Planning and Management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: Guidelines and Tools

Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 105

Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools

Helsinki Commission Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission

Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings No. 105

Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools

Helsinki Commission Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission For bibliographic purposes this document should be cited as: HELCOM 2006 Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Balt. Sea Environ. Proc. No. 105

Information included in this publication or extracts thereof is free for citing on the condition that the complete reference of the publication is given as stated above

Language revision: Janet Pawlak, Denmark Design and layout: Bitdesign, Vantaa, Finland Cover photo: Utö island, The Archipelago Sea, Finland (Photo: BioGeo project and Metsähallitus 2003)

ISSN 0357-2994 Contents

Executive summary ...... 5

Introduction ...... 7

SECTION 1: Practical guidance for establishing management plans for HELCOM BSPAs ...... 8 1. Outline for HELCOM and OSPAR MPA management plans ...... 9 2. Annotated description of HELCOM BSPA management plan components ...... 10

SECTION 2: Manual and tools for BSPA planning and management ...... 16

Part 1: Introduction to MPAs ...... 17 1. What is an MPA? ...... 17 2. Why an MPA? ...... 17 3. BSPA network ...... 18

Part 2: Planning tools ...... 20 1. Choosing MPA categories ...... 20 2. Legal framework for BSPAs ...... 21 3. The wider context: Ecosystem Approach and ICZM ...... 24 4. Deﬁ ning boundaries ...... 26 5. Developing conservation goals and objectives for BSPAs ...... 28

Part 3: Management tools ...... 32 1. Establishing the management framework ...... 32 2. Meeting information needs ...... 39 3. Threat analysis ...... 40 4. Choosing management measures ...... 44 5. Zoning ...... 49 6. Surveillance and enforcement in BSPAs ...... 51 7. Public awareness and education ...... 52 8. Research and monitoring in BSPAs ...... 56 9. Administration of the BSPAs ...... 60 10. Preparation of a management plan ...... 61 Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 3 Part 4: Management effectiveness evaluation ...... 63 1. Evaluating management effectiveness by applying quantitative indicators ...... 63

2. Toolbox of quantitative indicators ...... 64

References ...... 70

Attachments ...... 74

Attachment 1: International laws and conventions ...... 74

Attachment 2: Human activities table ...... 76

Attachment 3: Sensitivity assessment rationales for habitats and species...... 78

Attachment 4: An example of a general “sensitivity-to-impact” matrix ...... 80

Attachment 5: An example of a site-speciﬁ c “vulnerability-to-impact” matrix ...... 81

Attachment 6: An example of a table combining impacts of human activities on conservation features with management issues ...... 82

Attachment 7: Activities to be regulated and regulation options according to HELCOM BSPA management guidelines ...... 83

4 Executive summary

The main purpose of this document is to Raising public awareness is an issue of a high facilitate the planning and management of priority. Education of the public to acknowledge those Baltic Sea Protected Areas (BSPAs) still the value of our joint natural heritage and lacking proper management and/or expertise therefore act in a way that prevents ongoing to implement them effectively by providing degradation may be one of the most crucial practical guidance and tools. The provisions beneﬁ ts of MPAs. Research and monitoring of the Natura 2000 network sites have been are important to increase our understanding of acknowledged, when considered relevant, marine ecosystems and enable an evaluation of but the guidance has otherwise been kept on management effectiveness. However, research a more general level. The additional value of is time consuming, and therefore a balance is these guidelines lies in the comprehensive set required so that action may be taken using the of literature references and other complemen- best available scientiﬁ c knowledge: the Baltic tary tools, which can be used to support BSPA Sea needs urgent action. management work in accordance with the upcoming marine Natura 2000 guidelines. Background

The guidelines have been constructed by At the 2003 Joint Ministerial Meeting between following the chain of actions of the manage- the Helsinki Commission, the governing body ment planning and implementation process. of the Helsinki Convention, and the OSPAR Planners and managers are not necessarily the Commission for the Protection of the Marine same people and tools have been provided for Environment of the North-East Atlantic, the two both groups. Drafting a written management commissions stated their commitment to taking plan is considered one of the most important action in the development of programmes and management tools, and the practical guidance measures for the protection of species and on establishing such a plan has been developed habitats which are identifi ed as threatened, jointly and adopted by both HELCOM and the declining, or in need of protection. Marine OSPAR Commission, in the spirit of the Joint protected areas were cited as an important tool Work programme. Therefore, it has been placed in this work. at the very beginning of the document (Section 1). As a result of the joint meeting, HELCOM and the OSPAR Commission adopted a joint work In Section 2, additional guidance on the ongo- programme to guarantee that the work will be ing planning and management work that takes carried out consistently across their maritime place in the background, either with or without areas. The objective is that by 2010 an ecologi- a printed management plan, has been provided. cally coherent network of well-managed marine Stakeholder involvement from the very begin- protected areas will have been achieved and be ning of BSPA planning, has been especially maintained in both the North East Atlantic and encouraged. BSPAs may lose their long-term the Baltic Sea. benefi ts if the entire coastal zone fails to be managed in an integrated way, which should The fi rst 62 Baltic Sea Protected Areas were also include stopping land-based eutrophication proposed to HELCOM already in 1994 as a and pollution. Management on a wider scale part of HELCOM Recommendation 15/5, on is also needed to avoid overexploitation and a system of coastal and marine Baltic Sea destruction of marine species and their habitats. Protected Areas. Currently the HELCOM BSPA An important part of this management process database includes information on 97 sites, is threat and confl ict analysis. Zoning could be of which the majority are Natura 2000 sites one management tool to separate confl icting protected under the EC Habitats and Birds interests within protected areas. Therefore, Directives. guidance is provided on both. Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 5 As 2004 was the 10th year after the fi rst BSPA for evaluating the effectiveness of existing man- proposals, an assessment of the current status agement, was needed to achieve this goal. An of the network, in terms of its goal as “an EC-funded HELCOM Project, “Implementation ecologically coherent network of well-managed of the Joint HELCOM/OSPAR Work Programme marine protected areas”, was deemed neces- on Marine Protected areas (HELCOM-BSPA)”, sary .It also became evident that practical guid- was launched in 2004 to conduct this work. ance for the management of BSPAs, as well as These guidelines are one of the results.

6 Introduction

The purpose and scope of this The structure of the document guidance document The guidelines have been constructed by fol- The purpose of this document is to provide lowing the chain of actions used during the practical guidance and tools for applying the management planning and implementation proc- HELCOM management guidelines in the Baltic ess. Planners and managers are not necessarily Sea Protected Area (BSPA) network. It poses no the same people and tools have been provided obligations to Contracting Parties. Instead, the for both groups. Drafting a written management main goal is to facilitate the planning and man- plan is considered one of the most important agement of those Baltic Sea Protected Areas management tools, and the practical guidance for still lacking proper management and/or expertise doing this has been developed jointly and adopted to implement them effectively. The managers by both HELCOM and the OSPAR Commission. of implemented sites can begin to plan how the Therefore, it has been placed at the very begin- effectiveness of chosen management measures ning of the document (Section 1). could be evaluated and improved, a process that can also be conducted on a wider national or In Section 2, additional guidance has been regional level. provided on the ongoing planning and management work, with or without a printed management Since March 2003, the EC Marine Expert plan. After a few words on the purpose, wider Group has been working to “develop a common context and classifi cation of Marine Protected understanding of the provisions of Natura 2000 Areas (MPAs), the guidance concentrates on relating to the marine environment in order to the fi rst steps of MPA planning: establishing the facilitate the designation and future management legal framework, and defi ning the boundaries of these areas”. The provisions of the Natura and objectives of BSPAs. The description of 2000 network have been acknowledged when management tools includes chapters on building considered relevant, but the guidance has oth- partnerships, meeting information requirements, erwise been kept on a more general level. BSPA analyzing threats and confl icts, choosing and designation criteria have not been discussed, implementing management measures, and nor is the guidance directed towards any particu- designing monitoring and research plans. Finally, lar species or habitats. The additional value of an indicator-based system is introduced for evalu- these guidelines lies in the comprehensive set of ating the management effectiveness in BSPAs. literature references and other complementary tools. Therefore, it is hoped that they may be Many of these processes will be started and used to support BSPA management work in carried out simultaneously. Therefore, the order accordance with the upcoming marine Natura of the chapters in this document should not be 2000 guidelines, and that together they will give interpreted as a fi xed succession. When appropri- a comprehensive set of tools for all BSPAs. ate, the links between different topics have been indicated and respective page numbers given. All The intention has been to provide advice that the chapters contain some background informa- can be applied by all HELCOM Contracting tion, but concentrate on practical tools, tips and Parties. Where appropriate, each country could useful references and, in some cases, examples either adjust the guidance or use the given guid- and experiences. ance in a way that acknowledges the biophysical features as well as the administrative, socio- Almost all referenced documents are currently economic, and cultural characteristics of their available on the internet. The homepages of the national BSPAs. relevant publishing houses or organizations have also been provided, where possible, as the direct links to documents may change over time. Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 7 SECTION 1: Practical guidance for establishing management plans for HELCOM BSPAs1

Management plans are valuable tools to help 3. The Natura 2000 and EMERALD networks are achieve the objectives of the HELCOM network of great value to the establishment of the Joint of marine protected areas. The following provides OSPAR and HELCOM network of marine pro- guidance on the outline structure of a manage- tected areas. EU Member States are obliged ment plan for a BSPA, based on the World Con- to implement these regulations in Habitats and servation Union (IUCN) model2. The outline has Birds Directives by nominating and managing, been adapted for the requirements of HELCOM inter alia, marine protected areas within the and OSPAR maritime areas in collaboration with Natura 2000 network. Where Natura 2000 the OSPAR Commission, and consequently sites are also reported as HELCOM BSPAs, harmonized with the outline structure presented Contracting Parties should be under no in the “Guidelines for the Management of Marine obligation to take any further action. Where Protected Areas in the OSPAR Maritime Area”. management plans for Natura 2000 sites exist, 1. The outline is intended to be used as a check- they will be sufﬁ cient. list for all possible information that could or 4. Chapter headings written in regular font are should be included in management plans for recommended for all plans, while information HELCOM BSPAs. under the headings written in italics is only 2. Proper management is required for all sites. needed if it exists and/or is of relevance to the Where management plans are used, these site in question. should be customized for the site. The ﬁ nal structure and content of the plan depends on the country, site, responsible agency and available information, and therefore not all the information provided below may be necessary for each plan. Guidance on information that could or should be included under each head- ing or subheading is provided (“Annotated description of HELCOM BSPA management plan components”.)

1 Only applicable to MPAs under national jurisdiction (Territorial Sea, EEZ of equivalent) 2 R.V. Salm, John Clark, and Erkki Siirilä (2000). Marine and Coastal Protected Areas: A guide for planners and managers. IUCN. Washington DC. xxi+ 371pp. Kelleher, G. (1999). Guidelines for Marine Protected Areas. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. xxiv +107pp. 8 1. Outline for HELCOM and OSPAR MPA management plans Title Table of contents 1. Executive Summary 2. Introduction 2.1. Purpose and scope of the plan 2.2. Legislative authority for the plan (national and international)

3. Description of the site and its features 3.1. Regional setting: location, access 3.2. Conservation values of the site 3.3. Features 3.3.1. Physical 3.3.2. Biological 3.3.3. Cultural 3.4. Existing uses 3.4.1. Recreational 3.4.2. Commercial 3.4.3. Research and education 3.4.4. Traditional uses 3.5. Existing legal and management framework 3.6. Threat and conﬂ ict analysis 3.7. Existing gaps in knowledge

4. Management 4.1. Goals and objectives (general and specifi c) 4.1.1. General goals and objectives 4.1.2. Specifi c goals and objectives 4.2. Management tactics 4.2.1. Advisory committees 4.2.2. Interagency agreements or arrangements with private organizations, institutions or individuals 4.2.3. Boundaries 4.2.4. Zoning plan 4.2.5. Regulations 4.2.6. Natural resources 4.2.7. Social, cultural and resource studies plan 4.2.8. Education and public awareness 4.3. Administration 4.3.1. Staffi ng 4.3.2. Training 4.3.3. Facilities and equipment 4.3.4. Budget and business plan 4.4. Surveillance and enforcement 4.5. Monitoring and evaluation of plan effectiveness 4.6. Timetable for implementation

5. Appendices 6. References and information sources Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 9 2. Annotated description of HELCOM BSPA management plan components

Title 2.2 Legislative authority for the plan Format the title page and the table of contents (national and international) according to the standards of your country and/or Introduce the general legislative framework for agency. Nevertheless, the minimum requirements the site and the associated legislative authorities include: that hold legal power over individual aspects of The name of the area subject to the plan and management (including ﬁ sheries). its status; The words MANAGEMENT PLAN; 3. Description of the site and The name of the authority/authorities responsible for implementing the plan; its features The date when the plan was prepared, and the Provide relevant information in the following cat- expected date for review. egories. For detailed information, use attachments and maps. Table of contents 3.1 Regional setting: location, access List the headings and sub-headings (optional) Provide the name of area and location, including: against page numbers. Location: state, district, municipality etc. and/or sea regime, (e.g. EEZ of Finland); 1. Executive summary Marine/terrestrial boundaries (coordinates of the series of points that describe the borders Cover the essential issues and necessary deci- of the area - position of central point and sions, including: approximate radius as a minimum.) Further Reasons why the plan was prepared (conser- relevant information (e.g., a map with bounda- vation objectives); ries, a grid in an appropriate scale and any The period of time to which it applies and revi- explanatory information) in an appendix; sion schedules, if any; Surface area: square kilometres, hectares or Any special conditions controlling its prepara- other appropriate units; tion, including the legislative basis and author- Geographical description of regional setting ity for plan development; and accessibility, e.g., the regional land and The principal provisions of the plan; sea surroundings and access routes to and The estimated budget; through the area; Acknowledgements. Character and use of adjacent areas, e.g., other protected areas. 2. Introduction 3.2 Conservation values of the site 2.1 Purpose and scope of the plan Indicate the area's degree on naturalness, Introduce the general long-term vision of the rarity, aesthetic values, and the degree of plan, describing the desired ecological and socio- habitat representativeness; economic state of the site. The vision will set the Indicate the type of information used to assess general long-term goals and objectives for the this status. management, reﬂ ecting the purpose(s) for which the area is protected and including its role in a 3.3 Features larger network. From the following physical, biological and cultural features, introduce data pertinent to the management of the site, as appropriate, and according to what is available. The rest may be considered voluntary.

10 3.3.1 Physical 3.3.3 Cultural Geology: e.g., evolution, ongoing processes, Archaeological information on the peoples erosion, accumulation /deposition; who used the area in prehistoric times and/or Geomorphology: coastal and marine land- information giving clues to species that were scapes, sediment types and qualities; formerly found in the area; Bathymetry: a bathymetric map at the best Species hunted/collected in historical times; available scale illustrating submarine struc- techniques for managing them, if any; tures (sills, banks, reefs, fl ats, trenches and Areas of religious/cultural signifi cance; canyons); where possible, refer to bathymetric Historical relics, such as submerged wrecks or GIS datasets (DEM, depth contours); other submerged structures of historic interest; Physical (oceanographic) parameters: e.g. Written or otherwise documented history. fi gures on climate and meteorology including water temperature and ice conditions, 3.4 Existing uses currents, water level changes/tidal regime, Concentrate on a summary of present uses as salinity, freshwater input, stratifi cation and described in the sub-chapters. Please provide transparency; in this context information on past types of uses Water and sediment quality (chemical param- and their levels.. Indicate clearly who the users eters), e.g., oxygen levels, nutrients, pollutants are, where they conduct their activities, at what and contaminants. times of the year, for how long, what the social and economic importance of their use is and what the 3.3.2 Biological known or likely impacts on natural features are. Biogeographic region and/or features; Describe, as appropriate: Description of habitats/biotopes; habitat/ Recent developments and ongoing activities; biotope maps indicating which classifi cation Future demand; and, when appropriate, which hierarchical Uses and activities on land or outside the site, level of classifi cation was used may be which may affect it. included as appendices; Important biocoenoses (associated plant/ 3.4.1 Recreational animal communities); Recreational values and forms of use; Flora: dominant marine, coastal, and estuarine Strategies, if any, for developing recreational plants and, where available, phytoplankton; activities following the principles of sustainable when possible, a summary of the plant com- use. munity and related environmental factors, such as the depth of occurrence, together with any 3.4.2 Commercial botanical features that may have special inter- Types of commercial uses and activities; est. Coverage of the area. Plant species identi- Estimates of the commercial value of these fi ed in the area could be listed in an appendix; activities; Fauna: dominant marine, coastal or estuarine Future developments. fauna, with an account of their ecological relationships and spatial coverage, if known. Full 3.4.3 Research and education information on mammals, reptiles, amphib- Ongoing and proposed research projects and ians, fi sh, birds, invertebrates and zooplankton programmes, for example, on biological and may be listed in an appendix, as appropriate; socioeconomic issues; Species covered by the national and inter- Ongoing and proposed educational pro- national red lists, for example, the HELCOM/ grammes and activities, whether general or OSPAR lists and the annexes of the Habitats specifi c, and indicating target groups and users. and Birds Directives; Indigenous animals and plants; 3.4.4 Traditional uses Migratory animals that periodically or occa- Ongoing traditional user rights, uses and man- sionally visit the area; where known, major agement practices; migration routes and important areas (repro- Their importance and impacts on the site, duction zones, areas of juvenile maturation, including confl icts with conservation, if any; resting areas, feeding areas, etc.) along the Future development/demand for traditional migration routes. uses. Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 11 3.5 Existing legal and management 4. Management framework Describe the following, depending on the informa- 4.1 Goals and objectives tion available and the legal status of the site: (general and specifi c) Legal status (according to national jurisdiction, e.g., marine protected area/national park/pro- 4.1.1 General goals and objectives tected seascape or other); State clearly the general conservation goals IUCN management category/categories; for the protected area, or if the area is to be National and international laws and regula- subdivided, for each zone or subdivision of tions relevant to the site; the site; Relevant legislative and enforcement authori- Describe the long-term ideal situation, identify- ties; ing desired conditions rather than specifi c Non-legal, voluntary-based management actions, e.g., protecting and maintaining the frameworks; integrity and natural quality of the biotope, Traditional management practices; habitats, species and the ecosystem functions. Stakeholders in the area and other interested parties, such as NGOs, local communities etc. 4.1.2 Specifi c goals and objectives Name any individual interest features for 3.6 Threat and confl ict analysis conservation and give reasons for their need of Scrutinize the human activities and actual or protection; potential stress factors in the area, in order to Formulate a favourable conservation status for assess their impacts on biodiversity and natural each interest feature; features (habitats and species) within or close Describe short- and long-term measurable to the BSPA boundaries, but also more distant steps towards attaining this favourable status regional infl uences, when appropriate. A site- for each feature, if necessary (e.g. implement- specifi c matrix could be used to list the impacts of ing a specifi c programme to protect the Zostera human activities against species/habitat sensitiv- fi eld from damage, or restoration procedures); ity. These activities include, among others: Give time frames for each objective. Sources of external or internal pollution and/or eutrophication; 4.2 Management tactics Biological threats, such as the invasion of alien Describe any arrangements and plans for manag- species; ing the area and its conservation features, for Exploitation of living and non-living natural dealing with current or future threats to conserva- resources; tion features and for confl icts between interest Maintenance or capital dredging and/or dump- groups, including all relevant subheadings below. ing activities: Coastal development and land usage plans 4.2.1 Advisory committees and projects; Describe the purpose, numbers, composition, Bottom trawling. and life span of appropriate advisory committees Address also historic, current and potential future established, e.g., for periodic consultation, evalu- confl icts between uses or user groups specifi c to ation of the effectiveness of management, the the area. review process, the approval of work plans, or the authorization of budgets. 3.7 Existing gaps in knowledge Identify any major gaps in information, for exam- 4.2.2 Interagency agreements ple, concerning or arrangements with private The state of the environment and of the fl ora organizations, institutions or and fauna, biological interactions and ecosys- individuals tem functions; Describe any policies and plans for interagency Their interactions with outside areas relevant agreements, as well as the responsibilities of to conservation; individual agencies, private organizations, institu- Confl icts between human activities and con- tions or individuals involved in the implementation servation objectives; and management of the site, including ongoing Socioeconomic studies and user surveys. traditional management practices, if any.

12 4.2.3 Boundaries Literature studies including previous ecological Describe the demarcation and/or regulation changes; of marine/terrestrial boundaries, e.g., nautical Socioeconomic effects. signs or fences, if any; Give the reasons for the boundaries and their 4.2.8 Education and public awareness placement. Describe any ongoing or planned public education and awareness programmes designed to promote 4.2.4 Zoning plan protection, sustainable use, public understanding Provide information on the zoning system and cat- and enjoyment of the area, including: egories in use, if any (e.g., core zones/sanctuar- Plans for general education and awareness ies, use zones, buffer zones, development areas, programmes, such as mass media, exhibits, areas of impact, or natural resource units) and the tours, training workshops, promotional items, implications for management, including: or informal recreational activities with an The reason/reasons for which a particular educational focus; area has been given a zone classifi cation; Plans for specifi c education programmes Management policies for different zones/units. aimed at target audiences, such as politicians, tourism operators, fi shermen, wind farm plan- 4.2.5 Regulations ners, etc.; In case they are needed and/or exist, clearly Production and dissemination of reports on indicate the legal regulations and/or any voluntary management activities and successes; agreements/restrictions on the uses of the area or Programmes and co-operative arrangements components zones, as appropriate: with educational institutions, public associa- Use/uses which are not permitted; tions, and communities. Temporal or spatial regulation of activities, including zoning and seasonal closures; 4.3 Administration Permanent restrictions; New measures/legislation required to enforce 4.3.1 Staffi ng the regulations, including, e.g., European Provide the name and address of the respon- fi sheries regulations. sible management authority, and of other relevant bodies, if necessary; Refer to the respective legal act, if any; 4.2.6 Natural resources Indicate the current and future staffi ng needs Describe: and major functions, as well as volunteers, Instruments for managing any commercial consultants, and research institutions. exploitation of natural resources in the area or exploitation outside the area affecting the site 4.3.2 Training (e.g., exploration of minerals, sand, gravel, oil Describe the training requirements, plans, and gas, wind energy); arrangements, and costs of training current and Requirements for sustainable land use activi- future staff. ties. 4.3.3 Facilities and equipment 4.2.7 Social, cultural and natural Describe the existing/required equipment and resource studies plan facilities, including their purposes and usage. Indicate any plans to conduct further studies needed in accordance with management informa- 4.3.4 Budget and business plan tion priorities, for example: Evaluate the actual and anticipated annual invest- Environmental impact assessments (in a SEA ments and costs including: and spatial planning context); Capital costs (such as one-off costs for build- Relations or interactions between animal/plant ings, offi ce and fi eld equipment, the recruit- populations and their threat factors; ment of personnel, purchase/rental of land); Dependence of the local population on natural Recurring expenses of running an MPA resources; (wages, insurance, services and utilities, etc.); Effects of tourism and recreational uses of the Research and monitoring costs; area; Possible sources of funds, if needed; Necessary measures to prevent deterioration; Plans for local fund-raising, if any.

Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 13 4.4 Surveillance and enforcement 5. Appendices Describe the enforcement approach and policy, including: Appendix 1: Boundary and area description Arrangements to be made for monitoring and/ This shall provide the legal description of the area or controlling compliance with the regulations; and should include at least: Possibilities of using this type of surveillance A numeration with all legally relevant coordi- for other purposes (see, e.g., the paragraph on nates of the borderline; monitoring, below); Further descriptions of the borderline, such as Enforcement tools (e.g., warnings, penalties "from point 1 to point 23, the line follows the and fi nes). border of the Territorial Sea"; Grid and other relevant information; 4.5 Monitoring and plan effectiveness Open legal questions or problems in relation to Describe any biological, environmental and/or boundaries. usage monitoring programmes proposed for the site, and provide guidance on how they are to be Appendix 2: Legislation used in reviewing the management plan. It may All legislation and regulations relating to the also be necessary to develop other monitoring area, and their interactions, should be noted and programmes to be initiated during the lifespan explained. Where feasible, the legislation that of the current plan. Some of the results from prevails in the event of confl ict between the provi- monitoring may eventually be included in the sions of different enactments should be identifi ed. appendices, such as: Implications for the protective status of the area Research and monitoring programmes on the should be identifi ed. biological/ecological status; Plans and guidance for evaluating the effec- Appendix 3: Habitats tiveness of the management in meeting the A detailed description of the biotopes/habitats of goals and objectives of the MPA; the protected area should be given, particularly Plans for monitoring the usage of the site, of those that are the objectives of protection, such as surveillance proposed to assess indicating the system used for habitat classifi ca- movement/activities of people, vessels, and tion and the reasons for conservation/restoration aircraft within and through the area; (HELCOM/OSPAR lists or annexes of Habitats/ Indicators used in the evaluation of effective- Birds Directives). Information on coherence of the ness of the management, reasons for their biotopes to other similar biotopes should also be selection, and sources of information used, provided. such as existing monitoring programmes and/or specifi cally designed surveys. Appendix 4: Plant species The preparation of a comprehensive list of plant 4.6 Timetable for implementation species should be attempted for the fi rst manage- If defi ned, give a timetable for the implementa- ment plan. As the process continues over the tion of the current plan and its expected years, it is quite possible that new plant species lifespan; will be discovered in the area. Plant names should If necessary, give reasons for the lack of a be listed in broad taxonomic groups, with scientifi c timetable. and common names where possible.

Appendix 5: Animal species Animal species should be listed in broad taxonomic groups: e.g. mammals, reptiles, amphib- ians, ﬁ sh, birds, and invertebrate phyla. Their common and scientiﬁ c names should be provided where possible.

14 Appendix 6: Nomination proforma 6. References and information The nomination proforma may be included as sources an appendix, especially if it already includes the information on plant and animal species, habitats, In addition to the bibliography used to compile and biotopes under protection. In that case, the the plan, list information sources from outside the proforma can substitute Appendices 3 and 5, regular information base of the manager, such as above. governmental and non-governmental organizations, user groups, individuals, consultants, or Appendix 7: Special Features research institutes that have been or will be This section could describe unusual or outstand- consulted, and Environmental Impact Assessment ing features of the area and could range from reports. whale stranding, waterspouts, and oil slicks to spiritual revelations and cultural beliefs.

Appendix 8: Past, present, and potential use This section should attempt to provide more detail on uses of the area, identify its key user groups, and assess its social and economic signiﬁ cance. Appendix 9: Risk analysis

Appendix 9: Risk analysis An assessment of the possible risks involved in carrying out the management plan could be included as an appendix. Such an assessment may reduce the associated level of risk through improved forward planning and also make the timetable for carrying out the management more realistic.

