 11 Indicative spacing between turbines for each layout are presented on Elasmobranchs and Other Marine Species. U.S. Dept. of the below (excluding micrositing) and discussed further within the PEIR Interior, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation, and Project Description Chapter (Volume 1, Chapter 3). Enforcement, Pacific OCS Region, Camarillo, CA.OCS Study BOEMRE 2011-09. Available at: ] Project Two FN introduces Project Two, consisting of Subzone 2 and the same offshore cable route corridor as Project One. Subzone 2 is located 7 north and west of Subzone 1. FN explains that the impact assessment for Project Two will be Project Two EIA will consider 5 to 15 MW turbines with a maximum dependent on ascertaining whether Subzone 2 overlaps sandeel or blade tip height of 278 m. herring grounds. Sandeel grounds within Hornsea Zone: Hornsea Zone update: PP gives an overview of the timescales for PP discusses the sandeel grounds within Hornsea Zone at a strategic 8 development within Hornsea Zone and an update on surveys for level. Projects One and Two. HL confirms that the sandeel grounds in the west section of Hornsea Action: Timescales: Project One PEIR is currently within Phase 3 Consultation Zone are the most important representing 60% of effort from within the HL to (1 August to 12 September). Phase 4 Consultation will be undertaken Zone, as described in the fisheries chapter. draw a in late January/early February 2013 on the Draft Environmental HL also explains that the grounds immediately north of the west section boundary Statement prior to submission of planning application to the Planning of Hornsea Zone are very important sandeel grounds. around Inspectorate (PINS) in April 2013. If the application is successful, 12 PP explores whether the overall impact to the Danish sandeel fleet this key construction of Project One is likely to be undertaken from 2015 to could be mitigated by avoiding development across these key sandeel sandeel 2018. grounds in the west of Hornsea Zone. If these grounds were avoided, ground in 9 PP confirms that the consultation phase for PEIR ends on 12 would the overall impact of exclusion from Projects One and Two be the west September and if written comments on the PEIR are to be submitted limited to a minor significance and could the Danish Fishermen's of they would be appreciated as soon as possible after this date (noting Association commit to not raising an objection for Projects One and Hornsea that the meeting took place on this deadline). Two. Zone. The scoping report for Project Two will be submitted in October 2012. HL confirms that if sandeel grounds in the west of Hornsea Zone are Action: The PEIR for Project Two will be available for consultation in late avoided then the impact of exclusion from the Project One and Two site Following January/early February 2013, to coincide with Project One Phase 4 boundaries would be minor and that the Danish would not object to receipt of

99 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Project One or Project Two. boundary, 11 October 2012 From Nord, Cooperative Maritime Etaploise and CRPMEM Nord HL confirms that a boundary/buffer of 100 to 200 m from the wind PP to turbines would suffice to allow access to fish these grounds. draft position Action for HL to draw a boundary around this key sandeel ground in the statement west of Hornsea Zone. . Minutes of Meeting PP will, on receipt of the boundary, work to draft a legal document (position statement) with commitment to avoid development in this Project Title Hornsea Offshore Wind Farm area. Purpose of Present and discuss outcomes of Project One PEIR; provide update on Cumulative impact of Dogger Bank: Meeting offshore surveys and introduce Project Two FN explains that the cumulative impact assessment will be presented Date of Meeting: 11 October 2012, 10 am within the Draft Environmental Statement which will be available for consultation from the end of January. CRPMEM Nord - Pas de Calais / Picardie, FN enquires about the impact of the Dogger Bank R3 zone on Danish Held at: 12 rue Solférino, 13 sandeel grounds. 62200 Boulogne-sur-Mer HL confirms that the key sandeel grounds across the Dogger Bank Present: Antony Viera (AV) – Copeche zone are being avoided and therefore the overall impact of the Dogger Alexiane Bréfort (AB) - Assistante OP, Coopératives Maritimes Bank zone is considered minor. Etaploises HL confirms that approximately 30% of the European Site areas on the Penny Pickett (PP)– SMart Wind, Offshore Environment Manager Dogger Bank will be closed to sandeel fishing. Emily Boram (EB) - RPS Position Statement: FN and PP explain that the Dutch and UK Fiona Nimmo (FN) – Fisheries Consultant, Poseidon fisheries will be looking to develop/provide a Position Statement in relation to Hornsea Project One. HL confirmed that the Danish Copies to: PP, PH Fishermen's Association would be working with the Dutch and UK Compiled by: FN 14 fisheries in this process. Statement of Common Ground (SoCG) are currently being developed by the Dutch and the NFFO for Galloper offshore wind farm and many Item: Introduction: Action by: valuable lessons have been learnt from this process. Commercial fisheries impact assessment: FN provides a summary of Circulation of Presentations: FN to circulate minutes and the impact assessment presented within the PEIR, describing 15 FN 1 presentations. justifications for each of the significance assessments for the French fleet. Baseline description: FN presents VMS data obtained from the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) which includes non-UK vessels. FN indicates presence of non-UK vessels in the Inner Silver Pit area, which is also targeted by UK demersal trawlers. AV confirms that this is the area targeted by the French vessels when fishing for whiting in the general Hornsea area. 2 AV describes a gentlemen’s agreement between French vessels and the NFFO whereby UK potters agree to stay outside the Inner Silver Pit to minimize gear conflict. FN presents the data obtained for the French fleet which includes 2008 VMS data for demersal and combined demersal/pelagic otter