Maps Where practicable, the use of overlay presentation is recommended to illustrate the associations between such factors as topography, biological communities, and major uses. Attached maps can include, e.g.: The regional setting: location, boundaries, and access; Land/water tenures and associated jurisdiction; Land topography and seabed bathymetry; Geology; Biology; Dominant habitats/biotopes; Major uses, user conﬂ icts, and threatened resources; Zoning. Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 15 SECTION 2: Manual and tools for BSPA planning and management

Acronyms

ASCOBANS The Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic and North Seas BDC Convention on Biological Diversity Birds Directive Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. Aims to protect bird species within the EU through the conservation of birds and important habitats for birds. BSPA Baltic Sea Protected Area CFP Common Fisheries Policy (of the European Union) EA Ecosystem Approach EC European Community EcoO Ecological Objective EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EU European Union HELCOM HABITAT HELCOM Nature Protection and Biodiversity Group Habitats Directive Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and ﬂ ora. Aims to promote the maintenance of biodiversity through the conservation of important, rare or threatened habitats and the habitats of certain species. HELCOM Helsinki Commission ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea ICZM Integrated Coastal Zone Management IMO International Maritime Organization IUCN The World Conservation Union MARPOL The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, IMO 1973 MEE Management Effectiveness Evaluation MPA Marine Protected Area NGO Non-Governmental Organization OSPAR MASH OSPAR Working Group on Marine Protected Areas, Species and Habitats UNCLOS United Nations Law of the Sea

16 PART 1: Introduction to MPAs

1. What is an MPA? 2. Why an MPA? According to the well-established World Conser- Fishing and aquaculture, tourism, coastal develop- vation Union (IUCN) defi nition, Marine Protected ment, marine traffi c and transport, exploitation of Areas (MPAs) are “Any area of intertidal or natural resources, climate change, eutrophication, subtidal terrain, together with its overlying water and pollution by hazardous substances all place and associated fl ora, fauna, historical and cultural additional pressure on ecosystem productivity features, which has been reserved by law or and biodiversity of the Baltic Sea by changing other effective means to protect part or all of the and destroying the very processes and resources enclosed environment” (IUCN 1994). on which these activities depend. In addition, the development of modern technology has facilitated This defi nition arises from the general objective the access to and usage of marine habitats and of many MPAs to protect and restore certain natural resources. marine habitats or species from degradation, which is also the main aim of the BSPA network. In aquatic environments, natural boundaries are The IUCN stresses the importance of supporting few compared to terrestrial biotopes, and even productivity and other life-supporting processes when they do exist, they are diffi cult to fi nd and in the sea. In addition, MPAs can support fi sher- determine from the surface. Due to the highly ies, help to restore and maintain water quality, connected nature of the aquatic environment, preserve genetic diversity, and protect cultural nutrients, pollutants, and forcing factors, such features such as wrecks, lighthouses, and jetties. as currents, are effectively transmitted. Many marine organisms move freely in the water, either Is any managed area migrating actively or being transported passively. a protected area? Therefore, the question arises: why set up MPAs? In the broadest sense, MPAs can also be seen as What can be achieved by protecting certain areas “any habitat in which human activity is man- of the sea, and how should it be done? aged” (Palumbi 2002), thus offering protection to some level. However, managing human activities MPAs help to maintain biodiversity does not necessarily refer to management directly and ecological processes appointed to improve the quality of the environ- The power of MPAs lies in the protection of ment or of its specifi c features. The more correct representative samples of marine biodiversity and term would perhaps then be Marine Managed of associated ecosystems, habitats and species, Area (MMA). MPAs then represent a subcategory including critical sites for species reproduction of MMAs. and growth. In doing so, they also help to maintain the essential life-supporting processes in the Is only a strictly protected area sea, such as photosynthesis and productivity, a protected area? maintenance of food chains, and degradation of At the other end of the spectrum lies a strictly pollutants. Protecting some sites with minimal regulated, closed marine area in which only some direct human impact means that they are likely to scientifi c research can be conducted and “no recover more easily from other pressure stress extractive use nor any habitat destruction is factors, such as eutrophication, sedimentation, allowed” (Palumbi 2002). In other words, people and increased temperature by global warming should be kept out. This is not and will not be the (Commonwealth of Australia 2003). major aim of modern MPAs, as the benefi ts of zoning are so encouraging. Strict reserves and MPAs can help to support fi sheries strictly regulated zones of MPAs do exist and In some cases, MPAs have proven to be one should exist in marine and coastal areas, but they of the best single means to support fi sheries. form only one category of MPA. Protecting the coastal habitats for critical life- stages and other vital functions, such as nursery grounds, feeding and spawning grounds, essential to fi sh reproduction and growth can be extremely Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 17 important in supporting fi sh stock management. can facilitate the launching of a management These habitats also provide refuge for exploited framework over a broad range of human activi- species and dispersion centres for the supply ties of can be embedded in large-scale marine of larvae (the “spill-over effect”) (Gell & Roberts spatial planning initiatives. They create an 2003). In particular, the importance of “no- opportunity to bring all the relevant sectors and take”–areas, in which no fi shing or other seafood stakeholders of the coastal zone together. Thus, harvesting is allowed, has been identifi ed in MPAs can serve as demonstration models for many recent technical reviews on existing MPAs integrating management priorities with multiple (Commonwealth of Australia 2003). If MPAs are stakeholders’ needs (Villa et al. 2002). Zoning carefully designed, they may benefi t sedentary as is one example of implementing this in practise. well as migratory species, both directly by protect- When successful, MPA processes can also build ing critical habitats and indirectly by affecting a basis for other nature conservation initiatives their behaviour (Gell & Roberts 2003, Roberts & in the future. Sargant 2002). Fisheries management, however, is outside the scope of HELCOM policies and, 3. BSPA network consequently, no further guidance on the subject is given in these guidelines. Providing site selection and designation principles is not the purpose of this document. Therefore Socio-economic and cultural they are only briefl y introduced in the box below, benefi ts with the reminder that conservation of biodiversity By protecting fi sheries, MPAs can improve remains the main goal of the HELCOM network. socio-economic outcomes for local communi- This goal is also the basis for management plan- ties. Perhaps even more importantly in the ning and effectiveness evaluation. Baltic Sea Region, MPAs can contribute to local economies by raising the profi le of the area In a BSPA, particular protection should be for marine tourism and recreation. Although given to the species, natural habitats, and tourism may represent a threat to marine biota, nature types of the marine and coastal eco- it can be sustainable when properly managed. systems of the Baltic Sea Area to conserve However, when livelihoods are at stake, careful biological and genetic diversity and to protect consideration of the rights of e.g. professional ecological processes. fi shermen as well as long-term socio-economic Objects of protection are: effects of MPAs is needed. Areas with high biodiversity Habitats of endemic, rare or threatened spe- Besides benefi ting tourism, MPAs can help to cies and communities of fauna and fl ora, raise public awareness of, and support for, marine Habitats of migratory species, conservation issues among both tourists as well Rare, unique, or representative geological as locals. They can fulfi l recreational, aesthetic, or geomorphological structures or proc- and cultural needs of local people as well as esses. visitors. In addition, MPAs protect archaeological A BSPA should be a representative ecological sites, shipwrecks, and marine landscapes of functional entity for a Baltic Sea Region or great cultural importance. MPAs can also act as Sub-Region (see attachment to document scientifi c reference sites, which are important in EC NAT 3/7) or for a Baltic Sea State. The long-term studies, and offer education or training minimum size of a BSPA should preferably be opportunities for schools and universities. 1000 ha for terrestrial parts and/or 3000 ha for marine/lagoon parts. Buffer zones of an appro- Salm et al.( 2000), Palumbi (2002) & Common- priate width are recommended for all BSPAs. wealth of Australia (2003). BSPA designation guidelines (Helsinki MPAs in promoting the development Commission 2003a) of coastal zone management Managing MPAs means managing human activities, and therefore MPAs are one important tool An MPA must be large enough to encompass in protecting the marine environment and biodi- the critical areas it aims to protect, but be small versity against the strong human impacts on the enough to enable enforcement (Salm et al. 2000). Baltic Sea Region. The establishment of MPAs On a local scale, this can mean a network of 18 small, strictly protected areas or a large, multiple- tion criteria (e.g. cost-effectiveness) (Hastings & use area. The optimal size of an MPA has been Botsford 2003). object for debate, reviewed by e.g. by Halpern (2003) and will not be discussed further in the Whether large or small, remotely situated, indi- scope of this document. vidual MPAs can probably not protect biodiversity and vital functions effectively in the Baltic Sea. All sizes may be needed in an ecologically coher- Only an “ecologically coherent” network of MPAs, ent network, although some results suggest that a term that still needs more detailed and measur- larger reserves may be necessary to meet the able defi nition, can help to maintain habitats and goals set for marine reserves on a large scale species in the long run. This assumption is the (Halpern 2003). The effectiveness of individual basis for the HELCOM work on MPAs, where pri- areas depends on the primary purpose and goals ority is placed on the establishment of a coherent of the site in question, as well as on the evalua- and well-managed network of marine protected areas.

3.1. Useful references

Publication Topic URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Commonwealth of Australia 2003. The benefi ts of marine protected Benefi ts of MPAs http://www.deh.gov.au/coasts/mpa/wpc/ areas. Commonwealth of Australia brochure. 24 pp. benefi ts/pubs/benefi ts-mpas.pdf

Palumbi, S. R. 2002. Marine Reserves: a tool for ecosystem manage- MPAs as conserva- http://www.pewtrusts.com/pdf/pew_ ment and Conservation. Arlington, US, Pew Oceans Commission. tion tools oceans_marine_reserves.pdf http://www.pewtrusts.com/

Jameson, S.C., Tupper, M.H. & Ridley, J.M. 2002. 2002:.The three Effectiveness of http://www.icriforum.org/docs/ screen doors: Can marine “protected” areas be effective? Marine MPAs as conserva- Jameson_et_al_2002_MPB.pdf Pollution Bulletin 44: 1177–1183. tion tools

Day, J.C. & Roff, J.C. 2000. Planning for Representative Marine MPA networks http://www.wwf.ca/NewsAndFacts/ Protected Areas: A framework for Canada’s Oceans. Oceans. Report Supplemental/marinemain.pdf prepared for World Wildlife Fund Canada, Toronto. www.wwf.ca

Bull, K.S.E. & Laffoley, D.d’A. 2003. Networks of Marine Protected MPA networks http://www.english-nature.org.uk/pubs/ Areas in the Maritime Environment. A report for the Review of Marine publication/PDF/537.pdf Nature Conservation and the Marine Stewardship process on a http://www.english-nature.org.uk/ stakeholder workshop held in London on 19 June 2003. Peterborough: English Nature Research Reports, No 537, 35 pp.

Gell, F. R. & Roberts, C.M. 2003:.The Fishery Effects of Marine Fishery beneﬁ ts of http://www.worldwildlife.org/oceans/ Reserves and Fishery Closures. WWF-US, 1250 24th Street, NW, MPAs pdfs/ﬁ shery_effects.pdf Washington, DC 20037, USA. http://www.worldwildlife.org/

Fujita, R. 2001. Why marine reserves? Environmental Defence, Fisheries beneﬁ ts, http://www.environmentaldefense. 5655 College Avenue, Oakland, California USA 94618, review org/documents/1993_whyreserves.pdf

Roberts, C. M. & Sargant, H. 2002. Fishery benefi ts of fully protected Fishery benefi ts of http://www.fi sheries.ubc.ca/ru/feru/ marine reserves: why habitat and behaviour are important, Natural MPAs publications/V15N4/robe.pdf Resources Modelling 15(4) 487-507.

Hastings. A. & Botsford, L. 2003:.Comparing designs of marine reserves Comparing MPA http://www.esajournals.org/ECAP/ for ﬁ sheries and for biodiversity. Ecological Applications 13(1) Supple- designs i1051-0761-013-01-0065.pdf ment S65-S70.

Marine Protected Areas of the United States 2005. What Is an MPA? MPA case studies http://www.mpa.gov/what_is_an_mpa/ - Case Studies. Internet resource. case_studies.html

Halpern, B.S. 2003. The impact of marine reserves: Do reserves work Reserve size http://www.nceas.ucsb.edu/~halpern/ and does reserve size matter? Ecological Applications 13(1)Supple- pdf/Halpern_EA_2003.pdf ment:S117-S137. Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 19 PART 2: Planning tools

1. Choosing MPA categories Category V Protected area managed mainly In the recently updated IUCN global classifi cation for landscape/seascape conservation and recrea- system for protected areas (IUCN 1994), catego- tion (Protected Landscape/Seascape) ries I–V are recommended for BSPAs due to their Category VI Protected area managed mainly strong focus on ecological criteria. Furthermore, for the sustainable use of natural ecosystems application of the following international protection (Managed Resource Protected Area). categories may be considered in a similar way as (IUCN 1994) a national implementation for the protection of a BSPA: Categories should be assigned based on the Biosphere Reserve; primary management objective, as contained in SCI/SAC (EC-Habitats Directive); the legal defi nition on which it was established. SPA (EU-Birds Directive). Guidance for choosing the right category on the basis of management objectives is given in 1.1. IUCN categories Table 1. Consequently, when assigning a site to Category Ia Protected area managed mainly a category, national legislation will need to be for science (Strict Nature Reserve) examined to identify the primary objective for Category Ib Protected area managed mainly which the area is to be managed. In addition, cus- for wilderness protection (Wilderness Area) tomary agreements or the declared objectives of a Category II Protected area managed mainly non-governmental organization can be an option. for ecosystem protection and recreation (National Assignment to a category is not a statement of Park) management effectiveness; the category is an Category III Protected area managed mainly indication of what the site is intended to be, and Table 1. for conservation of specifi c natural features not of how it is run (IUCN 1994). IUCN Protected area (Natural Monument) categories and mana- Category IV Protected area managed mainly Examples: If scientifi c research were the primary gement objectives for conservation through management interven- objective for the site (in addition to the preservation (IUCN 1994). tion (Habitat/Species Management Area) of species and genetic diversity), the only option would be category Ia. Secondarily, the MPA may Protected area category then also serve for wilderness protection and Management Objective Ia Ib II III IV V VI maintenance of environmental services, but it is Scientifi c research 1 3 2 2 2 2 3 impossible that it can support tourism and recreation, education, or any use of natural resources. Wilderness protection 2 1 2 3 3 – 2 If these are primary objectives for the site, other Preservation of species and genetic diversity 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 categories should be considered, such as II or Maintenance of environmental services 2 1 1 – 1 2 1 III, which allow the site to be used for educational purposes and the protection of cultural features, Protection of specifi c natural/cultural features – – 2 1 3 1 1 while still protecting species and genetic diversity, Tourism and recreation – 2 1 1 3 1 3 as well as supporting some scientifi c research. Education – – 2 2 2 2 3 The development of goals and objectives is Sustainable use of resources from natural – 3 3 1 2 2 1 ecosystems introduced in PART 2, Chapter 5; “Developing conservation goals and objectives for BSPAs” Maintenance of cultural/traditional attributes – – – – – 1 2 (page 28). Key: 1 = Primary objective 2 = Secondary objective; 3 = Potentially applicable objective – = Not applicable 1.2. Useful references

Publication Topic URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

IUCN 1994: Guidelines for protected area manage- MPA categories http://www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/pubs/pdfs/pacategories.pdf ment categories. IUCN, Cambridge, UK. 94 pp. www.iucn.org

20 2. Legal framework for BSPAs Developing specifi c national MPA legislation (with linkages to integrated coastal zone man- Existing legal and administrative structures agement schemes, where possible); in all but pertaining to the area and constraints already one Baltic Sea riparian states put on the area must be clarifi ed, e.g., existing frameworks for coastal fi sheries, marine trans- 2.2. Legal “diagnosis” for a BSPA portation and other relevant controls on present To defi ne the need for legislation and information use of the area. on which a BSPA should be based, the following diagnosis proposed by IUCN (Salm et al. 2000) BSPA management guidelines (Helsinki Com- may be done: mission 2003 b) What is the objective of the MPA to be created? How urgent are the protection measures to be 2.1. Legal instruments in marine taken? conservation To whom does the area to be protected belong? In some countries, for instance Germany, a Who are the stakeholders/users of the management plan alone is not a legally binding resources in the area to be protected? document. Therefore, the Contracting Parties How do they feel about the need to protect the should prepare and substantiate the establish- area and to restrict uses? ment of MPAs to the extent possible using legal How can they be involved in this process? instruments. Legal instruments are general valid What laws are already in place? (e.g., forestry, acts and include laws, executive decrees, and fi sheries or tourism) administrative decisions. Enforcement measures What institutions are already in place? (govern- cannot be implemented without a legal text that mental, traditional or non-governmental) recognizes the authority of the MPA manager. How can the existing laws and institutions be Sometimes legislation regulating uses inside and used, i.e., what regulations and what type of outside the area is both adequate and the only enforcement may be used? available means (Salm et al. 2000, OSPAR Com- mission 2004). 2.3. Contents of the legal act The law should include a suffi ciently detailed state- Modern protected areas were fi rst established on ment specifying clear objectives and the means for land many MPAs have been established under their achievement, thus protecting management fi sheries and forestry laws that may not address from unreasonable pressures. However, details take the specifi c characteristics and needs of should be carefully considered to avoid undue MPAs. Revising old laws or drafting new ones limitations on management fl exibility. When estab- is also a national political question these time- lishing an MPA, the issues listed below should consuming processes are beyond the scope of be supported in either umbrella or site-specifi c the manager’s daily responsibilities. MPA plan- legislation. According to Kelleher (1999), Salm et ners and managers can however take initiatives al. (2000) and the OSPAR Commission (2004), the in addressing legislative gaps. Meanwhile, the following aspects could or should be covered by existing legislation has to be used. Whatever the legal act: the chosen approach, following options remain, according to Agardy (1997), Kelleher (1999) and Purpose of Protection Salm et al. (2000): The legal act should include an explanation of the Using international legislation, or customary/ reasons for protection of the area. This provides soft laws (treaties, conventions, etc.) to desig- a clear and simple source of information for all nate and integrate MPAs in regional and global potentially affected persons concerning the pur- networks, such as the BSPA and OSPAR pose of protection. In addition to the description of MPA networks supported by the Helsinki and the most important characteristics of the area, it is OSPAR Conventions; also useful to declare the species and habitats in Using existing terrestrial protected area legis- need of protection. The explanation should include lation; the essential information, but should not be too Adapting other existing legislation, such as detailed and should not give fi nal conclusions. forest, fi sheries or tourism laws, to authorize Concrete terms should instead be described within the BSPA; the general section of the management plan. Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 21 Conservation aims Measures for care, recovery and To create comparability between the Natura 2000 research areas and the envisaged HELCOM network, it is The legal framework should include authorizations useful to integrate the conservation aims into the for the execution of measures for care and recov- legal act. This provides decision factors (criteria ery, as well as for carrying out scientifi c research of assessment) that can be applied in determin- and monitoring. ing whether the uses in and around the site are compatible with the purposes of protection. It Advisory and consultation processes, should be emphasized that this declaration only public participation represents conclusions based on the current Relationships with other national authorities, such extent of understanding of the area, and that as those responsible for coastal and fi sheries further conservation aims and specifi cations management, as well as procedures for coordina- should be part of a general management plan. If tion and confl ict resolution, such as ICZM, should zoning is used, a zoning plan addressing the aims be specifi ed, where appropriate. In addition, any for different zones can be integrated in an annex public participation should be supported in the to the legal act. legal act, if not already a legal requirement, as for the Natura 2000 network. Regulation of uses Relevant uses in and around the area which may Delineation of boundaries negatively affect the area should be regulated Whether operating on land or at sea, boundary in the legal act. The regulation depends on the mapping requires appropriate interpretation of purpose of protection and the conservation aims. the relevant laws and their spatial context. To do Before regulations are integrated in the legal act, this, the legal description of the boundaries must it is necessary to know the current uses of the be clearly written, unambiguous, and preferably area and which of these uses affect the purposes included in the legal act. This should avoid confu- of protection and the conservation aims. Regula- sion caused by shifting boundaries. tions may consist of prohibitions, imposition of conditions or spatial, temporal, and quantitative Management plan limitations, as well as measures of compensation. The authorization to establish a management plan should be included in the legal act. If zoning is used, it may be necessary to establish zone-specifi c regulations and execute these regu- (Kelleher 1999, Salm et al. 2000, OSPAR Com- lations in a Zoning Regulation Plan, or to integrate mission 2004). the various regulations in the existing zoning plan. In both cases, it is necessary to enact the 2.4. Using international laws and regulations as a part of the legal act. Regulation agreements is directly linked to enforcement, and practical aspects are discussed in PART 3, Chapter 6: Sur- Adoption veillance and enforcement in BSPAs (page 51). Management of the sea, and conservation of biodiversity in general, has an international Authority dimension, which allows countries to use relevant In addition to regulations and prohibitions, it would international agreements and laws as support. be helpful to integrate an authorization in the International laws provide the aims, but they must legal act. This should declare that the appropriate be translated into national laws. Only after this authority may give orders to users, especially can they be successfully enforced by national when such orders are necessary to achieve the administrative authorities and courts. The consti- conservation aims of the site. In addition, the tutions of states provide different juridical tech- authorization to establish a management plan niques to implement international laws. (Czybulka shall be included in the legal act. Relationships & Kersandt 2000). Briefl y, the adoption: with other national authorities, such as those May be automatic/general, resulting in immedi- responsible for coastal and fi sheries manage- ate national applicability; or ment, as well as procedures for coordination May require special transformation by passing and confl ict resolution, such as ICZM, should be a special national law. specifi ed, where appropriate. (Czybulka & Kersandt 2000).

22 Sources specifi c international rules (Czybulka & Ker- International conventions, either general or sandt 2000). particular, establishing rules recognized by Contracting Parties; a list is provided in "Useful International “Soft law” references"; These are rules of conduct for international prac- International custom as evidence of a general tice, which are not legally binding in principle but practice, accepted by law; nonetheless have some legal effect. The term “soft General principles of law recognized by civi- law” refers to the statements and documents of lized nations. intergovernmental and non-governmental organi- (Czybulka & Kersandt 2000). zations that do not have treaty status. The transi- tion from international “soft law” to international International environmental custom or custom is very often fl uid (Thiel & Koslow 2001). “customary law” The environmental customary international law The relevant international laws and conventions is a primary source of non-codifi ed international and their respective URLs can be found in environmental law. It’s emergence requires two Attachment 1: “International laws and conven- constitutive elements: tions” (page 74). A constant general practice; (Czybulka & Kersandt 2000) A respective acceptance of the practice as binding law (opinio iuris et necessitatis). 2.5. MPAs in Exclusive Economic Zones Therefore, a common international practice of As territorial seas and EEZs fall partly under states is required and, by the conviction of the national jurisdiction, legal acts can be set up by states, it postulates immediate obligations. In coastal states. Many international customary and addition, international treaties contribute to the “soft laws” are useful particularly outside territo- emergence of international custom, providing it rial waters. The applicability of the Habitat and with a legally binding effect. However, particu- Bird Directives in EEZs remains to be clarifi ed. larly in international environmental law, a differ- The regulation of activities in EEZs may require entiation into “principles” and “rules” is required. regional and international co-operation, for which “Rules” contain a binding commitment, whereas the HELCOM and OSPAR conventions, as well “principles” allow a relatively wide scope for as the EC Directives, can provide an umbrella. performance. The latter need to be completed MPA establishment in EEZs is an issue that has by the application of law and legislation. They do received increasing attention in recent years and not comprise concrete rights or duties, but serve will continue to do so in the years to come. as grounds for interpretation and application of 2.6. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Czybulka, D. & Kersandt, P. 2000:. Legal regulations, legal instru- Legal issues http://www.bfn.de ments and competent authorities with Relevance for Marine Pro- in EEZs tected Areas (MPAs) in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and the High Seas of the OSPAR maritime area. German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Bonn, Germany. 84 pp. – Bfn-Skripten 22.

European Commission 2000. Managing Natura 2000 sites the provi- Interpretation http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/ sions of article 6 of the ‘Habitats’ directive 92/43/EEC. Luxembourg: of Article 6 of nature_conservation/eu_nature_legislation/ Offi ce for Offi cial Publications of the European Communities 2000 the “Habitats” specifi c_articles/art6/pdf/art6_en.pdf — 69 pp.— 21 x 29.7 cm. directive http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/

Ritterhoff, J., Gubbay, S., & Zucco, C. (eds.) 2004. Marine Protected Fisheries www.dnl-online.de (database) Areas and Fisheries. Proceedings of the International Expert work- management, shop held at the International Academy for Nature Conservation, Isle legal issues, of Vilm, Germany 28 June - 2 July, 2004. German Federal Agency for Natura 2000 Nature Conservation, Bonn, Germany. 177 pp. – Bfn-Skripten 122. provisions

Kimball. L.A. 2001: International Ocean Governance: Using Interna- International http://www.iucn.org/themes/marine/pdf/ tional Law and Organizations to Manage Marine Resources Sustain- law IUCN%20book.pdf ably. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. xii + 124 pp. http://www.iucn.org/ Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 23 3. The wider context: and the intergovernmental and multi-jurisdic- Ecosystem Approach and ICZM tional character of the management regime can also pose challenges to an ecosystem-based 3.1. Short introduction to the planning (McGinnis & Hastings). Therefore, Ecosystem Approach stakeholder involvement, promotion of compatible uses, and education can all be seen as HELCOM framework ecosystem-based planning components in addition to research, protection through set-asides, The ecosystem approach can be defi ned as development of a management plan, ecosystem “the comprehensive integrated management restoration, and the use of existing state/regional of human activities based on the best available programmes (Yaffee et al. 1996). The chal- scientifi c knowledge about the ecosystem and lenges and solutions might lie in interagency, its dynamics, in order to identify and take action and agency-to-public, coordination and com- on infl uences which are critical to the health of munication (McGinnis & Hastings). marine ecosystems, thereby achieving sustainable use of ecosystem goods and services and maintenance of ecosystem integrity”. 3.2. Short introduction to Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) (Helsinki Commission & OSPAR Commission 2003) Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) is the integrated planning and management of coastal resources and environments in At the Joint OSPAR and HELCOM Ministerial Meet- a manner that is based on the physical, socio- ing in June 2003, the two Commissions agreed that economic, and political interconnections both the ecosystem approach and setting of ecological within and among the dynamic coastal systems, objectives (EcoOs), currently being developed by which, when aggregated together, defi ne a HELCOM, are the keys to improving the protection coastal zone. of the North-East Atlantic and the Baltic Sea. As a result, at this meeting the Commissions adopted the joint statement “Towards an Ecosystem HELCOM framework Approach to the Management of Human Activities”. This statement defi nes the Ecosystem Approach “…the Contracting Parties, in accordance with (EA) and lists the aims that the two Commissions the European Union’s ICZM recommendation will pursue regarding the EA (Helsinki Commission and the forthcoming European Marine Strategy, & OSPAR Commission 2003) to develop a national strategy or, where appropriate, several strategies, to implement the Ecosystem Approach and BSPA principles for integrated management of human management activities of the coastal areas and extend these Although the HELCOM/OSPAR approach principles to include marine offshore areas highlights the role of science, humans are a and also follow the ecosystem approach to the part of the marine ecosystems as well, and management of human activities, as defi ned by consequently these ecosystems also have HELCOM and OSPAR.” social, cultural, economic, and historical dimensions. Local and regional cultural, political, and HELCOM Recommendation 24/10 (Helsinki organizational values modify this role of science, Commission 2003c). and these values cannot be provided to managers and policy makers by scientifi c information alone. In addition, ecosystems are mosaics of The measures that each Contracting Party is privately held and “publicly” managed land, and recommended to take in order to implement ICZM these relationships will shape the development of can be found in HELCOM Recommendation ecosystem management and planning. 24/10. Briefl y, they include the following: Identifying laws and regulations of relevance Challenges and solutions to the use and protection of marine areas, Defi ning ecosystem boundaries, understanding and the authorities responsible for their imple- natural disturbances and anthropogenic threats, mentation; 24 Developing criteria and guidelines for integrat- problems such as pollution, climate change, and ing the management of human activities by overfi shing that originate outside reserve bounda- sector authorities; ries (Lubchenco et al. 2003). The ecosystem Identifying stakeholders with interests in approach highlights the need to systematically marine areas; combine and coordinate existing policy instru- Identifying confl icting interests; ments, which currently mainly operate independ- Improving assessments of the status of biodi- ently. ICZM is a tool directly for management to versity and impacts of human activities on ensure that these requirements are fulfi lled (Salm marine areas; et al. 2000). Developing overall management plans for human activities in marine areas; Between 2001 and 2005, Finland and Sweden Identifying the management issues in offshore worked out guidelines and tools for the integrated areas, identifying relevant data gaps, and management of the Bothnian Bay in the “Bothnian addressing gaps with inventories, and maps of Bay Life Project”. Despite regional contacts and biodiversity and the use of natural resources. joint projects, there was a lack of communication and of an integrated monitoring system between ICZM and BSPA management the countries. Issues such as coastal exploitation, protected areas, and land use in the catchment areas were registered separately. Therefore, to “The environment of a BSPA should be to obtain an overview of the status of the environ- a large extent free of pollution. If polluted, ment and improve information exchange, the activities should be started as soon as possible Environmental Information Database and BAT to distinctly improve the environmental situa- Information Exchange System were established. tion through, e.g., technical measures, such In addition, the Bothnian Bay Water Quality and as sewage treatment plants etc. Integrated Eutrophication Model was developed for expert Coastal Management Plans may help to meet use for management purposes. Dissemination these requirements.” of results and participation were guiding principles throughout the whole project, making the BSPA Management guidelines 2003 (Helsinki integrated approach efforts also useful tools for Commission 2003b). raising public awareness (Laine 2005). MPAs are powerful management and biodiversity conservation tools. However they cannot solve 3.3. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

ICES 2004. Report of the Thirteenth ICES Dialogue meeting: Advan- Ecosystem approach: http://www.ices.dk/pubs/crr/crr267/ cing scientifi c advice for an ecosystem approach to management: scientifi c advice crr267.pdf collaboration amongst managers, scientists, and other stakeholders. http://www.ices.dk/indexfl a.asp ICES Cooperative Research Report, No. 267. 59 pp.

Helsinki Commission & OSPAR Commission 2003. Statement on the Ecosystem approach http://www.helcom.fi /stc/fi les/ Ecosystem Approach to Human Activities. A paper prepared for the BremenDocs/ First Joint Ministerial Meeting of the Helsinki and OSPAR Commissi- JointEcosystemApproach.pdf ons (JMM) in Bremen, Germany. www.helcom.fi

ICES 2005. Guidance on the Application of the Ecosystem Approach Ecosystem approach http://www.ices.dk/pubs/crr/crr273/ to Management of Human Activities in the European Marine Environ- application guidance crr273.pdf ment, ICES Cooperative Research Report, No. 273. 22pp. http://www.ices.dk/

Ward, T. & Hegerl, E. 2003. Marine Protected Areas in Ecosystem- Ecosystem approach, http://www.deh.gov.au/coasts/mpa/wpc/ based Management of Fisheries. A report for the Department of the MPAs and ﬁ sheries pubs/mpas-management-ﬁ sheries.pdf Environment and Heritage. Commonwealth of Australia. 77 pp.

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2004) The Ecosystem approach http://www.biodiv.org/doc/publications/ Ecosystem Approach, (CBD Guidelines) Montreal: Secretariat of the guidelines ea-text-en.pdf Convention on Biological Diversity 50 p. http://www.biodiv.org

McGinnis, M.V. & Hastings, S.P. An Ecosystem Management Ecosystem manage- http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/library/ Approach for the Santa Barbara Channel Islands. National Marine ment approach, case alldocs.html Sanctuaries Library. An internet resource. study Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 25 Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Helsinki Commission 2003c. HELCOM Recommendation 24/10 ICZM http://www.helcom.ﬁ /Recommendations/ en_GB/rec24_10/ www.helcom.ﬁ

GESAMP (IMO/FAO/UNESCO-OC/WMO/WHO/IAEA/UN/UNEP Coastal zone mana- http://gesamp.imo.org/no61/w1639e00. Joint Group of Experts on the Scientiﬁ c Aspects of Marine Environ- gement and science pdf mental Protection). 1996. The contributions of science to coastal http://gesamp.imo.org zone management. Rep. Stud. GESAMP,(61):66 p.

Pickaver, A. (ed.) 2002: Integrated Coastal Zone Management in the ICZM in the Baltic http://www.helcom.fi /stc/fi les/Publica- Baltic States. State of the Art Report. Background for Coastal Plan- tions/OtherPublications/ICZMdocument- ning and Management in the Baltic Sea Region, as part of the second Compilation.pdf HELCOM-HABITAT meeting. December 2001, August, 2002. EUCC http://www.helocm.fi – The Coastal Union. 77 pp.

Poitras, J., Bowen, R. 6 J. Wiggin 2003. Challenges to the use of ICZM and consensus consensus building in integrated coastal management. Ocean & building Coastal Management 46(5): 391-405.

4. Defi ning boundaries 4.1. Tips for drafting the legal Defi ning boundaries is one the most important boundary description steps in setting up an MPA as the boundaries Whether operating on land or at sea, boundary have profound effects on the management of a mapping requires appropriate interpretation of the BSPA. Boundaries defi ne the group of stakehold- relevant laws and their spatial context. Unlike their ers, and may therefore cause objections due to land counterparts, marine boundaries have no confl icting uses and interests. They determine physical evidence to mark them. The result can be who and what belongs on either side, and may confusion, disagreement, and confl icting versions provide advantages or disadvantages, rewards or of boundaries. In order to avoid this, Canessa et al. penalties, permissions or restrictions, and power (2003) & Stein (2003) have provided several tips: or powerlessness to either party (Villa et al. 2002). Write clearly, concisely, and Boundaries in the three-dimensional, continuous unambiguously aquatic environment can be diffi cult to defi ne. In order for the legal/authoritative description to be In practice, the seaward extent of the MPA can translated into a digital boundary, it must be clearly legally be limited to the territorial waters, if the and concisely written. A surveyor, technician, GIS national legislation does not provide tools to pro- specialist or cartographer must be able to take the tect areas in EEZs. Distances of landmarks from description from the legal document and place it the coastline, as well as latitudes and longitudes on the ground or on a map. This also allows the may be used to set boundaries. Vertical boundary boundaries to be defended and enforced. In prac- setting is also worth considering: subsoils, air tice, this means avoiding ambiguous language, space above the site, all the waters in the area, as such as “the general contour of the coast” or well as the seabed can be included. However, the “slightly off from point X”, and using references that identifi cation of appropriate ecological boundaries can be mapped. based on ecological reasoning is strongly recommended (Salm et al.2000). Reference fi xed features It is recommended to reference fi xed features The boundary setting includes two important that will not move over time, for example, natural steps: features such as a rocky headland. Referencing 1) Legal establishment of boundaries; features that are ambulatory, i.e., have a tendency 2) Transformation of the legal description to to move, results in obsolete boundaries. A sandy digital boundaries. point is a good example of a feature to be avoided. In addition, groins, jetties, and other seemingly fi xed features may be moved or demolished. Clear nodes that are defi ned by accurate coordinates and that can be used to draw the boundaries 26 quickly in any situation and by anybody, should Develop a standard operating be given. procedure within your organization A Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is a set Review your boundary prior to of written instructions that document a routine or publication repetitive activity in an organization. The develop- This must be done with mapping, legal and ment and use of SOPs are an integral part of a enforcement staff, and other key staff members. successful quality control system and should be In order for these people to protect natural considered for mapping or other spatial data such resources, they need to know how to map, as boundary information. They provide individuals defend, and enforce the entire area of the MPA. with the information to perform a job properly, and (Canessa et al. 2003, Stein 2003) facilitate consistency in the quality and integrity of the products. At the least, develop minimum map- 4.2. Tips for developing the digital ping specifi cations. boundaries Tips by Stein (2003) include the following: Share your boundary data This can be done through a data clearinghouse Use the offi cial source for boundary or through the internet. All the appropriate information authorities must be informed of the existence of For example, if a legal description for an MPA new or modifi ed boundaries and the location of boundary indicates the three-mile jurisdictional this information. Marine resource users, manag- boundary as the outer limit; make sure you obtain ers, and law enforcement staff must utilize the the “offi cial” three-mile jurisdictional boundary. Ref- same current and most accurate boundary erencing other boundaries of questionable sources information. In order for everybody to follow the may render the boundaries unenforceable. same rules, the boundary and zoning data must be up-to-date. Use the most detailed chart or map available Make the boundaries visible for This applies when making a boundary from a hard everyone copy document. It allows the greatest resolution It must be made easy for any citizen to acknowl- and most information to be captured and ensures edge the MPA borders, when visiting the area the highest level of accuracy. GIS systems can or its surroundings. Hence, the MPA boundaries display the data at any scale, which may result in should be shown on regular maps and nautical the data becoming scaleless. Accuracy is a func- charts, and should be indicated, for example, by tion of the scale at which the map was created; buoys for marking at least some of the aquatic thus, the more detailed the scale, the more accu- boundaries. rate the digital boundaries. Accuracy will however be compromised at a threshold scale. 4.3. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Stein, D. 2003. MPA perspective: Tips for developing http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA38.htm Practical tips marine boundaries. MPA news 4(7):5. http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA38.pdf

Hulin, A.C., Fowler, C. & Tartt, M. 2005. The Creation of http://gis.esri.com/library/userconf/proc01/professional/ Digital Representations of National Marine Sanctuary Digital boundaries papers/pap978/p978.htm Boundaries. An expert paper. An internet resource. Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 27 5. Developing conservation The effectiveness of the MPA is goals and objectives for BSPAs measured against objectives An MPA must have clearly deﬁ ned objectives …”in a BSPA, particular protection should against which its performance is regularly com- be given to the species and natural habitats pared. Without clear objectives, or with vague, and nature types of the marine and coastal restrictive objectives, there is no foundation for the ecosystems of the Baltic Sea Area to conserve assessment of whether the selected management biological and genetic diversity and to protect measures are meeting the conservation goals of ecological processes”. the site.

General aim of management: Baltic Sea Pro- Objectives determine the group of tected Areas have been chosen as examples stakeholders of typical biotopes of ecological signifi cance Without clear objectives, it becomes impossible to occurring in each of the Baltic Sea sub-regions. decide which stakeholders groups are relevant for The general aim of management of these the site in question. areas is to ensure the conservation and/or restoration of a representative set of biotopes Clearly defi ned objectives facilitate and habitats in order to preserve biodiversity communication and sustainable use of natural resources where Persons taking part in the management process appropriate. will repeatedly question the goals and objectives of an MPA. Therefore, it is very important that the Specifi c aims of management: To reach the objectives are well-founded and defi ned. general aim in an area, it is necessary to focus (Kelleher 1999, Dahl-Tacconi 2002). on a number of specifi c aims, depending on the conservation needs of the area. Zoning could 5.2. What are the “goals” and be a useful tool to reach the specifi c aims. “objectives” of BSPAs? Elements in need of specifi c protection within a BSPA must be described comprehensively. Goals or general aims Goals, or “general aims”, refl ect the purpose(s) BSPA designation and management guidelines for which the area is protected and the long- (Helsinki Commission 2003a & 2003b). term ideal terms, identifying desired conditions rather than specifi c actions. The general aims of The development of conservation goals and BSPA management promote the conservation objectives at any level, whether international, and restoration of the sites, and should be sup- national or site-specifi c, is a challenging task. It ported by the specifi c aims (Helsinki Commis- requires expertise and a fundamental understand- sion 2003a & 2003b). In areas belonging to the ing of the social and political contexts, as well Natura 2000 network, this often means obtain- as the specifi c biophysical features of each site. ing a “Favourable conservation status”. For The purpose of this guidance is to focus on the the habitats listed in Annex I of the Directive, it design of meaningful and practical site-specifi c means that conditions have been established objectives. Much work in this fi eld has been done which will ensure that: in the Natura 2000 network, and the principles of The extent and range of the habitat will be the Natura approach may therefore also be useful maintained or increased over time; in other BSPAs. The populations of the consistent species of the habitat will be maintained over time. 5.1. Why develop objectives? For species listed in Annex II, it means that condi- Conservation objectives are the tions have been established which will ensure starting point for all management that populations of the constituent species of the The operations causing damage or disturbance habitat will be maintained over time (EN et al. to the conservation objectives are to be identifi ed 2001a, 2001b, 2001c). and management options decided based on the objectives.

28 Objectives or specifi c aims Identifying attributes Objectives or specifi c aims represent site- Attributes are characteristics of the features or specifi c, short-term, measurable steps towards subfeatures which are considered biologically/eco- attaining the defi ned goals (e.g., implementing logically important in achieving the goals for the a specifi c programme to protect the Zostera site. They must be measurable characteristics, and fi eld from damage) (Helsinki Commission be reliable indicators of the condition of the feature. 2003a & 2003b). The objectives help to identify Larger complex features should be divided into management needs and measures, as well as sub-features (see above) to facilitate the process, provide the standard against which the success as different features have different sensitivities. or failure of the management can be measured, The process must rely on understanding the i.e., the management effectiveness (EN et al. sensitivity and vulnerability of the features and 2001a, 2001b, 2001c). sub-features, as well as their distribution (EN et al. 2001a, 2001b, 2001c). Details on the assessments 5.3. A step-by-step approach to are given in PART 3, Chapter 3: “Threat analysis” developing objectives (page 40). One starting point would be to consider whether the primary goals are to maintain or to restore the For habitats, attributes may include the status of the feature/features. The objectives then Extent of the feature; should refl ect the concrete target or target values Diversity of the constituent communities/ and the steps to be taken to achieve the goals of biotopes; the site. This can be done using the following six Distribution of constituent communities/ steps. biotopes; I Identifying interest features; Species composition of constituent communi- II Identifying sub-features; ties/biotopes; III Identifying attributes; Important topographic features, e.g., bathym- IV Identifying targets for attributes; etry; V Identifying the relevant operations causing Water temperature; damage or disturbance; Turbidity; VI Identifying the management measures for Nutrients; these operations. Sediment character. (EN et a. 2001a, 2001b, 2001c) For species, attributes may include the Identifying interest features Extent of habitat critical for supporting the The interest features are the biotopes, habitats population of the species; and/or species in need of protection, as listed in Freedom from disturbance; the EC Directives and in the HELCOM/OSPAR Population size; lists of endangered or threatened habitats and Productivity of the population; species. The conservation objectives should Food availability; be set for interest features, instead of the site Water quality parameters; itself, to concentrate on the conservation needs Identifying targets for attributes of the features and to allow aggregation of the results of monitoring the conditions of the The attributes and targets must refl ect the various feature across the range of sites that have been elements of the desired conditions for the chosen selected for that particular feature (EN et al. features, i.e., habitats and species. For example, the 2001a, 2001b, 2001c). Extent and structure of the habitat, vital processes and functions, physical processes Identifying sub-features affecting the habitat, and presence, viability Sub-features are important ecological compo- and abundance of characteristic or key spe- nents of the features (for example, kelp beds, cies/habitats, quality of substrates; seagrass beds, individual estuaries). These Viability, abundance, population dynamics, should be mapped, as mapped information can be productivity rates, age and size distributions, incorporated into the formal advice on conserva- distribution ranges and patterns, and support- tion objectives that is presented to the relevant ing habitats/species, and supporting/affecting regulatory authorities (EN et al 2001a, 2001b, physical processes. 2001c). (EN et al. 2001a, 2001b & 2001c). Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 29 The target value is that which is considered Identifying operations necessary to achieve if the feature is to reach The topic of identifying activities threatening the or maintain the “favourable status” for which it features/subfeatures under protection is further was selected or was intended to achieve. This expanded upon in PART 3, Chapter 3: “Threat process requires scientifi c understanding of the analysis” (page 40) and in Attachment 2, “Human features to be protected, as well as some value activities table” (page 76). Briefl y, judgments. However, the setting of values is an Identifi cation of threatening activities/opera- inexact science and limitations must be acknowl- tions must be carried out separately for each edged. Knowledge of the attributes selected feature or sub-feature; may, for example, be based on only a single The nature of the link between the activ- survey. In addition, understanding of natural ity/operation and each feature should be fl uctuations and relationships between attributes established and recorded; (e.g., the values of various water chemistry The sensitivity of each feature to the effects of parameters) may be limited. each activity/operation must be assessed (it does not vary greatly between sites); Targets may be absolute, e.g., values that must be The vulnerability of a feature is site-specifi c: it achieved, or fl exible, covering a range of natural not only depends on the inherent sensitivity of fl uctuations. Therefore, the starting point for the the feature to the effects of the operation, but target value can be the value of the attribute at the also on the degree to which it is exposed. time of selection. If the site has been selected with a view to restoring , a value can be set that repre- Identifying management measures sents enhancement. An experimental approach and concrete steps should be adopted to learn from experience and Management options are introduced in detail in adapt future management accordingly Concrete the corresponding PART 3, Chapter 4: “Choosing target values for water quality or populations may management measures” (page 44) and in the Table 2. also be set. This should be done for the different subsequent Chapters 5-7 (pages 58-66). Within Examples of targets for zones and sub-features of the site, for example, each country and for each site, realistic and effec- “favourable conserva- beach dunes, lagoons, underwater nature, fi elds, tive measures should be decided upon for each tion status” (EN et al. forests, etc. EN et al. (2001a, 2001b, 2001c). case. The fi rst steps in the management may, for 2001c). Examples of setting targets are given in Table 2. example, be: Establishing advisory committees (PART 3, Characteristics which comprise ‘Targets’ equating to favourable Chapter 1: “Establishing the management conservation status conservation status framework”, page 32);

Habitats Preparing a zoning plan (PART 3, Chapter 5: “Zoning”, page 49); natural range and areas covered stable or increasing Establishing a specifi c programme for protect- within that range ing species (PART 3, Chapter 4: “Choosing structure and functions necessary for exist and are likely to continue to exist Management measures”, page 44); long-term maintenance Establishing general and specifi c awareness conservation status of typical species favourable as defi ned below programmes (PART 3, Chapter 7: “Public

Species awareness and education”, page 52).

population dynamics species is maintaining itself on a long-term basis as a viable component of its natural habitats

natural range is neither being reduced nor is likely to be reduced in the foreseeable future

supporting habitat is, and will probably continue to be, suf- ﬁ ciently large [and, by implication, of appropriate quality] to maintain the populations on a long-term basis

30 5.4. Useful references

Publication Topic URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

EN, SNH, EHS(DOE(NI)), CCW, JNCC, SAMS 2001c. Guidelines Developing objectives for http://www.ukmarinesac.org. for developing conservation objectives for Marine SACs - Learning Marine SACs uk/publications-launch-pdf. from the UK Marine SACs Project 1996-2001. Peterborough, English php?ﬁ le=conservation_ Nature. obj&ﬁ lesize=250 http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001b. Natura 2000. UK Includes a chapter setting http://www.ukmarinesac.org. Marine SACs project: Partnerships in action. Proceedings of a confer- conservation objectives uk/pdfs/cproceed.pdf ence held in Edinburgh, 15th-16th November 2000.Peterborough, http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ English Nature.

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001a. Indications of good Includes a chapter setting http://www.ukmarinesac.org. practise for establishing management schemes on European Marine conservation objectives uk/pdfs/good_prac1.pdf sites. Learning from the UK Marine SACs project 1996-2001. http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ Peterborough, English Nature.

Laffoley, D.d’A., Vincent, M., Connor, D.W., Hill, M., & Breen, J. 2002. Strategic goals for marine Strategic goals and objectives for marine nature conservation, and conservation in general associated indicators. Prepared for the Review of Marine Nature Conservation by English Nature and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Peterborough: English Nature Research Report, No 482. 23 pp. Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 31 PART 3: Management tools

1. Establishing the 1.2. Top-down and bottom-up management framework management Two extremes of management exist: “top-down” 1.1. Why partnerships? management, referring to a system where full “Community-based management”, “joint manage- control belongs to the agency in charge; and ment”, “partnership”, “collaborative management”, “bottom-up” management, where there is strong and “co-management”: Whichever the title, in many management involvement, even up to full control, cases building partnerships is just as important to by the local community. The spectrum between successful management as knowledge, scientifi c these two extremes offers numerous options, aspects, and legal imperatives (Kelleher 1999, Salm and success often lies in fi nding the best balance et al. 2000). It can also be the most diffi cult and between these two approaches. Without the time-consuming part of the management planning. involvement of local people, protection often fails, but without government involvement, the MPA can Partnerships with relevant authorities, as well as lose its protection status (Kelleher 1999). stakeholders, may have legal reasons, but they are Co-management may not be possible for some also strongly recommended for practical reasons. sectors, for example, while tourism access may Many experiences worldwide have shown that be co-managed, control over navigation rights stakeholder involvement in management decisions must remain with a government authority. In usually builds up trust and confi dence between the general, the stakeholder activities should be parties, which in turn facilitates the implementation supported by legislation (Salm et al. 2000), but of management and strengthens both public sup- in some cases even voluntary agreements and port and commitment (EN et al. 2001a). regulations can be appropriate, for example, for privately owned lands, which constitute a great For example, effective dialogue has almost proportion of the Baltic Sea coastline in some invariably been shown to increase the level of riparian countries, such as in Finland. acceptance and support for Natura 2000 sites. Participation by different groups creates in each 1.3. Examples of different approaches a sense of pride and “ownership” of the site, The type of participation adopted for a site has ensuring continuity, and creating new socio-eco- a profound impact on the management scheme Table 3. nomic opportunities and partnerships (European process, especially the management structures Different levels Commission 2004b). Communicating with policy and the decision-making processes. The structure of participatory developers and government bodies leads to better should be considered and planned in advance, activities and integration of policies, encourages a coordinated with the involvement of the relevant authorities examples of approach to land use policies, highlights areas of and stakeholders. What is achievable will depend techniques mutual interest, and helps in strategic planning to an extent on the local political culture, and in (EN et al. 2001a) (European Commission 2004b). particular on the willingness of relevant authorities

Level of activity Examples of techniques Objective

Information-sharing activities Newsletters, websites, leaﬂ ets, videos, public displays, slide shows. To disseminate information in Additional info in PART 3, Chapter 7: “Public awareness and education” the activities, presentations, (page 52). media brieﬁ ngs

Consultative activities Management group consisting of relevant authorities consulting with To encourage a two-way stakeholders through surveys, focus groups, public meetings, face-to- exchange of information face brieﬁ ngs with key individuals/organizations

Collaborative activities Creating hierarchical management groups whereby relevant authorities To engage the knowledge and collaborate with stakeholders through topic groups to scope problems resources of stakeholders and solutions; running site-based events

Empowerment activities Creating fl at management groups combining relevant authorities and To share power and respon- stakeholders by co-opting individuals from relevant authorities and sibility for the decisions being stakeholder groups; devolving and budgets and resources made and their outcomes 32 to share responsibility in decision-making. It will 1.5. Potential relevant authority and also depend on the opportunities, or lack thereof, stakeholder groups for relevant authorities and other stakeholders to Collaboration requires networking and forging identify common goals (EN et al. 2001a). Exam- linkages, for example, with ples are given in Table 3. environmental and/or nature conservation agencies at state/regional/local levels; 1.4. Statutory management: working tourism authorities; with relevant authorities fi sheries agencies/committees; Some impacts may arise outside the boundaries shipping authorities; of the site and beyond the geographical area local law enforcement offi cers; within which the local relevant authorities’ powers community leaders and other local politicians; apply. Management schemes must identify the port, harbour, and navigation/lighthouse impacts on features originating outside the sites authorities/committees; and develop appropriate management measures, land drainage authorities; where possible. In addition, fi sheries and shipping local people, e.g., landowners, fi shermen; policies have international dimensions in the Baltic private businesses and industries; Sea and cannot be regulated directly. This may water and energy companies; necessitate the involvement of relevant authorities NGOs; and other bodies in adjacent areas. These bodies Scientists. need to be involved alongside the relevant local authorities in the development of the scheme. For Authorities Natura 2000 sites, relevant authorities should be Environmental agencies consulted regarding the activities threatening the If not already entirely or partly responsible for the sites (see “Operations Advice”, discussed later in management scheme of the MPA, regional/local this chapter). environmental agencies should be coordinated to distribute, collect, and report, e.g., relevant Relevant and competent authorities are those monitoring results concerning the MPA. that can exercise their existing functions to secure compliance with the conservation features, and in Fisheries authorities the Natura 2000 network, have a duty under the In the European Union, fi sheries policy has Habitats Regulations to do so. Generally, relevant an international dimension as EU legislation authorities have suffi cient legal instruments to regulates the allowable takes, not national govern- manage potential impacts identifi ed through the ments. BSPAs and their management must be management schemes. However, there are cer- integrated into national fi sheries policies, but this tain potential impacts from some on-going activi- complex discussion cannot be dealt with in this ties, for example military or aviation activities, document. that are within the jurisdiction of other competent authorities. In such cases, it is important that the Shipping authorities respective competent national authorities are Shipping is another issue with an international targeted and kept involved in the development of dimension, thus requiring international coopera- the management scheme, particularly regarding tion. Relevant authorities should be informed those areas over which they have control. When and consulted regarding the BSPAs, if shipping interests are overlapping, each relevant authority activities have a considerable effect on the site. should consider the measures devised by another Routing and maintenance/navigational dredging relevant authority (EN et al, 2001a). activities in national territories may be negotiated with relevant authorities, and managers should be In addition to operating with relevant authorities, prepared for catastrophic events such as oil spills. it is important to identify other stakeholder groups and their concerns. These may be mapped, for Tourism authorities example, by participatory surveys (Salm et al. Tourism can pose threats to conservation fea- 2000). The number of potential stakeholders tures, but when managed in a sustainable way, and the extent to which they can be, or want to it can benefi t the conservation efforts by raising be, included in the MPA management may differ public awareness and support. It may also bring greatly from country to country, from site to site, great commercial value to a protected area in and from countryside to urban MPAs. a location that is easily reached and has tourist Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 33 attractions (such as archaeological interests, Landowners have a vested interest in land usage scenic coastal and marine landscapes, diving or questions. Establishing a dialogue with fi shermen, bird watching opportunities). Tourism may create both commercial and recreational, is relevant job opportunities and raise the profi le of the com- for BSPA managers, especially when the areas munity. The establishment of an MPA is also a benefi t sustainable fi sheries by protecting nursery good opportunity to encourage the tourism indus- grounds and fi sh aggregation areas. Fishermen try to develop and adopt codes of environmental may be able to provide valuable information on practice. the resources of the site, and their needs should also be taken into consideration. Law and enforcement offi cers Law and enforcement offi cers, such as local Private businesses and industries police, and coast guard can help to establish Many private businesses and industries may and enforce the legal basis and regulations for have interests in BSPA sites, and their actions MPAs and share surveillance responsibility, where may need to be regulated by the MPA manage- needed. Offi cers should be aware of the existing ment, for example private harbours and tourism regulations and penalties, and their role in the enterprises. MPA management must be clearly defi ned. Law offi cers can also take initiatives in establishing Water and energy companies new marine conservation or site-specifi c legisla- Water companies and sewage treatments plants, tion, when it is considered necessary. as well as energy companies and power plants, whether privately or state-owned, depend on or Community leaders and other local are closely associated with the seashore and thus authorities have an interest in and infl uence on the coastal Trusted community leaders, workers and local areas. authorities, such as city council or environmental board members and chairpersons, can be helpful Scientists partners. They often have intimate knowledge Scientifi c research, and the resulting information of local political cultures and natural resources, on ecosystem structure and function, can benefi t and can therefore reduce confl icts and act as a management in many ways. Through intensive conduit in communicating the advantages of the collaboration and planning, the interest of scien- site, thus affecting public opinion. tists to conduct research in MPAs can be used to fi ll relevant information gaps. If the threats to Other biodiversity in the site, as well as the goals and Harbour, navigation and lighthouse, land drainage, objectives of its protection, have been scrutinized and military authorities/committees are examples and developed in cooperation with scientists, they of other authorities that may be relevant to BSPA can be used to support the conservation efforts management. more effectively.