trawls. Very little effort is seen across Subzone 1. The effort that does occur within the Hornsea Zone is mainly to the east and west of

100 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: Subzone 1. operational range of fleets and their normal fishing patterns including AV confirms that the French fleet does not target the fishing grounds scale of alternative grounds targeted. immediately north of Subzone 1. FN provides justification for the impact assessment of French AV confirms that whether the French vessels target the Inner Silver Pit demersal and pelagic otter trawlers in relation to exclusion from Subzone 1 and the export cable. From the available evidence there is is dependent on the success/status of the red mullet fishery in the Channel, which is preferred over traveling north to target whiting. very little effort by the French fleet within Subzone 1 and the export cable avoids the Inner Silver Pit; it is therefore assessed that the FN enquires about data availability for the French fleet, given that the impact of exclusion to the French fleet is of minor significance. impact assessment is based on data from 2008 to 2009. AV and AB agree with this assessment for Project One. AB points out AV explains that he is in discussion with the Fisheries Ministry and is working to obtain landings statistics and VMS data, however there are that the French vessels targeting the Inner Silver Pitt are less than a number of confidentiality issues which may make obtaining further 25 m in length [EIA currently states >25 m]. FN agrees to change this data difficult. to 15 to 25 m. AV states that there may be a cost associated with obtaining the data FN outlines mitigation measures that have been considered for and enquires if this can be covered by the project. assessing significance including ongoing liaison, advance warning of construction activities, program of construction to minimize disruption PP agrees that in principle data costs can be covered, depending on where practical, safety zones etc. A full list is presented within the the timeframe and area that the data cover. It is noted that data may PEIR. not be obtainable in time to inform Project One, but may inform future Hornsea Projects, including Project Two. AV confirms they receive fortnightly Notice to Mariners and acknowledge that this will outline construction details. AV enquires about Subzone 1 and whether this will still be developed as two separate wind farms. PP explains that details of construction program and activities will also be communicated via Kingfisher. PP explains that Subzone 1 could be up to three operating entities and may be constructed in a series of phases (e.g., one, two or three FN outlines the minor significance for each further impact assessed, construction phases). including gear snagging, increased gear conflict, longer steaming distances and resource refuge. Operation within the wind farm: AV and AB agree with the assessment for these impacts in relation to FN explains that individual fleets have been consulted on this aspect Project One. with varying responses. For example the Dutch beam trawl fleet would FN explains that the impact of displacement or disruption of fisheries be able to operate in areas where there is 1 km width between resources during construction has not been assessed as it is turbines, while other fleets have expresses concern over safety of dependent on ongoing noise and sediment transportation modeling. operating within a wind farm. FN confirms that noise modeling is being assessed for cod and For the purpose of the EIA, minimum turbine spacing relates to turbine herring, which are likely to be representative of the impacts to whiting layout 1 with 924 m row, 1,320 m column excluding micro-siting. At and mackerel respectively. Mitigation for EMF assumes burial of cable 3 this stage, it is unknown what extent of cable protection may be to depths of up to 3 m for interarray and export cables. required and therefore, total exclusion from Subzone 1 is assumed for assessing impacts to all commercial fisheries. This is true for all forms FN introduces Project Two, consisting of Subzone 2 and the same of impact, with the exception of instances where operating within the offshore cable route corridor as Project One. Subzone 2 is located wind farm would represent worst case scenario (e.g., gear snagging). north and west of Subzone 1. FN confirms that details of distances required by vessels to fish FN explains that the impact assessment for Project Two is likely to be between turbines were provided after the last French consultation 5 similar or lower than that presented for Project One, given that less meeting, as follows: 500 to 1,000 m. It was also confirmed that French effort is seen within Subzone 2. vessels do currently operate within wind farms. TC acknowledges that effort is similar in Subzone 2, as described for Subzone 1. TC expresses some concern over the proximity of Impact assessment: Subzone 2 to the grounds immediately north of this area. FN outlines the methodology for assessing impact significance which PP gives an overview of the timescales for development within considers both magnitude of the impact and the sensitivity. FN 6 4 Hornsea Zone and an update on surveys for Projects One and Two. explains that for commercial fisheries the sensitivity considers the resilience of the fleet and their ability to adapt, including the 7 Timescales: Project One PEIR has recently completed Phase 3