Stakeholders NGOs Local people Environmental NGOs usually have strong inter- People relying on the marine environment for their ests in the nature conservation issues and have livelihoods, using it for recreation and free time, often already lobbied greatly for them, both at the or simply living near the coast have a great deal political and general public levels. They usually of information that can increase understanding have good national and/or international networks of marine and coastal ecosystems. The costs of of experts, as well as regular associates. NGOs enforcement can be reduced and management also collect and report great amounts of informa- responsibilities can be shared with local people. tion on nature issues and on the legal aspects of Trust between managers and locals results conservation, as well as raising funds for nature in greater commitment to implementation of conservation. They possess scientifi c and man- measures, and future confl icts are more likely agement expertise and sometimes may carry the to be avoided. In addition, public awareness of main responsibility of voluntary management of a conservation issues increases and integration marine area. of conservation efforts with social, economic, and cultural concerns for the nearby territories becomes easier. 34 1.6. Advisory committees - tools for Existing trust/mistrust. The selection between stakeholder participation separate and single groups also depends on the Establishment of committees helps to form existing level of confi dence and trust. These may partnerships, facilitates local participation, and depend on whether earlier initiatives exist and ensures that all interests are represented in the fi nal were successful, or whether none exist, in which proposal, even when not every interested individual case the entire structure must be designed from can play a central part. Committees are usually scratch, or whether previous initiatives existed but appointed by the MPA administration, and their failed and have created mistrust and confl ict. roles should be carefully planned and limited so (EN et al. 2001 a & 2001b). that no need arises to dissolve them. They should also remain in their advisory role and not play an Separate groups active role in the management, although it is vital This structure model is best suited for: to ensure that the advice given by members is Sites in urban locations with high populations valued and needed. Whatever the composition and and greater numbers of potential stakeholders; nature of the committee, it should be supported and Situations where there is a stronger political cul- empowered by adequate legislation (Kelleher 1999, ture for local communities, industry, and other Salm et al. 2000). Note that advisory committees interest groups to act through representatives, can be and most often are separate from manage- that in turn collaborate with statutory authorities; ment groups (EN et al. 2000a). Situations where high levels of trust already exist, for example, through previous successful Examples of reasons to set up committees include: conservation strategies. If not, extra attention Periodic consultation; might be required to ensure wider stakeholder Evaluation of the effectiveness of the plan; involvement. Reviewing progress; Approving work plans; Single group Authorizing budgets or specifi c expenditures This structure is best suited for: (Salm et al. 2000, EN et al, 2001a). Sites in more rural areas with fewer potential stakeholders, but with stronger interests and 1.7. Single or separate advisory/ dependence on the area; management groups? Situations where there is an accepted culture The fi nal decision between a single or several to involve both statutory and community groups separate groups depends on the number and com- in decisions affecting the local resources; position of partners, on the location and geography Situations where past conservation initiatives of the site, and on previous initiatives. have not developed strong levels of trust; Large urban sites. Urban/rural. Differences can be found between, (EN et al. 2001 a & 2001b). for example, highly populated urban sites and sparsely populated rural sites, where the latter 1.8. Practical tips for advisory usually have fewer stakeholder groups but they committees often have stronger interests and tighter bonds to Experience of MPA management in practise has the area compared to the former. resulted in many practical tips concerning advisory committees, the ones summarized here fi rst Small/large site. Size and geography also affect presented by Brody (1998), Kelleher (1999), Salm the stakeholder scheme. The physical nature has et al. (2000), EN et al. (2001b), Jones et al. (2001) an impact on how stakeholders view the site, and & Jones (2002). therefore their willingness to become participants. While small bays often have a well-defi ned identity Composition as a place, as well as associated communities, Represent all stakeholders. Advisory commit- large and open sites may not be recognized as an tees/boards should represent the spectrum of entity and may have many separate stakeholder the stakeholders, including members of the local communities, indicating a need to establish sepa- community. This way they can keep the local com- rate authority and stakeholder groupings. Conse- munity informed of activities and provide useful quently, larger sites may also need more time to information, in addition to the support provided develop awareness, familiarity, and support. by their involvement (Salm et al. 2000). It should be kept in mind that local communities rarely Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 35 are homogeneous units, and do not act as one. Dialogue Even seemingly homogeneous units can include Start small. Concentrate effectively on a few pri- a variety of interests and concerns. Examples ority issues before trying to deal with all the details, exist where a single group has been left out of and do not set targets that cannot be met. the process, causing strong opposition from this group, and leading to “paper parks” that receive Start with listening. Let the stakeholders tell you, no actual protection. Participatory surveys and who and where the resource users are, how they asking participating stakeholders to suggest other use the resources, and what they want to achieve. stakeholders can help. Use transparent processes. Transparent proc- Ensure early participation in the establish- esses and decision-making are important at every ment process. Advisory committees should level, in routine administration as well as policy. be established prior to or during the planning process, as they are less effective when the plan Deal with one issue at a time. Stakeholders may is completed and ready for implementation. Early benefi t from having “their own” issues dealt with involvement helps to reduce confl icts during the in a meeting that does not discuss other issues. later stages and will help local communities to This helps to reach decisions/consensus on one build a sense of ownership. The participation must issue at a time, which considerably speeds up the take place throughout the process (Salm et al. building of trust, while simultaneously isolating the 2000, Jones 2002). (Kelleher 1999). diffi cult issues/topics.

Timetables Challenge orthodoxy. The dialogue between Design a well-structured establishment proc- partners should not be just head-to-head but ess. Clearly defi ned stages of decision-making involving all levels of the participating agencies and with regularly scheduled, accessible meetings groups. It might be easier to start working bilater- make it easier for individuals to become involved. ally, by meeting the representatives one by one in The stakeholders will participate more willingly if private meetings. However, all stakeholders should they know how and when they can give their input. start working as a team as soon as possible. It can take time for a fruitful conversation and basis for Present realistic schedules. Try to fi nd a bal- compromise to be established, but it is the only way ance between meeting deadlines and keeping the to build up trust and keep the conversation open. process moving forward. However, do not push the process on too quickly, which can lead to the Favour participation over consultation. In alienation of some stakeholders. passive participation, stakeholders react to plans already developed rather than creating them Documents from the start. Interested parties should be given Beware of fi nalized documents. Avoid making specifi c, tangible responsibility over planning, drafting documents look too fi nalized so as not empowering them in making decisions and taking to give the stakeholders the impression that the credit for the fi nal rules. issue is closed already. The fi rst meeting agendas and information letters should clearly indicate Ensure equal representation in decision- which subjects are to be discussed, but not what making. When management decisions by a the outcome should be. committee are required, it must be ensured that different subgroups of the community are equally Use maps. Using “sketch maps” has often proved represented (fi shers, farmers, etc.). to be an effective means to organize the participatory discussion. All participants can add items Feedback and propose alternatives on the map: the fl ow of Monitor the effects of decisions on a regular materials, energy and people, and their potential basis. This may reveal mistakes before too much negative impacts, as well as ecologically sensitive time and effort are spent. Verifi cation of conclu- areas may be captured on paper. The purpose is sions reached through participatory appraisals to capture all reasonable ideas and comments; must be assessed, both by feedback to resource neatness is not required. users and by independent observation and measurement. The evaluation of management effectiveness is presented in the relevant chapter. 36 Take an “action-learning” approach. Test to see can be very important. Political and scientifi c whether the proposed actions work before turning expertise can play a bigger role at complex urban them into policies or strategies. sites. Initial information leafl ets and questionnaires can be a good starting point. Dissemination Ensure that the results are visible to the (Salm et al. 2000, EN et al. 2001b, Jones 2002, stakeholders. The initiatives arising and jointly MPA news 2004) accepted decisions must be implemented, and the participants must see that this is actually 1.10. Other tools for stakeholder taking place. If this is not apparent, participation participation and commitment will not last and future initiatives Other stakeholder-oriented tools for participation may also suffer. Documenting achievements and include: successes is particularly important, as they can be one-to-one discussions and phone calls; referred to when a new person becomes involved, meetings, round tables, workshops, and public if the MPA faces criticism, or other crisis. hearings; management forums; Integrating BSPAs with previous steering committees; initiatives interagency agreements; When previous initiatives around the site have fi eld visits. been successful in building trust and confi dence, the time invested in building the relationships can All of these can encourage mutual understanding, be reduced. It is, however, important to: build up trust, develop a knowledge base, lead Research the situation well; to longer-lasting solutions, and better motivate Make sure that no stakeholders are left out; people to become actively involved. However, Explain fully how the management scheme fi ts they also require time and money, and take a lot of alongside existing strategies; organization and planning, both for establishment Show an integration or development of the and maintenance, as well as requiring interper- objectives; sonal skills (European Commission 2004b). Involve previous project offi cers and networks in the development of the management scheme. 1.11. Natura 2000 and “operations advice” Consideration is especially needed when previous For the Natura 2000 network sites, Habitats Regu- initiatives have been voluntary and the current lations require the statutory nature conservation process is statutory. When previous initiatives agencies to provide advice on operations that may have failed, address and assess the underlying cause deterioration or disturbance to interest fea- causes. Try to build up a new network by indicating tures. The purpose is to alert relevant authorities clearly how the initiative differs from those previ- to the management of those activities that need ously and how problems encountered previously particular review in the light of the conservation may attempt to be solved in a satisfactory manner objectives. The procedure can also be recom- (Salm et al. 2000, Jones 2002). mended for BSPAs other than Natura 2000 sites.

1.9. The role of the project offi cers The identifi cation of these activities is based Understanding the structure of the communities, primarily on an understanding of the sensitivity as well as the concerns and feelings of security of of the respective feature, or sub-features, to different groups, is important. Thus, when possible, changes in environmental or ecological condi- project offi cers should have appropriate experience tions that can be caused by human activities. of the local political culture and be aware of exist- The assessment must take account of the effects ing, possibly latent, confl icts among stakeholders of activities outside the site, as well as potential and government authorities. The cohesion of the activities. To avoid any misunderstanding of the local population and relevant authorities, or the potential impacts, the statutory advice on opera- lack thereof, should be identifi ed. In addition to the tions should provide a clear statement on those capacity to set up group meetings and workshops, activities that may cause damage. the project offi cers should be able to meet relevant authorities and stakeholders individually. At many On its own, a long list of activities may cause rural sites, interpersonal skills and local knowledge alarm to relevant authorities and stakeholders, Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 37 especially if it is perceived as presenting the organizations can then consider and advise on prohibition of certain activities. It is therefore how activities within or adjacent to the site might helpful to involve these bodies in the development infl uence these factors. This separates the more of the list, especially in the early stages of infor- scientifi c assessments of sensitivity from the local mation collation, so that relevant authorities and information on the actual pattern of human usage stakeholders can identify for themselves the areas on the site. It also provides advice in a more long- of potential impact. One successful approach for lived form than simply the current assessments of increasing the acceptance of the statutory advice potential activities. (EN et al. 2001a & 2001c). involves the nature conservation agencies of individual countries identifying broad ecological Identifi cation of threatening activities is discussed in or environmental factors to which the features are PART 3, Chapter 3: “Threat analysis” (page 40) and sensitive, for example, physical abrasion, toxic in Attachment 2 “Human activities table” (page 76). contamination or biological disturbance. Other 1.12. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Jones, P.J.S., Burgess, J. & Bhattachary, D. 2001. An Evaluation of http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/stake_holder.pdf evaluation of approaches for promoting relevant authority approaches http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ and stakeholder participation in European Marine sites in the UK. English Nature (UK Marine SACs Project). 98 pp.

European Commission 2004b. LIFE Focus / LIFE-Nature: Examples of http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/life/ communicating with stakeholders and the general public participation in infoproducts/naturecommunicating_lowres_en.pdf – Best practice examples for Natura 2000. Ofﬁ ce for Natura 2000 sites http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/life/home.htm Ofﬁ cial Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg. 72 pp.

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001b. Natura Practical examples http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/cproceed.pdf 2000. UK Marine SACs project: Partnerships in action. from partnerships http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ Proceedings of a conference held in Edinburgh, 15th-16th November 2000.Peterborough, English Nature.

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001a. Includes a chapter http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/good_prac1.pdf Indications of good practise for establishing management on participation and http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ schemes on European Marine sites. Learning from the UK relevant authorities Marine SACs project 1996-2001. Peterborough, English Nature.

Jones, P.J.S. 2002. MPA Perspective: advice for promot- Promoting http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA27.htm ing participation of authorities and stakeholders in MPA participation http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA27.pdf planning. MPA news 3(7):5.

Brody, S.D. 1998. An Evaluation of the Establishment The role of http://www.gulfofmaine.org/library/mpas/ Processes for Marine Protected Areas in the gulf of community process_eval_0798.PDF Maine: Understanding the Role of Community Involvement involvement http://www.gulfofmaine.org/ and Public Participation, Gulf of Maine Protected Areas Project. Report #3, July 1998. Gulf of Maine Marine Protected Areas Project. 40 pp.

National Marine Sanctuary Program 2003. Sanctuary Advisory council http://sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/library/national/ Advisory Council Implementation Handbook. Second handbook sachandbook_new.pdf Edition. 67 pp. http://sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/

Kessler, B.L. 2004. Stakeholder Participation: A Synthesis Literature review http://www.mpa.gov/virtual_library/Publications/ of Current Literature. Prepared by the National Marine Stakeholder_Synthesis.pdf Protected Areas Center in cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coastal Services Center. 6 pp.

Pattison, D., dosReis, D. & Smillie. H. 2004: An Inven- GIS-based decision- http://www.mpa.gov/virtual_library/Publications/ tory of GIS-Based Decision-Support Tools for MPAs. support tools FINAL_Decision%20Sup%20Rpt.pdf Prepared by the National Marine Protected Areas Center http://www.mpa.gov/ in cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Coastal Services Center. 20 pp. 38 2. Meeting information needs relevant for management and how and when they should be addressed. Available information concerning the state of the environment and the fl ora and fauna and The pursuit of better information and understand- their interactions with outside areas has to be ing should continue in order to strengthen the compiled. Additional information should be basis for management decision, provide better gathered through literature studies including understanding of the underlying ecological and ecological changes (in the past), or base-line geographical processes, and detect changes studies must be undertaken to gather new in them. It should be remembered that special information. research is not always needed to answer management questions; answers can be found by tapping BSPA management guidelines (Helsinki into experience from elsewhere (Salm et al. 2000). Commission 2003b) Table 4. Key The issue of scientifi c research is discussed in information needs 2.1. A systematic approach to greater detail in PART 3, Chapter 8: “Research for management collecting and handling information and monitoring in BSPAs” (page 56). planning (Salm et There are four important elements in successfully al. 2000, EN et al. meeting information needs for developing manage- Key information needs 2001a) ment schemes on marine sites. They are to: Stage Required information I Identify the purpose of the information in the context of long-term needs; Setting Sub-features and attributes that describe the condition II Collate and review existing information and conservation of the features on the site including extent of habitats, knowledge; objectives size of populations, supporting information on physical III Identify shortfalls and fi ll the gaps; processes, “typical species” for habitats, and supporting habitats for species. Judgements of what constitutes IV Feed back the results of data collation and gap favourable conditions. These preferences on conditions fi lling. may depend heavily on understanding where the current condition lies in relation to the variability of the features 2.2. Collating existing information over time. Additional info can be found in PART 2, Chap- Collating and reviewing large amounts of existing ter 5: “Developing conservation goals…” (page 28). information of variable quality on a wide range of Setting Environmental conditions and operations to which the topics requires skill and judgement. Stakeholders, operations features are sensitive. Type and extent of activities both scientists and local people, can contribute to advice occurring or likely to occur on sites, and where they the gathering and evaluation of the existing biophys- occur. Location of features and sub-features. Additional information can be found in PART 3, Chapter 3: “Threat ical, cultural, and political information relevant to analysis” (page 40). the planning process. In many cases, they already possess this information. Information collection pro- Establishing In the planning phase, research and monitoring are management needed to support or challenge perceptions of resource vides excellent opportunities for collaboration that measures depletion or degradation; in other words, to defi ne why can strengthen local partnerships and maximize the there are problems and how they should be addressed. use of resources. Successful collaborations applied This means defi ning, e.g., location and sensitivity of on demonstration sites have included: features and sub-features and location, intensity and hiring local fi shing vessels for survey work; timing of activities. In addition, current management and monitoring regimes operating on the site have joint research programmes with university to be clarifi ed, including existing management plans. research departments; Additional information can be found in PART 3, Chapter linking with PhD research work; 4: “Choosing management measures” (page 44). loaning of sea fi sheries survey vessels for Establishing Target values for the attributes that equate to favour- biological mapping. monitoring able conditions for each of the features. Cost-effective (EN et al. 2001a). requirements techniques for detecting changes in the attributes. Additional information can be found in PART 3, Chapter 2.3. Identifying and fi lling gaps 8: “Research and Monitoring in BSPAs” (page 56). Scientifi c knowledge is never complete. However, gaps must not be seen as obstacles for planning 2.4. Feedback and implementing management measures. In the Relevant authority staff and stakeholders generally long run, the chosen management scheme and the have a keen interest in understanding their site. evaluation of its effectiveness on a regular basis Successful dissemination of the results of data will help to decide which gaps in information are collection and collation exercises can increase Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 39 this interest and the sense of ownership of the Involve stakeholders and relevant authorities site. It can also increase the understanding and in determining the gaps in information and the acceptance of the need for management action. ways to fi ll them, as well as in the development In addition, long-term objectives of scientifi c of the statutory advice on conservation objec- research and monitoring can then be designed tives and operations advice; more effectively. Consider how information collection exercises might build local support and a sense of own- Visual outputs are particularly effective. Video ership of the site and its feature; footage from underwater surveys of features on Draw on local knowledge through one-to-one sites has been shown to relevant authorities, both meetings, workshops or topic groups; to increase interest in the site, and to illustrate Investigate university research interests in the the damaging impact of specifi c activities. Maps site and seek collaborative research projects; capturing data collected in biological surveys Consider providing early draft advice on con- are very useful tools for identifying activities and servation objectives and operations; potential interactions. Overlaying feature and Separate the scientifi c components of advice activity information can assist in determining man- on operations from the local understanding of agement requirements. The compilation of data the site to engage stakeholders especially in into databases, either paper or electronic, and the latter; into reviews that are more extensive can help to Ensure the availability of the information by promote partnerships within groups by providing a dissemination of the outputs from collation of common and valued resource (EN et al. 2001a). information. Common databases and visual products are especially valued; 2.5. Lessons learnt about meeting Provide digestible versions of complex or information needs technical information. Plan the need for information with regard (EN et al. 2001a). to the potential impacts and management requirements; 2.6. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/ or to publisher

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001a. Indica- Management in practice http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/ tions of good practise for establishing management schemes good_prac1.pdf on European Marine sites. Learning from the UK Marine http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ SACs project 1996-2001. Peterborough, English Nature.

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001b. Natura Includes a chapter on http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/ 2000. UK Marine SACs project: Partnerships in action. information needs cproceed.pdf Proceedings of a conference held in Edinburgh, 15th-16th http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ November 2000.Peterborough, English Nature.

Gittings, S., Benson, K., Souik, P. & Tartt, M. 2002: Sanctu- Information needs evalu- http://sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/library/ ary Science: Evaluation of Status and Information needs. ation case study National/science_eval.pdf National Marine Sanctuaries Program, USA. 86 pp. http://sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/welcome.html

3. Threat analysis

“Confl icts between conservation interests and anthropogenic exploitation or side effects from such and other human activities detrimental to nature must be avoided in a BSPA. Actual and potential ecological stress factors, confl icts and threats have to be scrutinized in order to assess their effects on the environment and on the fl ora and fauna.”

BSPA management guidelines (Helsinki Commission 2003b).

40 3.1. Why threat analysis? Sensitivity is the intolerance of a habitat, com- The marine and coastal biodiversity in the Baltic munity, or species (i.e., the components of a Sea is threatened by many human activities to biotope) to damage, or death, from an external which it is exceptionally vulnerable, due to many factor. Sensitivity must be estimated (assessed) unique oceanographic, climatic, and biological in response to a change in a specifi c environ- features. Therefore, when designing the man- mental factor and to the magnitude, duration, agement and monitoring of BSPAs, the current or frequency of that change. It does not change and potential future threats should be carefully much from site to site. examined and listed. A satisfactory description of the relationships between pressure factors and Recoverability is the ability of a habitat, com- attributes is a powerful management tool. This munity or species to return to a viable state, enables the managers to set thresholds for inter- which is at least close to that which existed est features and thereby assess their condition, to before the development, activity or event. choose management measures, and to evaluate Recovery may be because of re growth (in the the effectiveness of these measures. case of damaged species capable of regrow- ing from remaining tissue), re-colonization by 3.2. Step one: identifying human migration or larval settlement from undamaged activities populations or may require re-establishment First, the presence, scale, and intensity of human of viability where, for instance, reproductive activities in and around the site that potentially organs or propagules have been damaged by have effects upon the site and its features need to the event. Recovery can be partial or complete. be identifi ed. The Attachment 2 “Human activities table” (page 76) is a checklist for potential threat (Tyler-Walters and Jackson 1999, Hiscock & factors and their impacts on the coastal and marine Tyler-Walters 2003) environment. Such tables could be produced locally in order to identify the relevant issues and the ways these issues may affect the site. Maps 3.4. Procedure for species illustrating human activities in and around the site I Collate and review key information for the spe- and areas of confl icts can be used to evaluate cies in question; relevant uses and their impact on habitats and II Assess the quality of the available data; species on a fi ner scale and to depict the spatial III Identify the likely intolerance of the species to use of the site. external factors; IV Assess the likely recoverability of the species; 3.3. Step two: assessing sensitivity V Assess the sensitivity of the species. (Tyler- When the above information is not readily avail- Walters & Jackson 1999) able, the sensitivity of the features for conservation in relation to the threatening human activities 3.5. Procedure for habitats has to be assessed based on the best available The sensitivity of a habitat/biotope is dependent information. This is done by combining the likely upon the sensitivity of the species within that com- impairment of the recoverability of the features munity. As it is impossible to consider the sensitiv- into a meaningful assessment of the sensitivity. ity of each species, it is useful instead to choose Methods for carrying out such an assessment are representatives that may have considerable effects introduced only briefl y here. Details can be found on the ecology of the biotope. These key/charac- in “Useful references” and the schematic presenta- teristic/important functional or structural species tion in Attachments 3: “Sensitivity assessment serve as indicators in the biotope sensitivity rationales for habitats and species” (pages 78 and assessment. However, the key species approach 79). Managers could seek to establish cooperation to management in general must be carefully with scientists to make such assessments and considered: key species may be context-depend- set standard benchmarks. The results could be ent, and do not necessarily indicate the state of entered in a “general sensitivity-to-impact” matrix, the ecosystem’s biodiversity (Simberloff 1997). which could be distributed for wider use across The issue is especially diffi cult in the species-poor BSPAs, such as the one shown in Attachment 4: Baltic Sea, where, at least in some cases, every “An example of a general “sensitivity-to-impact” species could be claimed to be a key species. matrix” (page 80). Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 41 According to Hiscock & Tyler-Walters (2003), the 3.6. Step three: assessing vulnerability steps to be taken are: I Collate and review key information for the Vulnerability expresses the likelihood that a habitat, community or individual (or individual colony) of a biotope in question; species will be exposed to an external factor to which II Select species that indicate biotope sensitivity; it is sensitive. The degree of ‘vulnerability’ therefore III Review key information for these species; indicates the likely severity of damage should the IV Indicate the quality of available data; factor occur at a defi ned intensity and/or frequency. V Assess the intolerance, recoverability, and (Hiscock & Tyler-Walters 2003) sensitivity of species (as above); VI Assess the overall intolerance and recover- This rationale represents a practical approach to the ability of the biotope. derivation of overall biotope sensitivity. However, the actual impact of human activities on the habitats and species to be protected needs to be assessed What are the key/structural species? locally, as they are dependent on the receiving Key structural species environment. When the sensitivity and recover- The species provides a distinct habitat that sup- ability information is evaluated in combination with ports an associated community. Loss/degrada- the knowledge of the current state of the existing tion of the population of this species would result population, the vulnerability and/or recoverability in lose/degradation of the biotope. Examples of that particular population can be estimated. include: Fucus vesiculosus, Zostera marina. For example, an activity that markedly increased siltation may have little effect in a turbid estuary, Key functional species whereas it would probably have signifi cant effects in The species maintains community structure and a sheltered embayment. A systematic approach to function through interactions with other mem- this could, for example, involve the development of bers of that community (predation, grazing, and a site-specifi c “Vulnerability to impact matrix” (His- competition). Loss/degradation of the population cock & Tyler-Walters 2003). An example is shown of this species would result in rapid, cascading in Attachment 5: “An example of a site-specifi c changes in the ecosystem. Examples include “vulnerability-to-impact” matrix (page 81). common predators and grazers.

Important characterizing species 3.7. Steps four and fi ve: setting targets The species is/are characteristic of the biotope and choosing management measures and is/are important for the classifi cation of the It is not the purpose of this document to develop biotope. Loss/degradation of populations of this new indicators or threshold values. The use of species would result in loss of that biotope. a standard benchmark level of change in an environmental factor ensures that the sensitivity of Important structural species different species or communities is assessed with The species positively interacts with the key of respect to the same level of change or perturba- characterizing species and is important for their tion. In addition, standard benchmarks allow the viability. For example: parasites, epiphytes, or relative sensitivity of different species and com- disease organisms, if key/characterizing species. munities to be compared (Hiscock & Tyler-Walters 2003). The development of such benchmarks Important functional species for Baltic Sea purposes is one of the future chal- The species is the dominant source of organic lenges. However, indicators and regular monitoring matter or primary production within the are not always necessarily needed to understand ecosystem. Loss/degradation of the species that pollution damages the protected features. could result in changes in the community func- Examples of setting targets for “favourable con- tion and structure. servation status” were given in PART 2, Chapter 5: “Developing conservation goals…” (page 28). Important other species The issue of choosing management measures is Additional species that do not fall under the introduced in PART 3, Chapter 4 (page 44). Finally, above criteria but present knowledge of the ecol- the impact of human activities on the conservation ogy of the community suggests that they may features could be compared with management affect the sensitivity of the community. measures and solutions, as well as relevant (Hiscock & Tyler-Walters 2003) partners. An example is given in Attachment 6: “An example of a table combining impacts of human 42 activities on conservation features with manage- the effects must be measured directly on the ment issues” (page 82). organisms. Knowledge of the interaction between pressure factors and the responses of the chosen 3.8. Separating the impacts of human indicators to these factors is thus fundamental. activities from natural variation This knowledge can be established through using Describing the existing environmental conditions both historic and recent data in combination with and their variations is essential for understand- empirical or dynamical modelling, where possible ing how they control the biological community (Dahl et al. 2004). The importance of specifi c and processes on the site. Given the mosaic of threats to the objectives of the protection should activities occurring within sites, it is very diffi cult also be considered individually, and therefore the to identify any one activity as the cause of an conservation objectives and the desired “favour- adverse effect and to separate its impacts from able conservation status” should be clear before natural changes. On the other hand, although there is any sense in making the threat analysis. environmental conditions modify the impacts on At the same time, research to gather suffi cient the environment, threat analysis cannot be based evidence to identify the causes of detrimental solely on them. Therefore, the status assessment change and to justify substantial management of the condition of the site must also be based action should be encouraged (EN et al. 2001a). on logical segregation of site-specifi c biological indicators and/or threshold values. In other words, 3.9. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Dahl, K., Larsen, M.M., Andersen, J.H., Rasmussen, M.B., Assessment of con- http://www2.dmu.dk/1_viden/2_Publikationer/3_ Petersen, J.K., Josefson, A.B., Lundsteen, S., Dahllöf, I., Chris- servation status fagrapporter/rapporter/FR488_p1-61.PDF tiansen, T., Krause-Jensen, D., Hansen, J.L.S., Ærtebjerg, G., http://www.dmu.dk/ Henriksen, P., Helmig, S.A. & Reker, J. 2004. Tools to assess the conservation status of marine Annex 1 habitats in Special Areas of Conservation. Phase 1: Identiﬁ cation of potential indicators and available data. National Environmental Research Institute, Denmark. 96 pp. – NERI Technical Report No. 488.