101 sdf

Item: Introduction: Action by: Item: Introduction: Action by: Consultation (1 August to 12 September). Phase 4 Consultation will be and Dogger Bank’s first projects, as well as other wind farms and undertaken in late January/early February 2013 on the Draft MCZs. Environmental Statement prior to submission of planning application in PP explains that the CIA will be informed by the impact assessments April 2013 to the UK Planning Inspectorate (PINS, which replaced the undertaken by other offshore wind farms (e.g., Dogger and East IPC). If the application is successful, construction of Project One is Anglia). Dogger Bank and East Anglia have been able to define the likely to be undertaken from 2015 to 2018. required extent of cable protection within their project sites and have PP confirms that while the consultation phase for PEIR has ended, we assessed their impacts based on coexistence with fisheries (i.e., are happy to receive comments at any time. FN encourages AV to fishing will be undertaken within the wind farms). SMart Wind will use read the commercial fisheries chapter (Project One Volume 2, Chapter the results of the Dogger Bank and East Anglia’s EIA’s that will be in 7) and provide any feedback as early as possible. FN notes that the the public domain to include within the Project One cumulative PEIR for commercial fisheries is not likely to change significantly (i.e., assessment. the Draft Environmental Statement will be very similar and therefore Circulation of Presentations: FN to circulate minutes and comments at this stage would be appreciated). presentations. AV confirms he will read the chapter, but notes the high degree of 10 FN AV asks for shapefiles of Project Two. FN agrees to provide this projects that currently require consultation including other Round 3 together with updated shapefile for Project One. sites, Round 2 sites and Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs). Design parameters: PP goes on to explain the design parameters for various elements of the project. The EIA considers worst case scenario for each type of impact parameter being assessed. For example, gravity based structures represent worst case from an ecological footprint and physical processes perspective, while monopiles represent worst case for noise impacts. Both HVAC and HVDC are being considered within the EIA – the former would require a standalone reactive compensation station, but this will not be in vicinity of the Inner Silver Pit area. PP presents the four turbine layouts being considered for Project One. The four layouts are indicative of the potential spacing between 8 turbines based on their capacity. Indicative spacing between turbines for each layout are presented below (excluding micro-siting) and discussed further within the PEIR Project Description Chapter (Volume 1, Chapter 3).