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001b. Natura Includes a chapter http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/cproceed.pdf 2000. UK Marine SACs project: Partnerships in action. on the role of sci- http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk Proceedings of a conference held in Edinburgh, 15th-16th ence in evaluating November 2000.Peterborough, English Nature. impacts

Garthe, S. & Hüppop, O. 2004. Scaling possible adverse effects Effects of wind http://www.minos-info.de/material/pub/WSI_ of marine wind farms on seabirds: developing and applying a farms on birds summary.pdf (abstract) vulnerability index. Journal of Applied Ecology 41: 724-734.

Hiscock, K. & Tyler-Walters, H. 2003. Assessing the sensitivity Sensitivity of seabed http://www.marlin.ac.uk/PDF/Biotope_sens_ of seabed biotopes to human activities and natural events. biotopes brochure.pdf MarLIN brochure. Edinburgh, Scottish Natural Heritage. 16 pp. http://www.marlin.ac.uk/

Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) 2006a. Sensitivity Sensitivity assess- http://www.marlin.ac.uk/sah/baskitemplate. assessment rationale - a summary ment php?sens_ass_rat http://www.marlin.ac.uk/

European Commission 2002. Assessment of plans and Assessment of http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/ projects signifi cantly affecting Natura 2000 sites. Luxembourg: projects affecting nature_conservation/eu_nature_legislation/spe- Offi ce for Offi cial Publications of the European Communities. Natura 2000 sites cifi c_articles/art6/pdf/natura_2000_assess_en.pdf 76 pp. http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/

Tyler-Walters, H. & Jackson, A. 1999. Assessing seabed spe- Assessing seabed http://www.marlin.ac.uk/PDF/MarLINReport4.PDF cies and ecosystems sensitivities. Rationale and user guide. and ecosystems http://www.marlin.ac.uk/ Report to English Nature, Scottish Natural Heritage and the sensitivities Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions from the Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN). Plymouth, Marine Biological Association of the UK. (MarLIN Report No.4.). January 2000 edition.

Simberloff, D. 1997: Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: Single-species is single-species management passé in the landscape era? versus ecosystem Biological Conservation 83(3): 247-257. management Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 43 4. Choosing management 4.2. The role of science measures Lack of understanding of the distribution and intensity of activities is a common constraint “The need for management arises from confl icts on developing effective additional manage- of interest and from specifi c nature conservation ment measures. In some cases, there may be goals. In addition, the aim to keep an area as it is simple information gaps, which can be fi lled as and to focus on an undisturbed natural succes- part of the process of preparing the scheme, if sion needs to be described within a management planned into work programmes by the relevant plan. “ authorities. In other cases, the gaps may be more complex, concerning cause/effect relation- General aims of BSPA management. Baltic ships, where developing the necessary level of Sea Protected Areas have been chosen as understanding will involve considerable time and examples of typical biotopes of ecological expense. When scientifi c information on del- signifi cance occurring in each of the Baltic Sea eterious effects is available it should be clearly sub-regions. The general aim of management of provided, by drawing on evidence and experts these areas is to ensure the conservation and/or from elsewhere, if necessary. restoration of a representative set of biotopes and habitats in order to preserve biodiversity In circumstances of uncertainty, development and sustainable use of natural resources where of a measure based upon the current best appropriate. available knowledge and in accordance with the precautionary principle, implementation of Specifi c aims of BSPA management. “To the measure, and review of its effectiveness reach the general aim in an area, it is necessary through a monitoring programme is a valid to focus on a number of specifi c aims, depending approach. Where further studies or monitoring on the conservation needs of the area. Zoning are proposed, it is benefi cial that their scope could be a useful tool to reach the specifi c aims. and approach is discussed with all the relevant Elements in need of specifi c protection within a authorities, rather than having authorities acting BSPA must be described comprehensively.” in isolation. In this way, any new understanding that emerges from the studies or monitoring is BSPA Management Guidelines (Helsinki more likely to be accepted and applied by both Commission 2003b). users and regulating bodies. The key information needs are indicated in PART 3, Chapter 2: 4.1. The procedure “Meeting information needs” (page 39). The activities to be regulated and regulation options (EN at el. 2001a) according to HELCOM BSPA management guidelines can be found in Attachment 7 (page 83).

Procedure Determine the conservation objectives for choosing ⇓ management measures; Review by relevant authorities of activities within their jurisdiction modiﬁ ed after ⇓ (EN et al. 2001). Refer to the conservation objectives of the Review of the adequacy of existing man- ⇔ site and the advice of nature conservation agement measures agencies, if required ⇓

Determine whether existing management need stop or may continue ⇓ Consult, as required, with nature conserva- Devise new measures, providing speciﬁ c ⇔ tion agency, other relevant/competent actions to be achieved, including timescales authorities, and stakeholders ⇓

Insert new measures in the management scheme 44 4.3. Statutory management indirect measures, excluding the public awareness Potential legal and administrative constraints on campaigning, are beyond the scope of an average the management of the site need to be clarifi ed manager and require cooperation with relevant and appropriate action must be taken to deal with authorities as well as the integration of national them. For example, as the Helsinki Commission and international policy instruments. does not have the competence to implement management measures for fi sheries or shipping 4.6 Fisheries management activities, the attention of the respective authori- The European Union has had a new common fi sh- ties needs to be drawn to these issues if action is eries policy since 1 January 2003. The aim of the considered necessary in a specifi c site. Building new Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) is to ensure partnerships with relevant authorities is discussed exploitation of living aquatic resources that pro- in PART 3, Chapter 1: “Establishing the manage- vides sustainable economic, environmental, and ment framework (page 32). social conditions. For this purpose, the precautionary principle has been introduced; the progressive 4.4. Voluntary and statutory implementation of an ecosystem approach to management fi sheries management is also anticipated, as well Where voluntary measures have been applied, as a need for the adoption of coherent measures they have involved relatively small changes to limiting the environmental impact of fi shing. In the the existing pattern of an activity. Such measures context of this legal framework, several measures are only as effective as the willingness of users have been taken to improve the conservation to support them, which in turn depends on the status of habitats and species in the marine envi- benefi ts expected or, conversely, the likely cost. ronment over the past few years, such as: Whilst their role is therefore limited, particularly Reduction of by-catch impacts on cetaceans when it comes to dealing with more signifi cant following the recent ban of driftnets and adop- management issues, voluntary measures are tion of regulations related to the mandatory able to secure initial support in situations where use of acoustic deterrent devices; a statutory approach would cause signifi cant Restriction of bottom-trawling activities to pro- resentment with little corresponding gain (EN et tect valuable habitats. The current CFP allows al. 2001a). Building partnerships with stakehold- for better integration of environmental protec- ers, and different approaches to this work, are tion requirements. Thus, it directly contributes discussed in PART 3, Chapter 1: “Establishing the to achieving the objectives of both the Birds management framework (page 32). and Habitats Directives. Fisheries management measures for the protec- 4.5. Managing biotopes, habitats, and tion of the marine environment may already be species taken under CFP provisions as indicated above. The management and/or restoration of biotopes Furthermore, the CFP provides for a system of can be done both directly and indirectly. Conser- protection for marine habitats and species from vation measures aimed directly at the species and harmful effects of fi shing activities, even in cases habitats, or activities occurring at the site, can be where the Natura 2000 provisions do not apply. implemented by the site manager. Many of the (Marine Expert Group 2005.)

Table 5. Direct management Indirect management Direct and Regulating access in time and space: zoning, Public awareness campaigns indirect closed areas/seasons Managing and restoring water quality management Regulating hunting, fi shing, and recreational activi- Regulating nutrient and other pollution emis- measures. ties: licensing, catch limits, size limits, temporary sions, e.g., end-of pipe technologies, regula- or permanent closures, reduction of by-catch tion of dumping and wastewater discharge Continuing and/or traditional management Inhibiting the invasion of alien species practices Improving the cleanliness and safety of mari- Active restoration efforts (e.g., reconstruction of time traffi c spawning grounds and passage routes), reintro- Through policy instruments, e.g., by increas- ductions ing coordination and cooperation of national Special species- or habitat-targeted programmes, and/or international programmes protection of critical habitats Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 45 4.7. Managing water quality ballast water management worldwide were given In addition to choosing management measures for concerning where, when, and how ballast waters human activities directly threatening the species can be released. At present, the convention awaits and habitats, efforts to maintain and restore water ratifi cation by 30 nations before taking effect. quality are an important part of the long-term MPA management, as well as the protection of the Baltic Therefore, an ideally based MPA would be situated Sea marine environment in general. Efforts to far away from vessel traffi c. However, as this is coordinate and integrate policies to improve water practically impossible in many parts of the heav- quality by preventing pollution and by stopping ily traffi cked Baltic Sea, MPA managers should eutrophication are beyond the scope of an average consider options for controlling invasions on a local manager, but attempts should be encouraged and level. Divers, fi shers, boats, and even researchers could be initiated by MPA management authorities. may act as secondary vectors for species that have Water quality issues can also be promoted by already invaded the system. For example: MPA managers by including them in BSPA-related The research vessels entering the MPA could be public awareness and education campaigns subjected to voluntary hull inspections by divers; (Anthoni 2004). Diving gear belonging to researchers could be subjected to thorough soaking and/or chlorine Much of the work of HELCOM in the past decades freshwater immersion; has focused on efforts to reduce pollution inputs Bait materials of recreational fi shers could be to the Baltic Sea. One example of such activities is subjected to inspection, and/or public aware- the Baltic Sea Joint Comprehensive Environmental ness should be increased to inform fi shers Action Programme (JCP), which has identifi ed 132 about the careful selection of bait materials. pollution Hot Spots areas around the Baltic Sea. Since 1992, 54 of these have been cleaned up and MPAs are often intensively monitored, and may the aim is to complete the programme by 2012 at therefore play an invaluable role in the early detec- the latest. tion of regional invasions. Though not commonly done, monitoring programmes should consider 4.8. Planning for future threats: including the detection of alien species as this may alien species and climate change be key to any attempts to their management. In addition, as local communities can help in address- Alien species: A transboundary threat ing the issue of alien species, public awareness In the Baltic, alien species can also be a signifi cant campaigns should provide information on this threat to biodiversity, and thus to the integrity theme as well. This is another example of why local of protected areas as well. Alien species are people should be involved in the MPA planning and another example of a threat that transcends MPA management processes from the beginning. (MPA boundaries, as even when not deposited directly news 2004a). into an MPA, species can still crawl, swim or fl oat into the MPA. The matter is complicated further by Managing climate change the potential positive contributions of alien species Whether or not as a result of greenhouse gas emis- to the biodiversity and function of the ecosystem. sions, the potential of climate warming presents Their management is also a diffi cult, if not impos- long-term challenges for MPA management. Habi- sible, task once they have invaded the ecosystem. tats may swiftly alter, and the distribution patterns Therefore, the most important, and perhaps the of species and species compositions may change. only, strategy for regulation is to focus on vectors In the worst-case scenario, some may even be that transport and release alien species. (MPA lost forever. The Baltic Sea is geographically quite news 2004a) small and the extent to which species can move northwards is limited. The levels of primary produc- Managing the vectors of alien species tion may change, as may water circulation patterns. One of the primary paths is on the hulls or in the Warmer winters and shorter periods of ice cover ballast water tanks of ships. A single tank may con- can result in problematic situations for some spe- tain hundreds of species and millions of individuals. cies, for example, seals. In addition, some coastal The International Maritime Organization (IMO) has habitats and human settlements are at risk if the adopted the International Convention for the Control sea level rises. The joint effects of potential warm- and Management of Ship Ballast Water and Sedi- ing and increased UV radiation may be fatal for ments. In this convention, standards for improved some species. 46 The warming itself, and the consequent rise in 4.9. Adaptive management surface water temperatures, are not manageable Decision-making for management relies on the in the scope of protected areas. The mechanisms assumption that the effects of management by which the changes will occur are complex actions are predictable. It should preferably be and not entirely predictable on the basis of cur- supported by scenario studies with quantitative rent knowledge. How can managers prepare predictions. This relies on how quantifi able the for threats caused by potential climate change? effects of management actions are, and hence MPAs may be places of refuge for species under on the availability of proper data and a good threat in a changing environment. Combined with understanding of the major processes controlling efforts to maintain good water quality, MPAs may the ecosystem components affected by manage- support the maintenance of primary production ment action. However, scientifi c knowledge is and other vital functions of Baltic ecosystems. always incomplete, and the extent to which it is (MPA news 2005) incomplete will vary among regions and for different ecosystem components. Therefore, managers Practical tips on climate change for will rarely be in a position to use formal rule-based managers management frameworks. This is also true in the In practice, attention should be paid to the loca- Baltic Sea region (European Commission 2004a). tion and zoning of individual sites, as well as to the integrity of MPA networks. Embedding large Why adaptive management? enough areas in individual sites enables effective According to the principles of the Ecosystem zoning and the inclusion of appropriate buffer Approach, the natural variability in marine zones, which are highly recommended for BSPAs ecosystems should be taken into account, and in general. If the zoning system is thoughtfully consequently management should recognize that constructed, with the possibility of future habitat ecosystems are dynamic. This implies that man- changes kept in mind, only the management agement frameworks will not be static, but continu- regimes for individual zones, and not their ally reassessed and updated as circumstances boundaries, need be altered in the event of either change. The alternative to rigid and infl exible short- or long-term warming events. Again, the management frameworks is adaptive management. adaptation of the management is the key. Practical tips for adaptive Public awareness campaigns should address the management threats of a warming climate, and stakeholders Adaptive management requires less stringent involved in the design and management process assumptions about scientifi c understanding of should also be aware. Joint national and regional ecosystem processes but requires an ability efforts to publicize the effects of warming on to predict the trend and general magnitude of marine biota are important in order to pressurize the effects of management actions. Managers governments into considering the problem and should be guided towards the achievement of the thus advocate internationally for greenhouse gas Operational Objectives, and hence the Ecological reduction. Objectives and Strategic Goals, through a series of consecutive adjustments of the management Minimizing all other stress factors that can be measure in response to system reactions. Eco- managed in the scope of MPA management is an logical Quality Objectives are currently also being option, and will give the ecosystem a better buffer developed in HELCOM. capacity against the threats that cannot be managed. This also includes promoting sound manage- Adaptive management is a form of “learning ment and protection of the surrounding areas. by doing”, with structured feedback and decision-making (Walters 1997). This approach Monitoring programmes should be designed has already been recommended in the context in such a way that changes caused by warm- of stakeholder participation. In this approach, ing events can be spotted early on and the ecological indicators are used to support the management regimes and zoning plans changed conservation objectives. This requires that moni- accordingly, where possible. Good networks with toring and assessment are of suffi cient accuracy, scientists are essential to ensure their mobilization precision, and frequency to ensure that the effects in the event of climate changes. of management measures can be evaluated in (MPA news 2005) a timely manner, and adjusted as necessary. Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 47 Hence, adaptive management is closely linked structure and function of whole ecosystems may to Management Effectiveness Evaluation (MEE), be bypassed, if the focus is on “ecosystem health” which is introduced in PART 4, Chapter 1: instead of the individual species (Simberloff 1997). “Evaluating management effectiveness by applying quantitative indicators” (page 63). The second problem is that if management measures are continuously modifi ed in the light of new In order to make adaptive management effi cient, observations, no clear stopping point exists where the indicators should provide rapid and reliable a particular hypothesis may be rejected and the feedback on activities and management measures. chosen management measures seen as optimal Limit or Target Points will often have to be set with (Walters 1997). limited knowledge and re-evaluated and revised regularly as learning-by-doing provides more and Third, there is little evidence that any single better information. In the longer term, even the indicator, whether representing “vital functions/ Ecological Objectives and operational objectives processes” such as primary production or a key may need to be refi ned to refl ect new knowledge of species, truly indicates “ecosystem health” or the relationships and impacts. state of the environment in general. Ecosystem processes can continue even after the component Challenges of adaptive management species normally responsible for them are lost. In There are some pitfalls in the adaptive manage- addition, the concepts of ecosystem management, ment concept. First, it is unclear if the changing ecosystem approach, adaptive management, and procedures and goals really result in improved ecosystem health are defi ned and understood in mechanistic understanding of the system, as many different ways (Simberloff 1997). Therefore, the prerequisites for a true experimental design in the spirit of the Habitats and Birds Directives (repetition, controls, and adequate time frames) and the aims of the HELCOM BSPA network, the are generally lacking. This approach can thus lead management measures, their adaptation, and to a situation where it is impossible to use “normal” respective indicators should be chosen in a way scientifi c means to study the underlying mecha- that the habitats and species to be protected truly nisms of the ecosystem. In addition, the types of benefi t from these actions. experiments and observations on individual species that have often provided great insight on the 4.10. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Anthoni, F. 2004. Scientists Should Focus More on Threat of Pollution http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA49.htm Pollution. MPA news 5(7):4. http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA49.pdf

Cole, S., Codling, I.D., Parr, W. & Zabel, T. 1999. Guidelines Managing water http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/water_quality.pdf for managing water quality impacts within UK European quality http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ marine sites. UK Marine SACs program. 448 pp.

MPA news 2002. Managing water quality in MPAs: How practi- Managing water http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA27.htm tioners are handling the challenges. MPA news 3(7):1-4. quality http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA27.pdf

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001b. Natura Includes a http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/cproceed.pdf 2000. UK Marine SACs project: Partnerships in action. chapter on http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ Proceedings of a conference held in Edinburgh, 15th-16th managing November 2000.Peterborough, English Nature. human activities

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001a. Indications Includes a http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/good_prac1.pdf of good practise for establishing management schemes on chapter on http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ European Marine sites. Learning from the UK Marine SACs choosing project 1996-2001. Peterborough, English Nature. management measures

MPA news 2004a.: Invasive Species: Their Threats to MPAs, Invasive http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA59.htm and How Practitioners Are Responding.6(6):1-4. species http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA59.pdf management

MPA news 2005. Climate Change and Ocean Warming: Climate http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA61.htm Preparing MPAs for It. MPA news 6(8):1-3. Change and http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA61.pdf MPAs 48 Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Ritterhoff, J., Gubbay, S., & Zucco, C. (eds.) 2004. Marine Pro- MPAs and www.bfn.de (publisher) tected Areas and Fisheries. Proceedings of the International ﬁ sheries Expert workshop held at the International Academy for Nature Conservation, Isle of Vilm, Germany 28 June - 2 July, 2004. German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Bonn, Germany. 177 pp. – Bfn-Skripten 122.

Simberloff, D. 1997. Flagships, umbrellas, and keystones: Single-species is single-species management passé in the landscape era? management Biological Conservation 83(3): 247-257.

5. Zoning characteristics, and the resource units will be site- specifi c, for example: 5.1. Zoning as a tool for multiple-use Natural: beaches, islands, deep-water MPAs trenches, turtle or seal rookeries, etc.; Taking into consideration all the interests and Development areas: Areas that either have needs of local residents, tourism and community been developed or where development is development, as well as conservation values proposed; and needs, is the true challenge of MPA design. Areas of impact: Areas showing marked In addition to sustainably managing all activities impact of human activity (Salm et al. 2000) within the MPA, activities in the bordering areas can also cause damage. Several controlled and Core zones/sanctuaries/preservation sustainable uses within the MPA may be permit- zones ted using zoning, and this is perhaps the most These are the areas of high conservation value concrete example of applying ICZM in practice. vulnerable to disturbances; therefore, they should This way, particular uses can be confi ned to spe- be managed for a high level of protection, allowing cifi c zones within the MPA where they are appro- no disturbing uses. The sizes of these zones are priate or where the uses do not confl ict with other crucially important. Depending on the primary activities. Safeguarding of ecological elements conservation objectives, such as species, habitats can be achieved by keeping people out of the or productivity protection, the core zones must: most sensitive, ecologically valuable or recovering Include an area of the protected habitat large areas. Zoning is also a cost-effective means of enough to harbour as many species as pos- managing, as staff and maintenance requirements sible; can be minimized (Salm et al. 2000). Be large enough to sustain a breeding population of the key species and their support 5.2. Zoning methodology systems; Mapping any watersheds, rivers, streams, Be large enough to contain as great a diversity lagoons, and estuaries that infl uence the MPA is of habitats as possible helpful. When they open directly to the protected (Salm et al. 2000) area, they should be included in the buffer zone or zone of infl uence management. Potential Management policies for resource upcurrent sources of stress should be identifi ed units and controlled where possible, such as sewage The resource units defi ned above may provide a outfalls, polluted and silt-laden rivers, ports, basis for zoning. Zoning must be easy to under- degraded shipping lanes, oil and gas explora- stand by both the manager and the managed, and tion/production sites, and ocean dumping areas. must be consistent with avoiding unnecessary Some potential zoning categories presented by restriction of human activities. The questions to be Salm et al. (2000): answered are: Why has a particular area been given a zone Step one: “resource units” classifi cation? It might be useful to defi ne “resource units” as Which activities are permitted or prohibited a basis for zoning. Each MPA will have unique within each zone? Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 49 Activities within individual zones are planned to transported over great distances. Therefore, an meet the conservation objectives of the sites, external buffer zone requires co-operation with defi ned in the management plan or other strategy authorities outside the MPA, perhaps as part of a document. Certain zones may require management “zone of infl uence” (Salm et al. 2000). that is more intensive, while others very little. Exam- ples of different type of zones are "core zones/sanc- Other zones tuaries", "use zones", and "buffer zones". These can A “scientifi c research zone” is an option for a sepa- be named and divided in different ways; the most rate zone set aside for scientifi c research alone, important thing is to be clear about the zoning provi- and where use or entry for any other purpose is sions, whatever the system used. prohibited. Shipping, defence, fi sheries experi- ment, seasonal closure, estuarine conservation, The last-mentioned approach is simple in the rare traditional use, island zones, and other special situations where extensive data are available. This management areas are examples that may also be is often not the case, however. Obtaining informa- addressed as separate zones. tion on the following categories may be helpful and gathering the information may be included in future 5.3. Lessons learnt goals: Lessons from zoning activities have mostly been The number of species and genera present in a learnt in the tropics and on very large sites, such given area; as the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Some The distance of the site from human settle- general remarks, presented by Day (2002) may, ments; however, be useful also in the Baltic environment, The levels of use by people and their depend- as well as on a smaller scale: ence upon it; Even on a large site, it is better to manage the The migratory patterns of key species; whole site as an integrated whole, not as a The feeding patterns and ranges of key species; series of isolated protected areas; The distance from sources of seeds and larvae Each zone should have a specifi c, written for species replenishment; objective, with "conservation" or "protection" The available prototypes, that is, successful being the overriding aspect; designs from apparently similar situations Clear zoning provisions are necessary, outlining elsewhere what is allowed without a permit, what is allowed (Salm et al. 2000) only with a permit, and what is prohibited; Zoning maps must be accurate enough to Use zones and conservation zones show the actual location of zones, and prefer- These zones have a special conservation value, ably be available in electronic formats which but can tolerate different types of human uses, and may be interfaced directly with the modern are therefore suitable for these uses in dedicated navigational aids found on many vessels; zones. There may be more categories in this The process for the development of the zoning group, especially on a large site, including general plan should be stipulated in the legislation, use zones, habitat protection zones, conservation including statutory phases of public participa- park zones, and national park zones, which all tion, when appropriate; allow different types and scales of uses within Zoning information can be and should be used their areas (Day 2002). he types and locations of to assist public understanding; required zones depend on the planned activities Zone boundary marking can be diffi cult, even (e.g., water sports, recreational fi shing, commercial impossible, but other types of markings (e.g., fi shing, research, education zones). Remaining "no-anchoring") may function well as enforce- areas between and around these zones may be ment and self-education measures; classifi ed, for example, as “general conservation Seasonal closures tend to work better than zones”(Salm et al. 2000). attempts to control the levels of extractive activities, e.g., fi shing; Buffer Zones and zones of infl uence Sudden transitions from highly protected areas The buffer zone surrounds the protected area. It to areas of relatively little protection should be is established to safeguard the area from external avoided; infl uences and to manage the processes or activi- Representative samples of marine communities, ties that may affect ecosystems within the protected as well as signifi cant breeding and nursery sites, area. Nutrients, pollutants, and sediments may be should be included in highly protected zones; 50 Management should be addressed on an coastal management scheme, zoning could appropriate scale, but too many zone types extend to areas outside the MPA, where some with only minor differences between them may activities could be prohibited or regulated; confuse users; Zoning in a vertical direction can be a viable Only time and experience will show what works option; and what needs to be fi ne-tuned, thus, many Mapping the zones requires some extra atten- aspects of management will evolve continuously; tion related to the usage of colours, printing, The high levels of connectivity in marine eco- costs, etc. Details of this and all other experi- systems must be considered when determining ences can be found in marine zoning; (Day 2002). Depending on national legal acts and the embodiment of the MPA in an integrated 5.4. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Bohnsack, J.A. 1996: Marine reserves, zoning and the future of Zoning, ﬁ sher- ﬁ sheries management. Fisheries 21(9):14-16. ies management

Day, J.C. 2002: Zoning-lessons from the Great Barrier Reef Zoning lessons http://www.icriforum.org/docs/zoning_GBRMP.pdf Marine Park. Ocean & Coastal Management 45:139-156 http://www.icriforum.org/

Villa, F., Tunesi, L. & Agardy, T. 2002. Zoning Marine Protected Zoning with http://www.uvm.edu/giee/publications/asinara.pdf Areas through Spatial Multiple-Criteria Analysis: The Case of the GIS-based http://www.uvm.edu/ Asinara Island National Marine Reserve of Italy. Conservation spatial tools: Biology 16(2):515-526 case study

6. Surveillance and ness and education” (page 52). The enforcement enforcement in BSPAs can be carried out by measures, including the following presented by Salm et al. (2000):: 6.1. Why enforcement? Adequate powers for fi eld staff to take effective Enforcement is the most sensitive aspect of law enforcement action when needed; making, but one that has to be considered to Provisions for local people to reinforce or pro- avoid so-called “paper parks”, i.e., MPAs that exist vide enforcement, especially when they may on paper but fail to reach their objectives, and continue their traditional uses; sometimes even allow signifi cant deterioration of Incentives for self-enforcement of rules and their condition (Salm et al. 2000). regulations by users; Mechanisms for confl ict resolution; Providing adequate enforcement duties and Effective penalties for breaches of regulations; powers is a prerequisite for effective legislation. Preventive measures, such as education and However, enforcement operations at sea can be public awareness campaigns, which can result diffi cult, and means of enforcement by manag- in reduced costs and requirements for enforce- ers are limited. Still, legislation must at least be ment. followed by sensitive measures to ensure that it is respected. The issue of including regulatory 6.2. How to enforce? measures in the legal act on BSPAs (if and when Surveillance is important, especially in areas the management plan in itself is not a legally bind- where fi shing is a threat to conservation. However, ing document) is discussed in PART 2, Chapter 2: air and sea patrols surveying fi shing vessels are “Legal framework for BSPAs” (page 21) and in not often needed in the Baltic Sea region, and as Attachment 1 (page 74). they are both expensive and may require extensive coordination among agencies, alternatives may In practice, this means that a signifi cant part of be pursued. For example, the local college in the enforcement has to be carried out by the one Canadian project fi nanced two human “eco- users themselves. A prerequisite for this is, there- guardians” for an MPA that have been essential fore, public awareness and acceptance of the in ensuring compliance. They have successfully signifi cance and benefi ts of the protection. This is approached violators by boat to discuss infractions discussed in PART 3, Chapter 7: “Public aware- (MPA news 2001). Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 51 Education of staff Voluntary practices The BSPA staff must be trained carefully to carry In many cases, local divers, tourism companies, out enforcement without unnecessary public and sport fi shers have developed, and can be antagonism. A better option yet is to authorize encouraged to develop, their own “best-practice other offi cials, such as the coast guard, to enforce codes” and/or agree to signifi cant limitations on the MPA regulations. This way park staff are not their activities. The voluntary support of these considered solely law-enforcement offi cers and recreational and traditional users has often made a can devote themselves to public relations and real difference to the success of a site. education (Salm et al. 2000) 6.3. Lessons learnt Modern technology Major measures in compliance should include Modern surveillance technology, such as the VMS public education and the help of user groups; (Vessel Monitoring System), has been adopted in When enforcement is needed, the “soft glove" several countries. This enables the managers to approach is recommended, with explanations monitor fi shing vessels on a 24-hour basis without and warnings being given for the fi rst offences; being on-site. Real-time video clips recorded by Creating social pressure by sharing the burden on-site cameras designed for monitoring purposes of enforcement with coastal communities can have been tested and shown to have the side also be effective; effect of becoming surveillance tools. Perhaps Public attention to regulations can by drawn the most important advantage of cameras may through local news media, community leaders, be public awareness and increasing support. brochures, and visitor information centres Providing the video clips on the internet can help (Salm et al. 2000). people become more attuned to the values of the protected area (MPA news 2000). 6.4. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

MPA news 2000. MPA Enforcement: Practitioners Enforcement http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA14.htm Employ Mix of High-Tech and Community-Based Strat- strategies http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA14.pdf egies. MPA news, 2(5):1-4.