Project Two EIA will consider 5 to 15 MW turbines with a maximum blade tip height of 278 m and maximum rotor diameter of of 250 m. Dong Energy: Dong has acquired a 33% stake in Project One. Dong Energy bring construction and operation expertise to the consenting 9 process and while maintaining contact throughout this process, overall responsibility for consenting remains with SMart Wind. Cumulative impact assessment: FN confirms that the CIA will be presented in the Draft Environmental Statement and will consider the cumulative impacts of Hornsea Project Two, East Anglia’s first project

102 sdf Item Action by: 06 June 2014 Holderness Coast Fishing Industry Group (HCFIG) 4 Mike Cohen now has 100% of Bridlington fishermen within CJ to supply MC HCFIG. MaxSea continues to provide a robust data collection system for his members. CJ to supply MC with latest with latest shapefiles/coordinates for Project One and Project Two. shapefiles/ coordinates for Project One and Project Meeting Notes Two. 5 Project Title Hornsea Round 3 Zone and Project Two NG stated that there has been limited communication with Pim Purpose of Visser as members wanting him to focus on other areas. Meeting Update Anecdotal evidence of problems arising in areas where pulse Date of trawling by Dutch fishermen has taken place, in so far as Meeting: 1230hrs, 6 June 2014 excessive quantities of stunned fish present across large Held at: areas. Rags, Bridlington 6 CJ noted that Project Two Phase 2 consultation scheduled to NG to Present: Chris Jenner (CJ) – SMart Wind be issued on 18 June to NFFO and HCFIG. CJ noted that email all Nick Garside (NG) – SMart Wind FLO / NFFO Services previous meetings had provided introduction to Project Two, fisheries but information being released at Phase 2 will constitute the contacts on Jim Buckingham (JB) – NFFO Services th Mike Cohen (MC) - HCFIG draft Environmental Statement (Preliminary Environmental 18 June Copies to: SMW team, RPS and Fiona Nimmo Information) and SMW are seeking comment from all fisheries to invite associations on the draft Commercial Fisheries Environmental review/com Compiled by: CJ Statement Chapter. ment on PEI Item Action by: 7 CJ tabled hardcopy A3 excerpts of draft Commercial Fisheries 1 NG noted that all key fishermen were invited to this meeting Environmental Statement Chapter to seek preliminary feedback today, however the good weather and time of year has resulted on baseline information. MC, NC and JB concurred with correct in all fishermen being at sea today. Fishermen welcomed the datasets being presented and all stated that there was a invitation and sent apologies for absence. slightly higher density of fishing in Project Two with maybe a couple of extra fishermen not previously consulted for Project 2 CJ gave update on Project One – Examination closing on 10th One. However majority of UK and EU fishermen will be the June. Signed Statements of Common Ground were requested same as Project One (i.e., Dutch trawlers, French, Belgium, (in Rule 6 Letter) and submitted to PINS for NFFO/Dutch Danish, Gary Hodgson, Smurf, etc.). Fisheries/HCFIG, Belgian Fisheries, Dutch Fisheries, Danish 8 MC welcomed early notice of release of PEI and suggested CJ to Fisheries and EIFCA. There was no further representation from propose any fisheries interest during the Examination. NG and MC finding some dates after the Phase 2 consultation to present the detailed conclusions of the assessment to the fishermen. dates for confirmed that this is a reflection on the positive pre-application next consultation and levels & type of fishing in Project One. meeting. 3 NG asked if existing FLO arrangements will continue after DE CJ to make take ownership of Project One. CJ stated that ultimately this recommen dation to will be a decision for DONG Energy, but CJ will make a DONG recommendation to DONG Energy to continue the working Energy relationship in order to provide continuity and integration with Project Two.