Davis, B.C. & Moretti, G.S. 2005. Enforcing U.S. Reviews of various http://www.mpa.gov/virtual_library/Publications/ Marine Protected Areas: Synthesis Report Prepared theories on enforce- enforcement.pdf by the National Marine Protected Areas Center in ment and compliance, http://www.mpa.gov/ cooperation with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric case studies Administration Coastal Services Center. 72 pp.

7. Public awareness and education the need for conservation and its objectives are Promotion is an essential feature of building more likely to support the concept in the long run. participation. Raising awareness of the manage- Support by the local population, when evidenced ment scheme process and of opportunities for by their understanding of the conservation objec- people to participate is one important element. tives, can lead to adherence to the protected area The promotion of the conservation features for rules. This can be achieved by sharing benefi ts, the general public is just as important and can be such as (Salm et al. 2000). very effective. In general, appreciation of these Addressing exclusive user or access rights to features is low, as few people are aware of the particular resources or types of use for local diversity and beauty of marine plants and animals communities; (EN et al. 2001b). Giving local communities the responsibility for continued resource management using 7.1. Public support by the local (sustainable) traditional practices; population Creating job opportunities and other economic MPA proposals should be communicated early benefi ts for local people in facilities and serv- and carefully introduced to affected parties. The ices related to the BSPA; parties must then be educated on the benefi ts of Training local tourist guides as BSPA the protection, as resource users who understand interpreters; 52 Using the local user groups in carrying out Specifi c awareness programmes surveys and monitoring; should aim to: Using, for example, local decision-makers, Identify the target audience (tourism industry, politicians, other opinion leaders, or teachers to fi shermen, politicians, port offi cials, etc.); infl uence peoples’ attitudes Use terms and concepts familiar to the (Salm et al. 2000). specifi c user group; Establish specifi c objectives in terms of 7.2. Public awareness campaigns knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour to be changed; Scientifi c research should be controlled by the Combine printed materials and audio-visual management authority that should be responsi- presentations with face-to-face interactions ble for education and public awareness too. (see Table 6 “Evaluation of techniques for public awareness and communication”). BSPA management guidelines (Helsinki Com- mission 2001b). Remember that changes in basic attitudes do not take place immediately, nor as a result of General public awareness also plays an important short-term campaigns. For successful results, role in the general success of the MPA. Any the management staff must have a good rela- awareness programme should honestly inform all tionship with the people involved. The change stakeholders, whether communities, politicians, in attitude must be demonstrated and reinforced administrators or the private sector, of what the by people's own experiences. Feedback is an management authority is able to do (Salm et al. important part of all work promoting aware- 2000, Hiscock & Tyler-Walters 2003). General and ness, to determine the effectiveness of the specifi c programmes may be needed for different programme (Salm et al. 2000). purposes and target groups. Techniques are evaluated in Table 6. According to Salm et al. (2000); 7.3. Dissemination of information on the management of a BSPA (PR) General awareness programmes Transparency of the management process and should aim to: effective dissemination of results are prerequi- Explain the long-term, sustainable benefi ts of sites for successful management. The public, conservation using public information; and particularly stakeholders, need information Provide information and promote conservation on the goals and objectives of the manage- ethics through environmental education; ment process that can be easily understood. Use, e.g., mass media exposure, exhibits, A dissemination strategy is necessary, and tours, training workshops, or sale of promo- professionals should preferably carry out the tional items, and provide informal recreational compilation of information in order to ensure activities with an educational focus; good results. Focus on honest efforts to inform the public instead of producing propaganda for promoting 7.4. Useful references the MPA

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any, and/or to publisher)

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001b. Natura Chapter on http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/cproceed.pdf 2000. UK Marine SACs project: Partnerships in action. promoting sites, http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ Proceedings of a conference held in Edinburgh, 15th-16th communicating November 2000.Peterborough, English Nature. marine science

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001a. Indica- Includes a chapter http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/good_prac1.pdf tions of good practise for establishing management schemes on promoting sites http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ on European Marine sites. Learning from the UK Marine SACs project 1996-2001. Peterborough, English Nature.

Goodson J. & Willingham, A. : Island Ecology Safari Educa- Combining http://sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/library/CI/goodson.pdf tional Programs at Catalina Island. An expert paper of the education and http://sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/ National Marin Sanctuaries Program, U.S. 4 pp. conservation

National Marine Sanctuary Program 2000. Education Plan. Example of http://sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/library/national/

National Marine Sanctuary Program. U.S. education and education_plan_2000.pdf Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected promotion plan http://sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/ 53 Table 6. Evaluation of techniques for public awareness and communication (Hudson 1988, Salm et al. 2000, European Commission 2004b).

Technique Advantage Disadvantage

One way communication

Print media: general + Use familiar techniques that are simple to manage − Need effective distribution + Can reach a wide audience, both locally and aﬁ eld − Are often not read + Draw attention to problems people may not know − Are often not enough to motivate exist people to take action + Keep people informed − Effect can be short-lived + Some forms of print media are inexpensive to produce

Books, booklets, + Useful, e.g., in schools − Expensive to produce reports + Books can be sold to a selected adult audience − Reports can contain too much + Well-designed booklets can be effective in building speciﬁ c information local support, but are most effective once the site has already gained local identity + Reports can be useful for speciﬁ c groups

Newsletters + Well-targeted newsletters can be a valuable means − See Print media: general of building identity + Newsletters need not be colourful or glossy, thus quite cheap to make and distributed

Postcards, + Attractive; good photographs can reveal wildlife − Not suitable for speciﬁ c groups calendars, posters treasures + Easy to make and distribute outside the site (hotels, information centres, etc.). Can be effective in instilling a local sense of pride + Can be sold

Leaﬂ ets and + Easy to make and distribute outside the site − See Print media: general other educational (hotels, information centres, etc.) material + Are a general educational tool, useful in schools and other institutions

Pamphlets, leaﬂ ets + Pamphlets can help in speciﬁ c cases, e.g., rules − See Print media: general for management, and are relatively inexpensive to produce

T-shirts, badges + Good promotional items − Not suitable for speciﬁ c groups + Can be sold to support conservation + Can be used as rewards, e.g., for school groups + Highly visible, a good talking point

Visual media, general + Can be memorable, when made enjoyable and − Expensive to produce entertaining − Require specialized skills + Simpliﬁ es explanation of a complex story − Information or technology can become outdated

Videos, DVDs + Make speciﬁ c programmes for target groups − A high quality product for wide cir- possible culation is not straightforward and + Equipment is relatively cheap and easy to use requires specialists and resources. + Can be of great beneﬁ t in public education, e.g., schools + Relatively easy to distribute 54 Technique Advantage Disadvantage

Multimedia + Can be of great beneﬁ t in public education, e.g., − See Visual media, general programmes, CD- schools ROMs + Can be sold

Displays and + Can provide a permanent, entertaining form of − Can contain too much information, exhibitions communication which is off-putting

Plays, theatre + Locally acceptable forms of drama are effective in − Require resources, planning, and reaching a speciﬁ c audience, especially children organization, + Can be effective in raising awareness and − Require special skills motivation of the public + Can be incorporated into local festivals, family days, etc.

IT: Websites + Avoids printing costs − Not everyone is connected, thus, + Can be a form of two-way communication may not necessarily reach a wide + Responds to an increasingly IT-oriented society, audience especially among the younger generation − Requires special skills: technical set-up and long-term maintenance have to be considered before setting up

Two-way communication

Open meetings + Encourage mutual understanding − Should not be held to + Build up trust and support propagandize the people + Motivate people to become actively involved − Require time for planning and + Provide opportunities for socializing organization + Can be held to discuss speciﬁ c issues − Need to be sustained + May be aimed at soliciting ideas from the public − Have no guarantee of success + Should encourage interactive participation − Reach only a small audience at a time − Do not reach audiences further aﬁ eld − Require interpersonal skills

Open days, guided + Good for general awareness raising − Require signiﬁ cant resources: tours, festivals, + Good for face-to-face contact time, personnel, and money events, boat trips, + Good promotional events are excellent opportuni- slide shows ties for catching local press interest + Can encourage discussion on the site

Indirect communication: media

Television/radio + Reaches a general and wide audience − A passive medium for the receiver (interviews, + Raises general awareness − Issues have to be presented advertisements, + Can motivate people to do something about the simply etc.) issue − No control over contents of TV + Uses the most popular communication medium spots, can also be negative − Can generate polarized views − Cannot be targeted for speciﬁ c groups

Press releases + Can reach both general and specifi c groups − A passive medium for the receiver + Regular press releases are good for “keeping the − Issues have to be presented simply site in mind” − Perhaps no control over contents + Journalists can be helpful, but should be dealt with of articles, spots, can also be carefully negative − Can generate polarized views Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 55 8. Research and monitoring in inadequate time-scales. In addition, comparison BSPAs between sites is diffi cult due to simple natural variation between any two sites, meaning that true 8.1. MPAs and science controls do not exist (Halpern et al. 2004, Willis et al. 2005). Neither do marine reserves exist in “...that a monitoring programme be incorporated isolation from adjacent marine areas. Therefore, into the management plans in an appropri- research effort should not be wasted on the ate number of these areas including at least creation of “optimal” reserves, but instead used monitoring of biological, physical and chemical for establishing minimum requirements for target parameters. The monitoring programme shall species (Halpern et al. 2004 and concentrating on be integrated within the Baltic Monitoring Pro- the threats and pollution endangering marine life gramme of HELCOM.” in general, as part of an integrated approach to marine conservation (Anthoni 2004). HELCOM Recommendation 15/5 (Helsinki Com- mission 1994/2003) A science-based management might seem ideal from the point of view of biologists and conserva- “…it may be necessary to follow up by monitor- tionists, and many claim it to be more rational and ing at appropriate intervals depending on regen- objective than other strategies. A good scientifi c eration potential and the impact and frequency understanding of the ecosystem does provide of detrimental activities, in order to assess the the capacity to make better decisions, and direct need for management.” the selection of effective measures. However, alone it does not always lead to better decisions. “Available information concerning the state of the First, reducing complex problems into component environment and the fl ora and fauna and their parts tends to produce results that are detached interactions with outside areas has to be com- from the actual management context. Second, piled. Additional information should be gathered scientifi c reasoning does not always enable nor through literature studies including ecological guarantee consensus on policy choices. Resting changes (in the past), or base-line studies must the decision-making power solely in the hands of be undertaken to gather new information.” scientifi c experts is a type of authoritarianism and does not satisfy the need for more responsible “Scientifi c research should be controlled by and democratic decision-making. Therefore, the management authority that should also be based on experience, good decisions rely on fi nd- responsible for education and public aware- ing a balance between scientifi c reasoning and ness.” political reality; neither is adequate in isolation. Participatory processes can be expensive and BSPA management guidelines (Helsinki time-consuming, and may even fail due to prob- Commission 2003b) lems in the fl ow of information and inadequate commitment to the process. However, both In order to develop, monitor, and adapt manage- participation and sound science are desirable for ment strategies, managers often need research improving management effectiveness (Dahl-Tac- that is conducted and presented in a way that coni 2005.) Practical tips for MPA science are is relevant to the actual management goals and given in Table 7. challenges of the MPA. Science that does not relate to these or relevant contextual issues of the MPA, or does not present the potentially useful information clearly, fails to support the development and adaptation of management. “Science- based” recommendations generated without regard to the actual management context should be used with great caution.

Research on MPA effects has posed particularly many challenges due to, for example, the lack of replication in space and time, both within and between reserves, the lack of control sites, or 56 Table 7. Tips from managers on improving science in MPA Tips from scientists on improving science in the management MPA management Practical tips for MPA science (MPA Communicate your needs. Managers must Establish joint meeting and boards. Scientists news 2001a & communicate their needs and those of the com- agree with managers that scientists and mangers 2001b). munity to the scientists so that they understand should work together at all times: on research, how the research will be used. education, and extension. Establish joint meetings. This can be done Develop understanding on both sides. in joint meetings of technical advisory boards Managers should be trained to ask scientifi c or similar. A research translator, who is aware questions and scientists trained to think in terms of the different ways in which people assimilate of management. information, can help to interpret research Be open. If managers need to come forward with results to managers. their needs, scientists should be more open and Make the roles clear. Scientists need to under- available to managers. stand their role, which is to serve as unbiased Communicate. There is a need for the creation and informative consultants to the management of international research and management net- and policy-making process. works for MPAs, as well as electronic discussion Build trust with the local community. Accept groups. and use traditional knowledge. Both managers Use local as translators. In addition, to the sug- and scientists must display sensitivity to local gestion by managers on the involvement of locals cultures by making use of local resources, using in the process, scientists feel that locals can be local terminology, and fi nding innovative ways to used as translators between the community and approach data collection. the scientist/manager team. Return your information. Scientifi c information should be fi ltered back to the community to show local stakeholders that their involvement has contributed. Make sure all voices are heard, including those of politicians.

8.2. Monitoring As Contracting Parties should be under no obliga- The issue of monitoring, and its relevance for tions to take any further action where Natura 2000 assessing the effectiveness of the management sites are also reported as BSPAs, the monitoring measures compared to the conservation objec- conducted in compliance with the corresponding tives, is discussed in detail in PART 4, Chapter EC Birds and Habitats Directives will be sufﬁ cient 1: “Evaluating management effectiveness by to monitor BSPAs (see also Section 1). In addition, applying quantitative indicators” (page 63). When other monitoring schemes, such as those under choosing which attributes of the conservation the Water Framework Directive, should also be objectives are to be monitored, it is useful to focus used, if appropriate. on attributes that are most critical to assessing and achieving the objectives of the MPA, and 8.3. Research and monitoring needs most sensitive or vulnerable to change on a Some key information requirements for plan- particular site. In this way, deterioration or distur- ning and management are provided in PART 3, bance is more likely to be detected than by moni- Chapter 2: “Meeting information needs” (page 39). toring attributes unlikely to change in response to According to Kelleher (1999), the research needs impacts (regardless of how important these char- include e.g.: acteristics may be in conservation terms). The precise design, scale, and scope of a monitoring Social sciences programme depend on the characteristics of the Managers especially need information that is area, as well as on the resources available. The useful for changing or reinforcing user behaviour, emphasis should be on those elements critical including: to assessing and achieving the BSPA objectives, Awareness levels; especially measuring changes in the ecology and Aspirations and compliance of stakeholders; in the interest features of the site. Costs and beneﬁ ts of management initiatives;

Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 57 Changes in stakeholders' perceptions of social Several useful guidelines on how to carry out and environmental values; marine habitat and species inventories have been Current and future political climates; prepared over the years (Bäck et al. 1996, Bäck et Trends in industrial technology. al. 1998).

Natural sciences Mapping Research and monitoring should provide informa- Maps, as well as photographs, have many tion on: advantages. They are easily read and interpreted, Dominant biota, and are useful in discovering trends, confl icts, − Species, and problem areas that otherwise may easily be − Communities, overlooked. Overlay mapping is simple using GIS − Life histories, applications, which have become both readily − Natural long-term variation in recruitment available and inexpensive for personal computers. and population sizes, Therefore, inventories and habitat maps should be − Trophic levels; integrated into GIS systems. Using GIS to create Rare, endangered or threatened species; databases on BSPAs is a future goal of the net- Alien species; work, and it is highly recommended for the BSPA Ecological processes; managers to invest in the software as well as on Conservation status; training personnel to use GIS (Salm et al. 2000). The scale and extent of pressures and threats on the system; GIS systems and thematic maps provide Usage of the area; many advantages (Salm et al. 2000): Levels of exploitation. Geographical data and attributes can be transformed into maps; 8.4. Inventories and mapping Coastal features that have spatial attributes (points, lines, and areas) can be stored, ana- Inventories lysed, and printed out as maps; Inventory-taking and mapping of coastal and Automatic calculation of areas is fast and underwater conditions have recently started in precise; several Baltic countries. It is a highly recom- GIS systems are open ended and easily mended initiative that should be taken in all receive new data, therefore, data banks are coastal areas to effi ciently evaluate the ecological easily updated; coherence of the protected area network and to GIS systems work well in conjunction with identify gaps in the protection status of habitats remote sensing and satellite images; and species. On a smaller scale, each protected Maps of different scales can be easily incorpo- area should have an inventory taken at least to rated; support the setting and reviewing of conservation GIS-based maps can be inexpensively distrib- objectives and management measures. uted on CD-ROM and over the internet; Thematic layers can be incorporated into GIS Before taking the inventory, a decision should (e.g., land use, navigation routes, river inputs, be made on how to carry out the inventory and locations of discharge pipes, etc.). which habitat classifi cation system will be used. Currently, the HELCOM Red List of Biotopes and These thematic (e.g., habitat) maps can, Biotope Complexes (Helsinki Commission 1998) in turn: is one of the few classifi cation systems available; Be used to assess environmental quality (e.g., however, as it was developed for broad-scale the extent of particular threatened or threat evaluation, it is not suitable for detailed sensitive habitat types, such as salt marshes); habitat inventories. The EC hopes to develop the Signifi cantly help end-users to better under- EUNIS classifi cation system (European Environ- stand the ecological status and the impacts of ment Agency 2006) further so that it also includes anthropogenic activities; the marine habitats in the Baltic Sea. National Facilitate making decisions on resource use, attempts to develop EUNIS-compatible classifi ca- depending on spatial distribution of the tion systems have been taken, for example, in resource; Finland (the Baltic Marine Biotope Classifi cation Guide more effective placement of scientifi c System). measurement tools in the marine environment; 58 Be used to develop management zoning Help to evaluate changes over time; schemes within MPAs; Help to predict and model the future. Inform, and place relevance on, the position- (Salm et al. 2000) ing of national monitoring stations (e.g., for the implementation of the EC Water Frame- work Directive as well as of Natura 2000); 8.5. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Davies, J., Baxter, J., Bradley, M., Connor, D., Khan, J., Murray, Monitoring handbook http://www.jncc.gov.uk/PDF/ E., Sanderson, W., Turnbull, C. & Vincent, M. 2001: Marine Monitor- and updates MMH-mmh_0601.pdf ing Handbook. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, English http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-3390 Nature, Scottish Natural Heritage, Environment & Heritage Services (updates) (DoE NI), Countryside Council for Wales & Scottish Association for http://www.jncc.gov.uk/ Marine Science. 405 pp.

Cowie-Haskell, B. D. & Delaney, J. M.2003: Integrating Science Integrating science in http://www.sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/ into the Design of the Tortugas Ecological Reserve. MTS Journal • reserves, case study library/national/integratingscience.pdf 37(1): 68-79. http://sanctuaries.nos.noaa.gov/

Lubchenco, J., Palumbi, S.R., Gaines, S.D. & Andelman, S. 2003. MPA science http://www.stanford.edu/group/ Plugging a hole in the ocean: the emerging science of marine Palumbi/manuscripts/ reserves. Ecological Applications 13(1) Supplement:S3-S7. EA.Lubchenco%20et%20al%202003.pdf

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001b. Natura 2000. UK Includes chapters http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/ Marine SACs project: Partnerships in action. Proceedings of a con- on monitoring and cproceed.pdf ference held in Edinburgh, 15th-16th November 2000.Peterborough, the role of science in http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ English Nature. evaluating impacts

Gell, F. & Roberts, C. 2005. MPA Perspective: Difﬁ culties Involved Marine reserve sci- http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/ in Studying Marine Reserves. MPA news 5(6):4. ence MPA48.htm Willis, T., Millar, R., Babcock, R. & Tolimieri, N. 2005. MPA http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/ Perspective: The Science of Marine Reserves: How Much of It Is MPA48.pdf Science? MPA news 5(6):3.

Fish, T.E., Recksiek, H. & Fan, D.P. 2002. Uses, Values, Stake- MPAs in the media: http://www.csc.noaa.gov/mpa/MPA_ holders, and Opinions Associated with Marine Protected Areas: A analysis example MediaContentAnalysis.pdf Content Analysis of News Media, 1995-2001. COASTAL SERVICES http://www.csc.noaa.gov/ CENTER, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Char- leston, South Carolina. NOAA/CSC/20215-PUB.15 pp.

Wahle, C., & Lyons, S. (Eds.) 2003. Social Science Research Strat- Social science http://www.mpa.gov/virtual_library/ egy for Marine Protected Areas .National Marine Protected Areas research strategy Publications/ssr_strategy.pdf Center, MPA Science Institute, Santa Cruz, California. 52 pp. http://www.csc.noaa.gov/

Helsinki Commission 1998. Red List of Marine and Coastal Red list of biotopes in http://www.helcom.fi /stc/fi les/Publications/ Biotopes and Biotope Complexes of the Baltic Sea, Belt Sea and the Baltic Proceedings/bsep75.pdf Kattegat – Including a comprehensive description and classifi ca- http://www.helcom.fi / tion system for all Baltic marine and coastal biotopes – Baltic Sea Environmental Proceedings No. 75.

European Environment Agency 2005: EUNIS - European Nature Information on http://eunis.eea.eu.int/index.jsp Information System European habitats, species, and sites Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 59 9. Administration of the BSPAs Undertake fi eld operations, including surveillance, research, and monitoring; 9.1. Required administrative elements Undertake educational and training activities; As for other parts of the plan, the administrative Undertake and control visitor use and guidance. plan should be carefully coordinated with manage- (Salm et al. 2000) ment goals and objectives. The administration is expected to develop over time, and two or three 9.3. Project offi cer years are often required to reach optimal operation. A management scheme is very unlikely to be Arrangements required to establish the BSPA and developed without one, or more, individuals who to manage it effectively, including fi nancial, human can co-ordinate the overall process and particu- and physical resources, could cover the following: larly the inputs of the relevant authorities. A project staffi ng; offi cer, with the specifi c responsibility to undertake equipment and facilities; this co-ordination, is generally essential on most training; sites. Depending on the size and complexity of the interpretation and education; issues, there may not need to be a full-time offi cer monitoring and research; and, where there are several neighbouring sites, maintenance and/or restoration; it may be possible for a single project offi cer to surveillance; support more than one site (EN et al. 2001a, MPA enforcement; news 2004b). evaluation and review of effectiveness. The range of skills and competencies needed in a 9.2. Staffi ng needs project offi cer are described in Table 8. The offi cer The staff number naturally depends on the size, may often be involved in sensitive and confronta- purpose, and use of the site. Understanding of the tional discussions with stakeholders and relevant conservation goals, ability to communicate to local authorities. This calls for a mature individual, confi - people as well as visitors, and expertise in many dent in working in such situations. Local knowledge specialized areas are required. can be of particular importance and there may be particular benefi ts to be gained from appointing a Adequate, well-trained personnel are needed to: local person to the post of project offi cer. A local Interpret relevant policies and objectives; may bring in a good network of connections, gain Prepare and update management plans; trust more easily - especially in close-knit commu- Direct the management; nities - and the employment of local individuals can Assess logistical requirements; help to counter claims that the MPAS local jobs (EN et al. 2001a, MPA news 2004b).

Table 8. Skills and competencies Comments Skills and competencies of an MPA project Good interpersonal skills Must be able to communicate with a wide range of people, including specialists ofﬁ cer (EN et al. 2001a, MPA news 2004b). Consensus-building skills Often has to act as a go-between among relevant authorities, conservation agencies, and stakeholders

Advocacy skills Promotes the concept of the site designation, and the management scheme process

Self motivation, management, and organization Able to manage a wide range of duties and co-ordinate others

Knowledge of relevant legislation Good knowledge of the complex legislation relating to the process is required to guide others through the process

Knowledge of marine ecosystems Helps to gain credibility and to provide support for other relevant authorities

*These points rep- Knowledge of the site Helps to gain credibility, especially at the local level resent skills that the Enthusiasm for the site and sustaining its wildlife Helps in promotion of the site and for being able to act inde- project offi cer may pendently of any organization, even if employed by one of them need to be able to access, though not Technical skills * Knowledge of GIS systems necessarily possess. PR skills * Promotes the site through the media, taking care of public relations 60 9.4. Funding and budgets of the and aim to generate services to support the run- BSPAS ning of the MPA (Salm et al. 2000). In developed countries, fi nancial support usually derives from the government, but some funds Anticipated annual investments and costs must be may be raised locally, for example, by charging described, including: entrance fees. Despite government funding of Capital costs (developing a management plan, most protected areas, the costs of running, e.g., including surveys, promotion costs and so on; national parks are high. Greater tourism may one-off expenses for buildings, offi ce and fi eld increase available funds, but may also increase equipment, recruitment of personnel); and expenses, as the facilities must be kept in good Recurring expenses of running an MPA order, information and services must be provided, (wages, insurance, services, etc.). etc. The budget must take a long-term strategy, 9.5. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Conservation Finance Alliance 2005: Conservation Finance Financing protected http://guide.conservationﬁ nance.org/ Guide. An internet resource. areas, including a chapter on MPAs

EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS 2001a. Indications Includes a chapter on http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/pdfs/ of good practise for establishing management schemes on administrative resources good_prac1.pdf European Marine sites. Learning from the UK Marine SACs http://www.ukmarinesac.org.uk/ project 1996-2001. Peterborough, English Nature.

Financing Protected Areas Task Force of the World Commission Financial guide http://app.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/PAG- on Protected Areas (WCPA) of IUCN, in collaboration with the 005.pdf Economics Unit of IUCN (2000). Financing Protected Areas. http://www.iucn.org/ IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. viii + 58pp.

MPA news 2004b. MPA news Poll: What Qualities Make a Good Good manager qualities http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/ Managers? MPA news 6(4):3. MPA57.htm http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/ MPA57.pdf

10. Preparation of 10.1. Why a management plan? a management plan Only a systematically and carefully designed implementation of management can ensure “... that management plans be established for that the desired goals and objectives of a each BSPA to ensure nature protection and protected area can be met. sustainable use of natural resources. These Planning provides the basis for decisions on management plans shall consider all pos- how resources are to be allocated and pro- sible negatively affecting activities, such as: tected. In addition, the aim to keep an area in extraction of sand, stones and gravel; oil and its current state and to focus on an undisturbed gas exploration and exploitation; dumping of natural succession must be described within a solid waste and dredge spoils; constructions; management plan. waste water from industry, municipalities and A written management plan serves as an households; intensive agriculture and intensive operational guide for the BSPA, and identifi es forestry; aquaculture; harmful fi shing practices; actions to resolve specifi c management issues. tourism; transport of hazardous substances by It specifi es particular courses of action for ship through these areas; military activities ...” interested persons and decision–makers. The site of the MPA may not need a full man- HELCOM BSPA management guidelines (Hel- agement plan to begin operations, but it will sinki commission 2003b). need one for the long-term programme development, which should also be the aim of BSPAs (Salm et al. 2000). Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 61 10.2. What should be in a plan? servation initiatives to both relevant authorities and The principal goal of the plan is to maintain the other stakeholders, and the need to establish new natural resource values of the area, optimize eco- approaches, particularly in relation to conservation nomic uses, and integrate traditional uses. In order objectives and operations advice (EN et al. 2001a). to do that, it should: Be clear and practical, as well as adaptive Timetables enough to allow adjustments in changing natu- It is open to debate whether the imposition of ral conditions and other altering situations;' mainly externally driven timetables is a net posi- Be seen as a working document that is tive or negative factor. Imposing timetables can updated periodically; undermine local ownership of, and responsibility Look at past progress, the current issues, and for, delivery of the scheme and lead to frustration future needs to identify priority actions for each with the process. This can be a particular problem individual site; where the emphasis in management scheme Encompass legal and administrative concerns, development is on consensus building. It is impor- as well as educational, social, ecological, and tant that relevant authorities and stakeholders are physical objectives; able to determine a timetable appropriate to their Function to achieve interagency coordination; requirements. With more time, increased collation Facilitate cooperation among stakeholders; of information can be undertaken, allowing for Facilitate communication between administra- improved discussion with relevant authorities. On tion and management; the other hand, a defi ned endpoint and milestones Examine the effects on local people and fi nd as targets are usually good motivating factors and ways to avoid confl icts, for example, through serve to focus the scheduling of work and record- organizing workshops and public consultations. ing of progress. Furthermore, limiting the length (Salm et al. 2000). of the process is a means of constraining costs; it may also be diffi cult to sustain the commitment Detailed guidance on the contents of a BSPA man- and participation of relevant authorities during an agement plan is given in SECTION 1: “Practical overly extended preparatory process. Ideally, a guidance for establishing management plans for balance should be found between setting clear Baltic Sea Protected Areas” (page 8). targets, and making them realistic and fl exible (EN et al. 2001a). 10.3. How much time? 10.4. How much money? Experiences The types of expenditures shown in Table 9 com- As an example, establishing an agreed manage- prise the core costs for developing a management ment scheme in some marine Natura 2000 sites in plan, some of which may be shared among the the UK has taken three to four years for sites with relevant authorities. Table 9 does not include the a project offi cer, measured from the time of offi cer running costs for implementation of the manage- appointment. A longer time scale may be needed ment scheme; these are the responsibility of indi- for sites without dedicated project offi cers. It is vidual relevant authorities, in addition to their own expected that time scales may vary substantially staffi ng costs for the process (attending meetings, Table 9. according to the size and complexity of the site, undertaking reviews of management needs and Potential costs the level of knowledge of the features, the man- measures. No concrete calculations are provided, for developing agement issues, and any attitudes and cultures only the possible sources of expenditures (EN et al a manage- inherited from any previous initiatives. According to 2001a). All measures for managing and monitoring ment scheme, the UK experiences, a considerable proportion of BSPAs must be cost-effective, technically feasible adjusted from the time taken was due to the novel nature of the and, if appropriate, based on the results of impact EN et al, 2001. work, including the relative novelty of marine con- assessments, including cost-benefi t analyses.

General cost area Specifi c details Overall costs Biological surveys For example, acoustic subtidal surveys, underwater biotope mapping surveys, High bird counts Collation of data sources Costs for individual data sets and/or contracts, when needed Moderate GIS and data entry Equipment and contracts Moderate Project offi cer Salary and running costs (3 years) High Site promotion Leafl ets, advertisements, public meetings, guided walks, etc. Low to moderate Publishing a scheme Design and printing of drafts and fi nal versions Low 62 PART 4: Management effectiveness evaluation

1. Evaluating management directives (in particular the Water Framework effectiveness by applying Directive, the Habitats and Birds Directives, the quantitative indicators ICZM recommendation (HELCOM 2003c), and the recent work towards a European marine 1.1. Introduction strategy), and fi nally the HELCOM recommenda- One of the tasks given by the Joint Ministerial tions that would benefi t from an evaluation of their Meeting (JMM) was to develop guidance on the management effi ciency. evaluation of BSPA management effectiveness. i.e., how the management of MPAs is achieving 1.3. Objective the aims of protection, how effi ciently the manage- The objective is to develop a toolbox that includes ment plan is being carried out or how effectively protocols for management effi ciency evaluation. the site is governed. The current guidelines for The toolbox also includes the guiding principles managing BSPAs do not include advice on how to for defi ning indicators, similar to those presented evaluate management effi ciency. by Delbaere (2004).

1.2. Goal Particular attention is given to indicators that The goal is to prepare an action plan for the evalu- are user-driven, responsive to change, easy to ation of management effi ciency on three levels: comprehend, based on facts, scientifi cally sound, the regional scale (Baltic Sea), the national scale cost-effective, and relatively simple to use. Such (Contracting Party), and the site-specifi c scale indicators are also likely to be useful when devel- (sub-national or local area). In addition, the plan oping monitoring schemes and setting monitoring should determine the appropriate indicators and priorities for the BSPAs. The indicators are also how to apply them in practice. likely to be helpful when communicating with stakeholders. The management effi ciency evaluation action plan is established using the existing guidelines by the 1.4. Action plan for an evaluation of IUCN, WWF, and NOAA (Pomeroy et al. 2004), the management effi ciency of MPAs as well as experience from regional or national The plan proposed here is a modifi cation of the management effi ciency evaluations already plan developed by IUCN (Hockings et al. 2000) completed (e.g., Anon. 2003, IUCN 2004). These and described in greater detail for MPA evaluation experiences are used to adapt the guidelines by Pomeroy et al. 2004. The logical step-by-step specifi cally to the Baltic Sea region and develop process, or cycle, is easy to follow and can as them further, where appropriate. The large human easily be adapted for the HELCOM BSPAs as for impacts on the Baltic Sea region, in combination any other area. This approach has recently been with fundamental differences in the policies, applied in Finland, where the management of gov- resources and traditions of nature conservation ernmentally owned protected areas was evaluated among the HELCOM Contracting Parties in the by an international team in 2004–2005 (Gilligan et Baltic Sea region, create additional challenges al. 2005). However, this evaluation did not cover for designing a joint framework for management the Finnish MPAs due to the lack of background and the assessment of its effectiveness. The fact data and suitable indicators. that HELCOM consists of the nine independent 1. CONTEXT: Where are we now? littoral states of the Baltic Sea and the European 2. VISION: Where do we want to go? Commission makes this type of effort unique and 3. PLANNING: How are we going to get there? challenging. 4. INPUTS: What do we need? 5. MANAGEMENT PROCESS: How do we go This work also acknowledges the goals and about it? objectives of the Convention on Biological Diver- 6. OUTPUT: What did we do and what products sity (the results from the Conferences of Parties, or services were needed? the Subsidiary Body of Scientifi c, Technical and 7. OUTCOME: What did we achieve? Technological Advice), the European Community (Return to step 1. and repeat the process) Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 63 Pomeroy et al. (2004) propose the use of specifi c 2.2. Terms of reference for developing indicators for each of the seven steps and point marine management indicators (MMIs) out the need to use them on relevant scales. How- In this document, terms of reference (ToR) ever, some of the indicators described later in this are defi ned for selecting or developing marine chapter are also useful; for example, the biological management indicators (MMIs). The ToR have indicators help to identify whether targets for the been based on Delbaere (2003) and Pomeroy et purpose of the BSPA are met. This approach, al. (2004). slightly modifi ed, has also been used by others 1. The purpose of the indicator must be easily (Belfi ore et al. 2002). understood (the indicator should be goal- driven with the aim to fulfi l the goals and 2. Toolbox of quantitative objectives set up in the management plan). indicators 2. The target group for the indicator should be identifi ed (the indicator should be user-driven). 2.1. Defi ning an indicator 3. Factual, quantitative information for marine The term ”indicator” is used here to describe areas in general should be provided. a unit of information measured over time that 4. It should be possible to describe the use of the allows documentation of changes in specifi c indicator concisely and clearly. attributes of marine area management (Pomeroy 5. The indicator should be logically (scientifi cally et al. 2004). It is any type of variable that alone, and methodologically) acceptable. or in combination with other similar indicators, 6. The indicator should give the possibility of can be used to describe the state, change, and comparison with a baseline and be responsive targets set up for the management and/or the to change (in time/space). development/evolution of marine areas. The 7. The indicator should be technically feasible management may in this case be any kind of and cost-effi cient to use. premeditated use of an area or its resources. 8. Indicators that are developed should prefer- Resources include the biota as well as the geol- ably be quantitative, e.g., based on numerical ogy of an area. data that can be analysed or managed in a GIS. Indicators can also describe or quantify more than 9. Indicators developed should primarily be one issue, e.g., the use of a resource as well as applicable for BSPAs but, if possible, also be the factual or potential threats towards the marine useful in the integrated marine and coastal biodiversity. The indicators for which such a con- zone planning of any type of area. nection exists are described here as multipurpose 10. Existing descriptions of the background and indicators and marked with a number referring to application of the indicators should be referred all issues that they describe. to, where possible, rather than spending efforts on preparing long, new descriptions. However, before an indicator can be identifi ed, 11. Illustrated examples should be given for all created and used, its anticipated signifi cance indicators described, where feasible. should be proved, e.g., the relationship between 12. The combination between different indicators a threat and its most signifi cant consequences should be demonstrated, where appropriate. for a species or habitat (biological indicator), 13. The error (degree of precision) of an indicator the quantifi ed value of a specifi c action taken by should be given as precisely as possible; a company (socio-economic indicator), or the the limitations and strengths of the indicator impact on the municipality of a governmental should be defi ned, and any occurrence or decision (governmental indicator). In addition, degree of approximation or vagueness should the impact of each indicator on the conservation be clearly indicated. This is particularly impor- objectives should be known. This has previously tant if using proxies when creating or using the been dealt with in Chapter 10.3 (p. 52) of this indicator. report. 14. The diffi culty rating and resource requirements (time for use, costs, know-how) of the indicator should be estimated.

64 2.3. Categorization of indicators well as specialists to understand the evaluation process as well as the results. They also allow Categorization based on application for a rapid assessment of the management The indicators that have been developed have been effi ciency, and in many cases are cost-effi cient to grouped into three main categories, depending on use. However, they are less suitable for following the type of management objective to which they changes in the management effi ciency. They apply. are also frequently used for multiple scoring of management effi ciency. This is rather surprising Bio-physical indicators due to the subjectivity involved in using several of These focus on the effi ciency of BSPAs for these indicators, the diffi culties in comparing the preserving the marine biological diversity as well indicators with each other, and the possible lack of as the geological diversity (geomorphology and measurable qualities. Nevertheless, acknowledg- geology), following Pomeroy et al. (2004). They ing the pros and cons of qualitative indicators, are grouped further into qualitative indicators and they are a useful component of most management quantitative indicators. This categorization makes effi ciency evaluations. it easier to comprehend the large selection of indicators and more precisely indicate the objec- In this document, emphasis is placed on the tive, use, accuracy, and limits of each indicator. identifi cation of quantitative indicators. Particular These can be divided further into subtypes, e.g., emphasis is given to indicators that can be used based on the origins of the data from which they in GIS and which can be drawn from numerical are derived, such as from existing GIS/RS, from databases with geographic data (Roff et al. existing databases or new data (through fi eld and 2003), national demographical databases, legal public surveys). Several of these indicators are statistics or similar sources. This and similar types based on proxies drawn from geophysical data of indicators have previously been described by because the biological data available have a poor Swenson and Franklin (2000), Delbaere (2002), coverage. Dalton (2004), Rogers and Greenaway (2005).

Socio-economic indicators Biological indicators These focus on the effi ciency by which MPAs The identifi cation of biological indicators is are managed (use of economic and temporal perhaps more challenging than that of socio- resources) as well as the role of BSPAs for the economic or governance indicators. The existing social development and economy in the MPA or ecological research on, for example, a key/struc- the marine and coastal areas surrounding it. These tural species might be vast, but papers that deal are of particular interest when showing the benefi ts specifi cally with the value of these species as of BSPAs for the local and regional inhabitants. indicators of ecosystem health might be few. The relationship between these indicators and Table 10 shows habitats and species that cover potential threats to marine biodiversity is also large portions of the seafl oor and whose pres- pointed out, where appropriate. ence/absence or cover can be demonstrated by applying GIS or thematic maps. The information Governance indicators on key/structural species in PART 3, Chapter 3: These evaluate whether or not the MPA is admin- “Threat analysis” (page 40) should be used for istrated well. They can, for example, be extracted identifying potential biological indicators. Special from legal statistics or obtained through empirical attention should be paid to the need to confi rm the studies that measure the extent to which the impact of specifi c indicators (their level/value and BSPA or its goals and objectives are known to change) on the favourable conservation status, as stakeholders. described in the same chapter.

Qualitative vs. quantitative indicators 2.4. Discussion Several indicators described in the literature The list of indicators has a great potential are qualitative, i.e., comprise specifi c questions when communicating with stakeholders, i.e., and/or multiple scoring that concisely describe the public, decision-makers, practitioners, the management status (e.g., Alder et al. 2002, managers as well as researchers in marine area Pomeroy et al. 2004, Staub and Hatziolos 2004). management. Schiller et al. (2001) point out that The advantage of qualitative indicators is that by stakeholders are less interested in the methodo- being descriptive they make it easy for laymen as logical aspects of developing or using indicators Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 65 than they are in understanding the results that 2.5. Introduction to indicator tables the indicators provide. Consequently, the fi rst six Each indicator is briefl y described (one short points of the ToR are for defi ning and selecting paragraph), stating the name of the indicator indicators of relevance when communicating and the objective, data source/origin, links to with stakeholders. threats for the indicator as well as the source, i.e., reference(s) for the indicator (see Tables 10, In addition to being useful for the HELCOM 11, and 12). The intention is to present examples Contracting Parties, the suggested management but not to provide a conclusive list of indicators. effi ciency guidelines and toolbox may also be Instead, the further development of similar quan- useful for the European Commission and the titative indicators by the HELCOM Contracting OSPAR Commission. Finally, it is also hoped Parties is encouraged. The essence of this is that these guidelines, tools, and indicators will also described in a concise table with keywords improve the way in which marine protection is for each column. The purpose of this table is acknowledged within integrated coastal zone to point out a representative set of biological, management (ICZM). The EU-funded Interreg IIIB socio-economic, and governance indicators that Table 10. project “BALANCE” that started in July 2005 will can be used in the Baltic Sea. The table is a fi rst Suggestions for further develop the list of indicators, as well as step and does not, as such, provide tools that biological and abiotic the action plan. The results from this project will can be directly applied. However, the references (physical) indicators. be funnelled into HELCOM since all Contracting given make it possible to look up the original Parties of HELCOM, with the exception of Russia, papers where the indicators have been described Original = fi rst men- are partners in BALANCE. or used. The next step, which is currently being tioned in this paper, prepared by the BALANCE project, is to make Common = frequently “ready-to-use” descriptions of these indicators used or mentioned in with attached examples and illustrations of their several publications use (www.balance-eu.org).

Name Purpose Target Data sources Links to potential Reference Quanti- group threats tative?

Presence/absence or The total lack of key/structural Managers, GIS models on Eutrophication? Martin Yes status and change in the species in areas where they public, key/structural Poor physical health Isaeus PhD cover of key/structural should occur (e.g., indicated government species of species? dissertation species by GIS analysis) can serve as an indicator of poor ecosystem health

Maximum depth limit of Changes in maximum depth Managers, UW video Eutrophication Common Yes key/structural species reﬂ ect long-term changes in public, or SCUBA water turbidity (+ or -) government monitoring

Presence/absence of ben- Anoxia results in the total loss Managers, Empirical oxygen Eutrophication and J. Persson Yes thic macrofauna and/or the of macroscopic infauna, which public, level measure- secondary effects PhD disser- cover of oxygen-depleted affects food availability for higher government ments in target thereof tation (GIS seafl oors trophic levels (e.g., fi sh) areas identifi ed analysis) by GIS

Presence/absence and Species of economic value are Managers, Records of Multiple threats Pomeroy et Yes amount (catch) of species important for the local economy. public ﬁ shermen’s al. 2004 with economic value, e.g., Recording their occurrence helps catches ﬁ sh or plants in building a favourable attitude towards the MPA. Some species also indicate ecosystem health

Presence/absence and These areas are crucial for Managers, GIS modelling Construction activi- Pomeroy et Yes extent of cover of important the life cycle of mobile species public, combined ties, dredging al. 2004 areas for mobile species, and the interactions between government with empirical such as suitable spawning, populations of a species. Several inventories nursery, and feeding areas of these areas also have other for ﬁ sh or marine and values, e.g., for a speciﬁ c type of coastal birds plants

66 Name Purpose Target Data sources Links to potential Reference Quanti- group threats tative?

Recruitment success of The recruitment success is a Managers, GIS modelling In some cases Pomeroy et Yes key/structural species quantifi able measurement of how public, gov- combined symptoms of al. 2004 well a specifi c species repro- ernment with empirical eutrophication, duces and, for example, recovers inventories e.g., decomposing from a catastrophe (e.g., anoxia, fi lamentous algae, storm) anoxia,

Threatened or extinct Red list species run a risk of Managers, Calculation Various threats, Belﬁ ore et Yes species as % of known disappearing from an area and government often described in al. 2002. species thus decreasing species diversity. the red lists Also, there is an obligation to follow up changes in their abundance

Abundance of top preda- Top predators are indicators of Managers, Calculation Heavy metals, toxins Original Yes tors (e.g., seals, white ecosystem health (e.g., seals and government, tailed eagle) white tailed eagle have suffered public from heavy metals and toxins)

Table 11. Suggestions for socio- economic indicators.

Name Objective Target Data sources Links to potential Reference Quanti- group used threats tative?

ECONOMIC BENEFITS

Number of companies, or To show a direct gain from MPAs Municipal Questionnaire or Possible wear on Original Yes their total annual income, in local communities authorities tax department some areas that gain from the MPA statistics

TRAFFIC

Shipping (VMS, ships > Pressure identiﬁ cation: Identiﬁ ca- Government Maritime admin- Oil spills, coastal GBRMPA Yes 50m) tion of main shipping routes can istration erosion by waves, be used to identify target areas noise, and increased for potential oil spills or coastal turbidity erosion and noise

Coastal (small) shipping Pressure identiﬁ cation: Identify Government/ Maritime admin- Oil spills, coastal Original Yes (20m–50m) the position of trafﬁ c “nodes” from municipal istration erosion by waves, which urban sprawl may initiate, authorities noise, and increased e.g., piers turbidity

Leisure boats (<20m) Identiﬁ cation of main leisure Government/ Maritime admin- Noise and increased Original Yes boat routes makes it possible to municipal istration turbidity identify highly disturbed areas as authorities well as undisturbed areas

Fishing vessels Benthic fauna in areas (ha) used Government, Maritime/ﬁ sher- Overﬁ shing, by- Original Yes for bottom trawling are heavily managers ies administration catch, increased affected turbidity, waste, noise

DISPERSAL OF HUMAN SETTLEMENTS

Urban sprawl increases the Municipal GIS data Yes impact on the shoreline marine authorities environment causing potential or actual loss of habitats Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 67 Table 12. Suggestions for governance indicators.

Name Objective Target Data sources Links to potential Reference Quanti- group threats tative?

Annual amount (number) of All court cases of this type indi- MPA Court fi les, may The reason behind Original Yes court cases related to the cate defi ciencies in the govern- authorities require specifi c the court case may MPA’s environment ance of the MPA, e.g., the MPA inquiries give an indication (including biota) restrictions are not adequately of which offences known by the public are common (what poses a threat)

Management plan status The lack of a management plan All, MPA authorities None speciﬁ cPomeroy et No indicates unreliable governance especially al. 2004 the MPA authorities

Cover of protected vs. A low percentage (<20%) may MPA MPA GIS data Potential habitat Common Yes non-protected shallow areas indicate that there is an insufﬁ - authorities, alteration (change) available for sessile fauna cient amount of area that can act municipal and ﬂ ora in the MPA as a source of species or create authorities spill-over effects to areas with destroyed or altered habitats or decreased species numbers

Public participation (one- The amount of registered mail MPA Records of None Common Yes way as well as two-way and e-mail to authorities that authorities registered mail communication) relates to MPAs (can be divided and e-mail to based on content or by area). MPA authorities Hits on web pages, number of meetings, newspaper articles etc. This indicates the level of participation

68 2.6. Useful references

Publication TOPIC URL (direct link to document, if any) and/or to publisher

Day, J, Hockings, M, and Jones, G (2002) ‘Measuring Measuring http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/publications/tech/MPA_ effectiveness in marine protected areas—principles effectiveness evaluation/Marine%20PAs.pdf and practices’, Keynote presentation in Aquatic Pro- of MPAs http://www.parks.tas.gov.au/ tected Areas. What works best and how do we know? World Congress on Aquatic Protected Areas, Cairns, Australia, August 2002.

Alder, J., Zeller, D. & Pitcher, T. 2002. A method MPA management http://www.ﬁ sheries.ubc.ca/ru/feru/publications/CM30/ for evaluating marine protected area management. evaluation Alder_et_al.pdf Coastal Management 30:121-131 http://www.ﬁ sheries.ubc.ca/

Pomeroy, R.S., Parks, J.E. & Watson, L.M. 2004. Measuring http://www.effectivempa.noaa.gov/guidebook/doc/ How is your MPA doing? A Guidebook of Natural and effectiveness ME_Guidebook1.pdf Social Indicators for Evaluating Marine Protected Area http://www.effectivempa.noaa.gov/guidebook/doc/ Management Effectiveness. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland ME_Guidebook2.pdf and Cambridge, UK. xvi + 216 pp. http://www.effectivempa.noaa.gov/guidebook/doc/ ME_Guidebook3.pdf http://www.effectivempa.noaa.gov/guidebook/doc/ ME_Guidebook4.pdf http://www.effectivempa.noaa.gov/

Stolton, S., Hockings, M., Dudley, N., MacKinnon, K. MEE tracking tools http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/ESSD/envext.nsf/ & Whitten, T. 2003: Reporting Progress in Protected 48ByDocName/ReportingProgressinProtectedAreasASite- Areas. A Site-Level Management Effectiveness LevelManagementEffectivenessTrackingToolbinEnglishb/ Tracking Tool. World Bank/WWF Alliance for Forest $FILE/ReportingProgressInProtectedAreasToolIn Conservation and Sustainable Use.19 pp. English2003.pdf http://www.worldbank.org/

World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) MEE general http://www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/pubs/pdfs/PARKS/ 1999: Management effectiveness of protected areas. Parks_Jun99.pdf PARKS 9(2). http://www.iucn.org/

IUCN 2004. Assessment of Management Effective- Case studies http://www.icran.org/pdf/ICRAN_IUCN_ME_study_ ness in Selected Marine Protected Areas in the Eastern_Africa.pdf Western Indian Ocean. Final Report. 35 pp. http://www.icran.org/

Staub, F., Hatziolos, M.E. 2004. Score Card to Assess Score card for http://www.icriforum.org/mpa/SC2_eng_nocover.pdf Progress in Achieving Management Effectiveness MEE http://www.icriforum.org/ Goals for Marine Protected Areas. The World Bank. 1-30 pp.

Hockings, M., Stolton, S. and Dudley, N. 2000. IUCN framework http://app.iucn.org/dbtw-wpd/edocs/PAG-006.pdf Evaluating Effectiveness: A Framework for Assessing for MEE www.iucn.org the Management of Protected Areas. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Delbaere, B. 2003. An Inventory of Biodiversity Indica- Biodiversity indica- http://reports.eea.eu.int/technical_report_2004_92/en/ tors in Europe, 2002. European Environment Agency. tors Technical92_for_web.pdf Technical Report 92. Ofﬁ ce for Ofﬁ cial Publications of http://reports.eea.eu.int/ the European Communities, Luxemburg. 42 pp. Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 69 References