103 sdf

25 September 2014 National Federation of Fishermen's Organisations (NFFO), Item Action by: Holderness Coast Fishing Industry Group (HCFIG) and Visned relatively fast due to set milestones needed to satisfy the Contract for Difference (CfD) awarded for Project One by DECC. If consented, it is expected that finance would be in place by mid-end 2015 and that offshore works could commence from 2016. 2 Project Two CJ gave an update on Project Two – Subzone 2 is adjacent to Subzone 1 and has a generating capacity of 1.8 GW. Meeting Notes Phase 1 and Phase 2 consultation are completed, and an Project Title Hornsea Round 3 Zone and Project Two additional consultation began on 15th September for 28 Present an update on Project One and Two, together with the days relating only to amended work and land plans. Purpose of impact assessment findings for Project Two and related Submission of the application to PINS will be in November Meeting Statement of Common Ground 2014. Date of A range of turbine capacity of 5 MW (360 turbines) to 15MW Meeting: 1400hrs, 25 September 2014 (120 turbines) is being considered for Project Two. Minimum Held at: NFFO offices, York spacings between turbines are 810 m along a dense perimeter and 1,323 x 878 m within the array. The maximum Present: Chris Jenner (CJ) – SMart Wind (SMW) infrastructure required for HVDC vs HVAC transmission Nick Garside (NG) – SMart Wind FLO / NFFO Services options are presented. Dale Rodmell (DR) – NFFO Mike Cohen (MC) – HCFIG The Project Two layout design principles are summarized as James Robertson (JR) – HCFIG follows: Pim Visser (PV) – Visned • No WTG positioned closer than 810m from Wouter van Broekhoven (WvB) – Visned Fiona Nimmo (FN) – Poseidon neighboring WTG. SMW team and RPS Copies to: • WTGs will be spaced evenly within the wind farm and Compiled by: FN and CJ in at least one straight line of orientation.

• There will be no wake recovery gaps. Item Action by: 1 CJ gave an update presentation • There may be micro siting of WTG if required. Project One 3 CJ gave an update on forthcoming surveys: CJ gave an update on Project One – which includes a reduced design envelope of up to 240 turbines (previously Geophysics – Survey starting 29 September on MV Aurelia 332 turbines), as the 3.6 MW option has been dropped for Subzone 1 only (no export cable route). Chris Pashley resulting in a range of 5 to 8 MW turbines. contracted as on board FLO through NFFO. Operational survey will be 9 days excluding weather. Expected duration The 3 month process for the Examining Authority to write a therefore approx. 4 weeks. NTM was issued to all fishermen recommendation for Project One concluded on 10 and entry in Kingfisher Bulletin. September 2014. The report from the Examining Authority will set out their conclusions on the application, including Geotechnical – Anticipated start date of 1 November. giving reasons for those conclusions. The report will make a Boreholes & CPTs in Subzone 1 only (no export cable recommendation to the Secretary of State for Energy and route). Climate Change who then makes the decision on, or before, 4 10 December 2014 on whether to grant development FN presented a summary of the commercial fisheries Environmental Statement chapter including the baseline and consent or to refuse it. impact assessment findings, as well as reiterating the The indicative programme for Project One will move

104 sdf Item Action by: Item Action by: positions made within the Project One Statement of 6 FN outlined the impact assessment methodology for Common Ground (SoCG) that are relevant to Project Two. commercial fisheries, noting that (as per Project One SoCG)

The baseline is informed by surveillance data (2008 to the Applicant has no powers under UK law to permanently

2012), Crown Estate beam trawl density mapping, VMS data close the offshore wind farm during operation to fishing

for UK mobile and static vessels (2008 to 2012), VMS data vessels, and has no intention of doing so.

for Dutch beam trawlers and landing statistics from MMO CJ enquired whether the position of Dutch skippers and their

iFish database. willingness to operate within wind farms has changed since the last meeting. The information shows a similar baseline to that of Project PV stated that as it becomes a reality skippers are more One, although it is noted that VMS data from MMO provides cautious about operating within wind farms, particularly in higher resolution data related to financial landings from darkness, windy or stormy conditions. However, when good th 1/200 of an ICES rectangle. weather prevails, it is likely that fishing vessels will operate An increase in effort is seen across a portion of the offshore within the wind farm.

export cable route in 2012, compared to preceding years. 7 FN summarized the findings of the impact assessment for C

FN postulates that this is due to an increase in scallop UK and Dutch commercial fishing fleets. dredging effort. MC confirms that scallop dredging effort has increased in this area, due to closures elsewhere around the It is noted that the draft Environmental Statement details a UK. MC confirms that this effort has been maintained in moderate adverse impact on potters related to exclusion 2013 and 2014, putting pressure on gear conflict between from the export cable during construction due to a the scallop and potting fleets. As a result a gentlemen’s multiphase discontinuous construction (of 4 years across an agreement has been established between the scallopers 8 year period). However, this construction scenario has now and HCFIG which supports scallop effort in deeper waters. been dropped and worst case assessment relates to 4 years continuous construction (which is less than the period for MC raises concern about the potential for the export cable Project One). As a result the impact has been changed to J to consider construction to impact on this gentlemen’s agreement and FN to update minor adverse. wording of lead to increased gear conflict between these fleets. Environmental MC again highlighted concern regarding displacement of DML with FN confirmed that this will be reflected within the Statement scallop dredgers into potting grounds during export cable regard to Environmental Statement. based on construction, and the potential for this to impact on their NFFO increased established gentlemen’s agreement. consultation With the above comments taken into consideration, DR, MC, potential of on cable PV and WvB confirmed that the baseline assessment seems displacement It is also noted that scallopers need to be included within the specification fine, and agreed with the Project One SoCG that the best on potters due Project Two SoCG between SMW and NFFO, HCFIG and and publically available data sources have been used to to scallop Visned. installation characterize the existing commercial fisheries activity. dredging All statements agreed within Project One SoCG remain true plan and co- effort. for Project Two, although DR requests further clarity on how existence plan. 5 FN noted the importance of consulting with the scallop fleet NG to contact the NFFO will be consulted on the cable specification and and outlined steps that have been taken to engage with the scallop fleet installation plan and the fisheries co-existence plan. Scallop Association. and include FN to provide them on NtM CJ agreed to look at the wording of the DML in relation to details of NG highlighted the nomadic nature of this fleet who can distribution these points. resolution of often be difficult to consult with. list. (Done, DR confirmed the position on post installation trawl survey side scan MC advised consultation directly with specific scallop dredge 1/10) remained a matter not agreed (4.1.4 of Project One SoCG) sonar with skippers and agreed to provide relevant details. until further details could be provided on the proposed post regard to post construction monitoring. FN agreed to provide details on the construction NG agreed to make contact and include the scallop dredge resolution of side scan sonar. monitoring. fleet within the Notice to Mariners announcements.

105 sdf Item Action by: 8 FN summarized the cumulative impact assessment findings FN to update for commercial fisheries which has been undertaken on a cumulative impact tiered approach (whereby Tier 1 relates to other assessment developments including offshore wind farms, cables, oil and gas etc., and Tier 2 relates solely to European Marine Sites as a result of and Marine Conservation Zones). increased scallop effort MC highlighted that the increased effort by scallop dredgers across Triton across the region is likely to affect displacement and gear Knoll, leading conflict with the potters cumulatively as a result of Triton to increased Knoll. potential for CJ stated that it is appropriate for our cumulative displacement assessment to reflect such recent changes in effort and and gear fishing activity. FN agreed to update the Environmental conflict with Statement accordingly. potters.

9 DR queried the layout principles, specifically the tolerance surrounding the proposal for turbines to be orientated in a straight line. CJ confirmed this is a search and rescue requirement from the MCA to allow helicopters to fly at low altitude up and down the wind farm. DR also highlighted the lack of information available on Kingfisher with regard to Greater Gabbard. This was noted by CJ – All Hornsea survey activities since 2010 have been regularly broadcast in the Kingfisher Bulletin.

10 CJ outlined that the Environmental Statement will be SMW to submitted to PINS by the end of November 2014 and progress encouraged early development of the Project Two SoCG to Project Two inform the examination panel and focus their questions as SoCG early as possible. DR agreed to this approach. CJ confirmed that a draft SoCG would be developed in the next month.

106