Agardy, T. S. 1997. Marine Protected Areas and in the gulf of Maine: Understanding the Ocean Conservation. Academic Press, Role of Community Involvement and Public Texas, USA. Participation, Gulf of Maine Protected Areas Alder, J., Zeller, D. & Pitcher, T. 2002. A Method Project. Report #3, July 1998. Gulf of Maine for Evaluating Marine Protected Area Man- Marine Protected Areas Project. 40 pp. agement. Coastal Management 30: 121-131. http://www.gulfofmaine.org/library/mpas/ Anon. 2002. Recommendation of the European process_eval_0798.PDF Parliament and of the Council concerning Canessa, R., Conley, K., Smiley, B. & Gueret, the implementation of Integrated Coastal D. 2003. Building an ecosystem-based Zone Management in Europe. Offi cial Jour- management plan for the proposed Bowie nal of the European Communities L 148/24 Seamount marine protected area. The fi fth (2002/413/EC). international SAMPAA conference Univer- Anon. 2003. Recommendations on Methodology sity of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada. for Monitoring the Effectiveness of MPA May 11 to 16, 2003. Management. Report from the Conservation Czybulka, D. & Kersandt, P. 2000. Legal regula- and Sustainable Use of the Mesoamerican tions, legal instruments and competent Barrier Reef Systems Project. MBRS Tech- authorities with Relevance for Marine nical Document No. 5. 49pp. Protected Areas (MPAs) in the Exclusive Anthoni, F. 2004. Scientists Should Focus More Economic Zone (EEZ) and the High Seas of on Threat of Pollution. MPA news 5(7):4. the OSPAR maritime area. German Federal Belfi ore, S., Balgos, M., Galofre, J., McLean, B., Agency for Nature Conservation, Bonn, Blaydes, M. & Tesch, D. International work- Germany. 84 pp. – Bfn-Skripten 22. shop – the role of indicators in integrated Commonwealth of Australia 2003. The benefi ts of coastal management. Department of Fisher- marine protected areas. Commonwelth of ies and Oceans Canada, Intergovernmental Australia brochure. 24 pp. http://www.deh. Oceanographic Commission, National gov.au/coasts/mpa/wpc/benefi ts/pubs/ben- Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration efi ts-mpas.pdf. (NOAA), International Geographical Union. Dahl-Tacconi, N. 2002. MPA perspective: MPA 162pp. perspective: Basis of MPA success lies in Bryant, D., Burke, L., McManus, J. & Spalding, M. the objectives. MPA news 3(10):4. 1998. Reefs at risk: A map based indicator Dahl-Tacconi, N. 2005. MPA Perspective: Sci- of threats to the world’s coral reefs. World ence, Participation and Politics in MPA Resources Institute, Washington, DC. 56 pp. Management. MPA news 6(11):3-4. Bäck, S., Ekebom, J., Johansson, C., Kangas, P., Dahl, K., Larsen, M.M., Andersen, J.H., Rasmus- Kautsky, H., Krause-Jensen, D., Mäkinen, sen, M.B., Petersen, J.K., Josefson, A.B., A. & Nielsen, K. 1998. Operative Methods Lundsteen, S., Dahllöf, I., Christiansen, for Mapping and Monitoring Phytobenthic T., Krause-Jensen, D., Hansen, J.L.S., Zone Biodiversity in the Baltic Sea. II Report Ærtebjerg, G., Henriksen, P., Helmig, S.A. of the PHYTOBIOS Project. Copenhagen, & Reker, J. 2004. Tools to assess the Nordic Councils of Ministers. – TemaNord conservation status of marine Annex 1 1998:568. habitats in Special Areas of Conservation. Bäck, S., Ekebom, J., Kangas, P., Kautsky, H., Phase 1: Identifi cation of potential indicators Mäkinen, A. & Rönnberg, O. 1996. Mapping and available data. National Environmental and monitoring of phytobenthic biodiversity Research Institute, Denmark. 96 pp. – NERI in the Northern Baltic Sea - background, Technical Report No. 488. http://technical- methods, and recommendations. Copen- reports.dmu.dk. hagen, Nordic Councils of Ministers. Dalton, T.M. 2004. An approach for integrating – TemaNord 1996:559. economic impact analysis into the evalua- Brody, S.D. 1998. An Evaluation of the Establish- tion of potential marine protected area sites. ment Processes for Marine Protected Areas 70 Journal of Environmental Management, 70: Gell, F.R. & Roberts, C.M. 2003. The Fishery 333-349. Effects of Marine Reserves and Fishery Day, J.C. 2002. Zoning-lessons from the Great Closures. WWF-US, 1250 24th Street, NW, Barrier Reef Marine Park. Ocean & Coastal Washington, DC 20037, USA. Management 45:139-156. Gilligan, B., Dudley, N., de Tejada, A.F. & Toivo- Delbaere, B. 2003. An Inventory of Biodiversity nen, E. 2005. Management Effectiveness Indicators in Europe, 2002. European Evaluation of Finland’s Protected Areas. Environment Agency. Technical Report 92. Nature Protection Publications of Metsähal- Offi ce for Offi cial Publications of the Euro- litus. Series A 147. pean Communities, Luxemburg. 42 pp. Halpern, B., Warner, R. R. & Gaines, S.D. 2004. EMMA 2005. Report of the Meeting of the Work- Moving the Discussion About Marine ing Group on European Marine Monitoring Reserves Science Forward. MPA news and Assessment (EMMA (1) 05/8/1), Copen- 5(7):1-2. hagen, 8 – 9 February 2005. Internal report, Halpern, B.S. 2003. The impact of marine unpublished. reserves: Do reserves work and does EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS reserve size matter? Ecological Applications 2001a. Indications of good practise for 13(1) Supplement:S117-S137. establishing management schemes on Hastings, A. & Botsford, L. 2003. Comparing European Marine sites. Learning from the designs of marine reserves for fi sheries and UK Marine SACs project 1996-2001. Peter- for biodiversity. Ecological Applications 13(1) borough, English Nature. Supplement:S65-S70. EN, SNH, CCW, EHS (NI), JNCC, & SAMS Helsinki Commission 1994/2003. HELCOM 2001b. Natura 2000. UK Marine SACs Recommendation 15/5. http://www.helcom. project: Partnerships in action. Proceedings fi /Recommendations/en_GB/rec15_5/ of a conference held in Edinburgh, 15th-16th Helsinki Commission 1998. Red List of Marine November 2000.Peterborough, English and Coastal Biotopes and Biotope Com- Nature. plexes of the Baltic Sea, Belt Sea and EN, SNH, EHS(DOE(NI)), CCW, JNCC, SAMS Kattegat – Including a comprehensive 2001c. Guidelines for developing conserva- description and classifi cation system for all tion objectives for Marine SACs - Learning Baltic marine and coastal biotopes – Baltic from the UK Marine SACs Project 1996- Sea Environmental Proceedings No. 75. 2001. Peterborough, English Nature. Helsinki Commission 2003a. Guidelines for European Commission 1998. Implementing the Designating Marine and Coastal Baltic Sea EC Habitats directive in marine and coastal Protected Areas (BSPA) and Proposed areas. Luxembourg, Offi ce for Offi cial Protection Categories. http://www.helcom. Publications of the European Communities. fi /Recommendations/guidelines/en_GB/ 62 pp. guide15_5/ European Commission 2004a. Guidance on the Helsinki Commission 2003b. Guidelines for Application of the Ecosystem Approach Management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas to Management of Human Activities in the (BSPAs). http://www.helcom.fi /Recommen- European Marine Environment. A paper dations/guidelines/en_GB/guidel_15_5_mgt/ prepared for the Second Stakeholder Con- Helsinki Commission 2003c. HELCOM Recom- ference on the Development of a European mendation 24/10. http://www.helcom. Marine Strategy 10-12 April 2004, Rotter- fi /Recommendations/en_GB/rec24_10/ dam, Netherlands. Helsinki Commission & OSPAR Commission European Commission 2004b. LIFE Focus / 2003. Statement on the Ecosystem LIFE-Nature: communicating with stakehold- Approach to Human Activities “Towards an ers and the general public – Best practice Ecosystem Approach to the Management examples for Natura 2000. Offi ce for Offi cial of Human Activities” . A paper prepared Publications of the European Communities, for the First Joint Ministerial Meeting of the Luxembourg. 72 pp. Helsinki and OSPAR Commissions (JMM) in European Environment Agency 2006. EUNIS Bremen, Germany. - European Nature Information System. Hiscock, K. & Tyler-Walters, H. 2003. Assessing http://eunis.eea.eu.int/index.jsp the sensitivity of seabed biotopes to human activities and natural events. MarLIN bro- Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 71 chure. Edinburgh, Scottish Natural Heritage. Marine Expert Group 2005. Guidelines: Natura 16 pp. 2000 network in the marine environment. Hockings, M., Stolton, S. & Dudley, N. 2000. Application of the Habitats and Birds Direc- Evaluating Effectiveness: A Framework for tives. A working draft of the Marine Expert Assessing the Management of Protected Group. Internal report. Unpublished. Areas. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cam- Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) 2006a. bridge, UK. Sensitivity assessment rationale - a sum- Hudson, B.E.T. 1988. User and public informa- mary. http://www.marlin.ac.uk/sah/baskitem- tion. In: Kenchington, R. & Hudson, B.E.T. plate.php?sens_ass_ratMarLIN. (eds.): Coral Reef Management Handbook. Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) 2006b. UNESCO Regional offi ce for Science and Maritime and coastal activities to environ- Technology for South East Asia, Jakarta. mental factors matrix. http://www.marlin. Pp. 163-176. ac.uk/PDF/activities3.pdf. IUCN – The World Conservation Union 1994. McGinnis, M.V. & Hastings, S.P. An Ecosystem Guidelines for Protected Area Management Management Approach for the Santa Categories. IUCN, Cambridge, UK. 94 pp. Barbara Channel Islands. National Marine IUCN – The World Conservation Union 2004. Sanctuaries Library. http://sanctuaries.noaa. Assessment of Management Effectiveness gov/library/alldocs.html. in Selected Marine Protected Areas in the MPA news 2000. MPA Enforcement: Practitioners Western Indian Ocean. Final Report. 35 pp. Employ Mix of High-Tech and Community- Jameson, S.C., Erdmann, M.V., Gibson, Jr. G.R., Based Strategies. MPA news, 2(5):1-4. & Potts, K.W. 1998. Development of biologi- MPA news 2001a. Workshop results: Tips from cal criteria for coral reef ecosystem assess- Managers on Improving Science in MPA ment. Atoll Research Bulletin 450. 102 pp. management. MPA news 3(4):4 Jones, P.J.S. 2002. MPA Perspective: advice for MPA news 2001b. Workshops Results: Tips from promoting participation of authorities and scientists on Improving Science in the MPA stakeholders in MPA planning. MPA news Management. MPA news 3(3):5. 3(7):5. MPA news 2004a.: Invasive Species: Their Jones, P.J.S., Burgess, J. & Bhattachary, D. 2001. Threats to MPAs, and How Practitioners Are An evaluation of approaches for promoting Responding.6(6):1-4. relevant authority and stakeholder participa- MPA news 2004b. MPA news Poll: What Qualities tion in European Marine sites in the UK. Make a Good Managers? MPA news 6(4):3. English Nature (UK Marine SACs Project). MPA news 2005. Climate Change and Ocean 98 pp. Warming: Preparing MPAs for It. MPA news Kelleher, G. 1999. Guidelines for Marine Pro- 6(8):1-3. tected Areas. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and OSPAR Commission 2004. Document MASH Cambridge, UK. xxiv +107pp. 04/5/3-E: Draft proposal for a work program Laine, A. 2005. Integrated Management System on the development of practical guidance for the Bothnian Bay - Bothnian Bay. In: for the application of HELCOM and OSPAR Marine Expert Group (ed.) (2005) Guide- management guidelines Meeting of the lines: Natura 2000 network in the marine working group on Marine Protected Areas, environment Application of the Habitats Species and Habitats (MASH) 5-8 October and Birds Directives A working draft of the 2004.Unpublished. Marine Expert Group. Unpublished. Palumbi, S. R. 2002. Marine Reserves: a tool for Lewis, A., Slegers, S. Lowe, D. Muller, L., Fern- ecosystem management and Conservation. andes, L. & Day, J. 2003. Use of Spatial Arlington, US, Pew Oceans Commission. Analysis and GIS Techniques to Re-Zone Pomeroy, R.S., Parks, J.E. & Watson, L.M. 2004. the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Coastal How is your MPA doing? A Guidebook of GIS Workshop, July 7-8, 2003, University of Natural and Social Indicators for Evaluating Wollongong, Australia. Marine Protected Area Management Effec- Lubchenco, J., Palumbi, S.R., Gaines, S.D. & tiveness. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Andelman, S. 2003. Plugging a hole in the Cambridge, UK. xvi + 216 pp. ocean: the emerging science of marine Ritterhoff, J., Gubbay, S., & Zucco, C. (eds.) reserves. Ecological Applications 13(1) Sup- 2004. Marine Protected Areas and Fisher- plement:S3-S7 ies. Proceedings of the International Expert 72 workshop held at the International Academy the high sea, including tools such as marine for Nature Conservation, Isle of Vilm, protected areas: scientifi c requirements and Germany 28 June - 2 July, 2004. German legal aspects. Proceedings of the Expert Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Workshop held at the International Academy Bonn, Germany. 177 pp. – Bfn-Skripten 122. for Nature Conservation, Isle of Vilm, Ger- Roberts, C.M. & Sargant, H. 2002. Fishery ben- many, 27 February – 4 March 2001. German efi ts of fully protected marine reserves: why Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, habitat and behaviour are important. Natural Bonn, Germany. 216 pp. - Bfn -Skripten 43. Resources Modelling 15(4):487-507. Tyler-Walters, H. & Jackson, A. 1999. Assessing Roberts, C.M. & Hawkins, J.P. 2000. Fully- seabed species and ecosystems sensitivi- protected marine reserves: a guide. WWF ties. Rationale and user guide. Report to Endangered Seas Campaign, 1250 24th English Nature, Scottish Natural Heritage Street, NW, Washington, DC 20037, USA and the Department of the Environment and Environment Department, University of Transport and the Regions from the Marine York, York, YO10 5DD, UK. Life Information Network (MarLIN). Ply- Rogers, S.I. & Greenaway, B. 2005. A UK mouth, Marine Biological Association of the perspective on the development of marine UK. (MarLIN Report No.4.). January 2000 ecosystem indicators. Marine Pollution Bul- edition. letin, 50: 9-19. Villa, F., Tunesi, L. & Agardy, T. 2002. Zoning Roff, J.C., Taylor, M.E. & Laughren, J. 2003. Marine Protected Areas through Spatial Geophysical approaches to the classifi ca- Multiple-Criteria Analysis: The Case of the tion, delineation and monitoring of marine Asinara Island National Marine Reserve of habitats and their communities. Aquatic Italy. Conservation Biology 16(2):515-526 Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Eco- Walters, C. 1997. Challenges in adaptive manage- systems 13:77-90. ment of riparian and coastal ecosystems. Salm, R.V. Clark J.R. & Siirilä E. 2000. Marine Conservation Ecology [online]1(2):1. and Coastal Protected Areas: A guide for Willis, T., Millar, R., Babcock, R. & Tolimieri, N. planners and managers. IUCN. Washington 2005. MPA Perspective: The Science of DC. Xxi + 371pp. Marine Reserves: How Much of It Is Sci- Schiller, A., Hunsaker, C.T., Kane, M.A., Wolfe, ence? MPA news 5:5-7 A.K., Dale, V.H., Suter, G.W., Russell, C.S., World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) Pion, G., Jensen, M.H. & Konar, V.C. 2001. 1999. Management effectiveness of pro- Communicating Ecological Indicators to tected areas. PARKS 9:68. Decision Makers and the Public. Ecology Yaffee, S., Phillips, A., Frentz, I., Hardy, P., Maleki, and Society, 5(1):19. S. & Thorpe, B. 1996. Ecosystem Manage- Simberloff, D. 1997. Flagships, umbrellas, and ment in the United States: An Assessment keystones: is single-species management of Current Experience., Island Press, passé in the landscape era? Biological Washington DC. Conservation 83:247-257. Solway Firth LIFE Project 2000). Solway Firth European Marine Site: Management Scheme. http://www.solway-ems.co.uk/man- agement_document_contents.htm. Staub, F. & Hatziolos, M.E. 2004. Score Card to Assess Progress in Achieving Management Effectiveness Goals for Marine Protected Areas. The World Bank. 1-30 pp. Stein, D. 2003. MPA perspective: Tips for developing marine boundaries. MPA news 4(7):5. Swenson, J.J. and Franklin, J. 2000. The effects of future urban development on habitat frag- mentation in the Santa Monica Mountains. Landscape Ecology 15: 713-730. Thiel, H. & Koslow, J.A. (eds.) 2001. Managing risks to biodiversity and the environment on Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 73 Attachments

ATTACHMENT 1: International laws and The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea conventions (UNCLOS) This convention provides a tool for conserving The Helsinki Convention marine areas beyond territorial waters, both in Inspired by the 1972 UN Conference on the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and on the Human Environment, in 1974 the governments High Seas. It enables nations to take measures, of the Baltic Sea states signed the Baltic Marine including the regulation of fi shing and the protec- Environment Protection Convention (Helsinki tion of living resources on the continental shelf Convention), which entered into force in 1980. The up to a distance of 200 nautical miles from their worldwide and regional awareness of the need for national jurisdictional baselines. In addition, protection of coastal and marine areas and habi- UNCLOS has created a formal responsibility for tats led to the inclusion of the new Article 15 on countries to protect the sea from all sources of Nature Conservation and Biodiversity into the new pollution, including land-based pollution. 1992 Convention, emphasizing the importance of conserving natural habitats and biodiversity, http://www.univie.ac.at/RI/KONTERM/intlaw/ as well as protecting ecological processes. Many konterm/vrkon_en/html/doku/unclos.htm HELCOM recommendations support the protection of the marine environment and regulation of The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) human activities. The CBD aims to conserve biodiversity and promote sustainable use, as well as sharing benefi ts http://www.helcom.fi /Convention/en_GB/text/ from biological resources. It also supports marine http://www.helcom.fi /Recommendations/en_GB/ conservation, particularly the establishment of valid/ MPAs.

EU legislation: Habitats and Birds Directives http://www.biodiv.org/ EU legislation aims to protect the natural environment through the “Habitats Directive” (Council The RAMSAR Wetland Convention Directive 92/43/EEC) and species through the “The conservation and wise use of wetlands by Birds Directive (Council Directive 79/409/EEC). national action and international cooperation” Both mention the creation of protected areas as is the objective of this convention. Therefore, measures for conservation, and when they are RAMSAR sites are often situated on the coast established, they jointly form a network known and may thus contain marine components. This as Natura 2000. Both Directives may be and convention may therefore serve as an additional have been applied to the coastal and marine tool for MPA managers. environments, and many existing BSPAs belong to the Natura 2000 network. In addition, the http://www.ramsar.org/ Water Framework Directive, Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive, Nitrates Directive, and The World Heritage Convention Discharges of Dangerous Substances Directive To protect cultural and natural sites of universal could be integrated in MPA design and manage- value, the UNESCO World Heritage Committee ment. may accept sites nominated by governments for the World Heritage list. One site including a good http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/ proportion of marine areas is the “High Coast” nature_conservation/eu_nature_legislation/habi- in the Bothnian Bay, which includes a marine tats_directive/index_en.htm (HABITATS Directive) component of 80,000 ha containing a number of http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/ offshore islands. The World Heritage Convention nature_conservation/eu_nature_legislation/birds_ is a name that carries much weight and clearly directive/index_en.htm (BIRDS Directive) has a value for the area, both by highlighting its http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature/ 74 importance as an area with great natural value, pollution of the marine environment by ships from and also by attracting visitors. operational or accidental causes. It is a combination of two treaties, adopted in 1973 and 1978, http://whc.unesco.org/world_he.htm respectively, and updated by amendments over the years. The combined instrument is referred to UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Programme as the International Convention for the Prevention The biospheres are “areas of terrestrial and of Marine Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modifi ed coastal-marine ecosystems which are internation- by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (MARPOL ally recognized for promoting and demonstrating 73/78), and it entered into force on 2 October a balanced relationship between people and 1983. Currently, the entire body of water of the nature”, a concept of great relevance to marine Baltic Sea, excluding Russian waters, has been areas. Examples of this in the Baltic area include identifi ed as a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area The North Vidzeme Biosphere Reserve located in (PSSA) by the IMO, and should receive special Latvia, which comprises 53 km of the coastline of protection by special routeing measures, as an the Gulf of Riga and along the border with Estonia area to be avoided, and/or other navigational to the north, and the Archipelago Sea in Finland. duties, such as piloting. http://www.unesco.org/mab/ http://www.imo.org/InfoResource/ mainframe.asp?topic_id=783 The Bonn Convention (The Migratory Species http://www.imo.org/ Convention; CMS) This convention predominantly concerns manag- ASCOBANS ing, controlling take, and controlling damage to The Agreement on the Conservation of Small individual migratory species, some of which are Cetaceans of the Baltic and North Seas marine such as whales, seals, and porpoises. (ASCOBANS) was concluded in 1991 under the However, it may also include the creation of auspices of the Convention on Migratory Species reserves. (UNEP/CMS or Bonn Convention) and entered into force in 1994. ASCOBANS is open for acces- http://www.cms.int/ sion by all Range States (i.e., any state that exercises jurisdiction over any part of the range of a The Bern Convention (Convention on the Con- species covered by the Agreement or whose fl ag servation of European Wildlife and Natural vessels engage in operations adversely affecting Habitats) small cetaceans in the Agreement area) and by The Bern Convention aims to ensure the conser- regional economic integration organizations. vation of the habitats of wild fl ora and fauna and of The ASCOBANS Area is defi ned as follows: “the endangered natural habitats, giving special atten- marine environment of the Baltic and North Seas, tion to migratory species. The Emerald Network as delimited to the north-east by the shores of the was launched by the Council of Europe as part Gulfs of Bothnia and Finland; to the south-west by of the work under the Bern Convention. It is an latitude 48°30’ N and longitude 5°W; to the north- ecological network of “areas of special conserva- west by longitude 5°W and a line drawn through tion interest” (ASCIs). The network involves all the the following points: latitude 60°N/longitude European Union States, some non-Community 5°W, latitude 61°N/longitude 4°W, and latitude states, and a number of African states. In addition, 62°N/longitude 3°W; to the north by latitude 62°N; the European Community is a Contracting Party and including the Kattegat and the Sound and Belt to the Bern Convention. The Emerald Network is passages but excluding the waters between Cape based on the same principles as the EU Natura Wrath and St Anthony Head.” 2000. For EU Member States, Emerald Network sites are those of the Natura 2000 Network. http://www.ascobans.org/ (European Commission 1998, Czybulka & http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/ Kersandt 2000) 104.htm

IMO and MARPOL The MARPOL Convention is the main international convention dealing with the prevention of Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 75 ATTACHMENT 2: effects. Many activities have been grouped to Human activities table make the list reasonably sized. The table does not This table is a checklist for all possible human address the impacts of the activities on the ter- activities and the mechanisms by which they restrial/coastal species, e.g., a public beach or a might threaten the biodiversity of a site. It is marina may cause noise disturbance that affects general rather than defi nitive, and does not coastal birds. Modifi ed from the report of EMMA indicate the magnitude or signifi cance of any (EMMA 2005) and the original work of MarLIN environmental effect, nor of indirect or cumulative (Marine Life Information network 2006b).

Environmental Physical Chemical Biological Factors

Sub-activities/ Activities events ow rate changes rate ow fl oval of target species Substratum removal Substratum smothering) (including change Substratum Increased siltation (deposited sediment) Turbidity changes (suspended sediment) desiccation) (including changes regime Emergence Water Temperature changes changes exposure Wave disturbance Noise disturbance Visual changes Electromagnetic Litter contamination compound Synthetic Heavy metal contamination Hydrocarbon contamination contaminationRadionuclide Nutrient changes (eutrophication) changes Salinity De-oxygenation abrasion) (including species to damage Physical Displacement of (moving) species Rem Removal of non-target species population/community in dynamics/structureChanges Introduction of microbial pathogens/ parasites species non-native of Introduction Finfi sh xx xx Aquaculture Macroalgae xx Shellfi sh xxx Climate Global warming x x x x change Barrages x x x x Beach replenish- x Coastal ment defence Groynes x x Sea walls/break- xxx waters Angling x Bait digging xxx Bird eggs x Curios x Collecting Higher plants x Kelp/wrack xx Macroalgae x Peelers Xx Shellfi sh x Artifi cial reefs x x x Cables/pipes x Construction phase of coastal defences/ xxxx x Develop- other structures ment Culverting lagoons x x x x x Docks, ports, xxx marinas Land claim x Oil/gas platforms x Freshwater x Maerl x x x x Navigational/mainte- xxx Extraction nance dredging Oil/gas x x Rock/minerals x Sand/gravel x x x

76 Environmental Physical Chemical Biological Factors

Sub-activities/ Activities events ow rate changes rate ow fl roduction of microbial pathogens/ parasites pathogens/ microbial of roduction Substratum removal Substratum smothering) (including change Substratum Increased siltation (deposited sediment) Turbidity changes (suspended sediment) desiccation) (including changes regime Emergence Water Temperature changes changes exposure Wave disturbance Noise disturbance Visual changes Electromagnetic Litter contamination compound Synthetic Heavy metal contamination Hydrocarbon contamination contaminationRadionuclide (eutrophication) changes Nutrient changes Salinity De-oxygenation abrasion) (including species to damage Physical Displacement of (moving) species Removal of target species Removal of non-target species population/community in dynamics/structureChanges Int species non-native of Introduction Fixed netting xx (gill/tangle) Mobile netting (seine) and pelagic xx trawling Fisheries Potting/creeling xx Suction/hydraulic xxx xxxx dredging Benthic trawling/ xx xxx scallop dredging Eutrophication x Heavy metals x Hydrocarbons x Oil dispersants x Pollution Oil/tar/chemicals x Organotins/TBT x Pesticides/herbi- x cides Sewage x x Boating/yachting x x x Diving x Marina x Recreation Public beach x x Resort x x Water sports x x Coastal forestry/ xx farming Education/interpreta- x tion Energy generation Uses x (wind/tide/wave) Military x x Research x x x Shipping x x x x x x Cooling water x (power stations) Industrial effl uent xx discharge Industrial/urban emissions (including x air pollution) Land/riverine runoff (including agricul- x Waste tural pollution) Litter and debris x Nuclear effl uent x discharge Quarry waste x x (mining) Sewage discharge x x x x Shipping (including fi sheries) Spoil dumping x x x Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 77 ATTACHMENT 3: Sensitivity assessment rationales for habitats and species

Sensitivity assessment rationale for species (Tyler- Walters & Jackson 1999).

78 Sensitivity assessment rationale for biotopes (Hiscock & Tyler- Walters 2003). Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 79 ATTACHMENT 4: mary” (Marine Life Information Network 2006a). An example of a general An alternative categorization for effects could be “sensitivity-to-impact” matrix likely/possible/unlikely, as introduced by Ritterhoff and co-authors in “Marine Protected Areas and The table below is a suggestion for a general Fisheries” (Ritterhoff et al. 2004), by whom the “sensitivity-to-impact” matrix structure, using ﬁ sh- model table was created as well. ing activities as an example. The sensitivity scale used (very high/high/moderate/low/very low/not The evaluations are not based on facts, and sensitive/not relevant) was employed in MarLIN should not be used as such; it is only intended in the ”Sensitivity assessment rationale - a sum- as a suggestion for a matrix structure.

Benthic Pelagic Dredging Netting Potting Longline Collecting trawls trawls

Habitats/biotopes

Mussel beds High Not relevant Very high Not sensitive Not relevant Not sensitive High

Zostera beds Moderate Not relevant Very high Not sensitive Not relevant Not sensitive Not relevant

Estuaries Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant Low Not relevant Not relevant Low

Sublittoral sandy High Not relevant Moderate Not sensitive Not relevant Not sensitive Not relevant bottoms model Large shallow inlets Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant Moderate

Species

Mammals Low Moderate Not sensitive High Not relevant Not relevant High

Fish Moderate High Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Not relevant

Migratory birds Low Low Not sensitive High Not relevant Low High

80 ATTACHMENT 5: An example of a site-speciﬁ c “vulnerability-to-impact” matrix

The evaluation in the table is not based on facts and should not be used as such; it is only intended as a suggestion for a matrix structure. The model table was created by Ritterhoff et al. 2004.

Benthic Windmills Pollution: Recreational Waste: Sand Oil spills trawls heavy metals ﬁ shing litter extraction

Habitats/biotopes

Sandy bottoms; sublittoral High Moderate Moderate Not relevant Low High Moderate zone level bottoms

Coastal dunes; foredunes Not relevant High Low Not relevant Moderate High Low

Sandy beaches Not relevant High Low Not relevant High Moderate Moderate

Glo-lakes; brackish, Not relevant Not relevant Moderate Not relevant High Not relevant Low eutrophic River banks Not relevant model Low High Low High Low Moderate Species

Zostera sp. beds High High Low Not relevant Low High Low

Salmo salar L. Low Not relevant High High Low Moderate Moderate

Haliaeetus albicilla Not relevant Moderate High Moderate Moderate Not relevant High Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 81 ATTACHMENT 6: ties and their impact on biodiversity with that on An example of a table combining conservation objectives and current/required impacts of human activities management solutions. Different interest on conservation features with features on the site could be indicated with numbers and explained; for example: 1=subtidal management issues mussel beds, 2=sandy beach. The table has This table represents an example of a matrix been modiﬁ ed from tables used in the Solway that may be presented in a management plan, Firth European Marine Site Management combining the information on threatening activi- Scheme (Solway Firth Life Project 2000).

Activity and Interest Impact on Conservation Existing Management Relevant Key Time location features interest objective management solutions authority partners scale features and 1234 signiﬁ cance

Water quality

Agricultural pollution

Heavy metals

Coastal development

Building on shore

Extraction

Sand

FISHING

Bottom trawling model Netting

SHIPPING

Maintenance dredging

Oil pollution

RECREATION

Motor boats

Bird watching

OTHER

Bait collecting

82 ATTACHMENT 7: Regulation options Activities to be regulated and Legislation must provide for making regulations to regulation options according to control and, if necessary, prohibit activities: Interim regulations to provide protection of an HELCOM BSPA management area for which a plan is being developed; guidelines Regulations to enforce a plan; External regulations to control activities Activities to be regulated occurring outside a managed area which may According to HELCOM/OSPAR guidelines, the fol- adversely affect features, resources, or activi- lowing activities and threats should be regulated: ties within the area. 1. Extraction of sand, stone, and gravel; 2. Oil and gas exploration and exploitation (includ- The options for regulations are: ing accidental spillage of oil) and exploitation a) Maintenance of sustainable and traditional of other natural resources such as amber; uses, when appropriate; 3. Dumping of solid waste and dredged spoils; b) Restriction of activities in extent 4. Constructions (including coastal defence meas- c) Restriction of activities in space (including ures and infrastructure); zoning); 5. Wastewater (from industry, municipalities, and d) Regulation of activities in time (ban of certain households) and other harmful discharges, activities for a speciﬁ c period, such as, a. discharges of nutrients and biodegradable during breeding seasons or spawning peri- organic substances, ods); b. discharges of heavy metals and other e) Alteration of procedures (e.g., reintroduction of hazardous substances such as pesticides, traditional land and sea use practices); antifouling agents, chemicals, and radioactive f) Substitution of materials or substances (e.g., substances; to avoid contamination); 6. Aquaculture; g) Total ban on building or demolition of con- 7. Transport of hazardous substances by ship struction (e.g., demolition of dykes); through these areas; h) Restoration, reintroduction. 8. Military activities; (Helsinki Commission 2003b) 9. Installation of wind-farms (including offshore wind-farms); 10. Submarine cables.

The following activities and threats should be regulated, where appropriate: 1. Agriculture and forestry including water regulation; 2. Fishing and hunting; 3. Tourism and recreational activities. Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected Areas: guidelines and tools Planning and management of Baltic Sea Protected 83 84 www.helcom.ﬁ