Eddystone Reef Camera Survey Summary Report 2014-2016

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Stephen K. Pikesley Jean-Luc Solandt Colin Trundle Matthew J. Witt

December 2016

All data remain copyright of the project partners. Maps or data within this report may not be used or referenced without the explicit written consent of the data owners.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Executive summary

The Eddystone Reef is part of the Start Point to Plymouth Sound and Eddystone Special Area of Conservation (SAC). In January 2014 management measures were introduced to prohibit bottom-towed fisheries from using key areas within the SAC, thereby creating a mosaic of protected areas within the SAC that may provide protection to vulnerable reef-associated species. Ideally, newly established protected areas should be monitored over time to observe change in biological communities attributable to adopted management strategies.

This project is a collaborative partnership between the Marine Conservation Society (MCS), Cornwall Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority (CIFCA) and the University of Exeter (Penryn Campus) (UoE); funded by the Pig Shed Trust (2014-2016, and 2020) and Princess Yachts (2017-2019).

This report details survey activities for the first three years of the project, 2014-2016. Drop-down camera surveys in 2016 produced 406 images of the seabed, analysis of which is ongoing. Surveys in 2015 produced 428 images that allowed identification of 1542 benthic organisms (n = 28 species identified to highest generic species classification). Surveys conducted in 2014 resulted in 214 images which yielded 372 benthic organisms (n = 23 species).

Surveys in 2015 and 2016 have built on the library of seabed images gathered for the Eddystone Reef complex based on primary surveys in 2014. Recently agreed continued monitoring throughout 2017-2019 will likely improve the robustness of any findings regarding seabed communities in the region and any changes thereof, as response to management regimes in place at the site.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Contents

Executive summary 1

Introduction 3

Aims & Objectives 5

Method 6

Results 8

Discussion 25

Appendices 27

Appendix 1: CIFCA 2014 Field Report

Appendix 2: CIFCA 2015 Field Report

Appendix 3: CIFCA 2016 Field Report #1

Appendix 4: CIFCA 2016 Field Report #2

Appendix 5: Substratum and image quality

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Introduction

On the 1st of January 2014 Cornwall Inshore Fisheries Conservation Authority (CIFCA) Closed Areas European Marine Sites (EMS) Byelaw came into force, this prohibited the use of bottom-towed fishing gear within EMS within the district. One such area that benefited from protection was the Eddystone Reef complex. Eddystone Reef is situated approximately nine nautical miles off the southern coast of Cornwall (South West UK) and comprises part of the Start Point to Plymouth Sound and Eddystone Special Area of Conservation (SAC). The Eddystone Reef was subsequently zoned to protect key site features (Figure 1). The local seabed habitats are too deep (at over 45 m) to safely deploy SCUBA divers to monitor the effects of the fisheries closure, hence remote survey techniques have been employed to gather data. The benthic habitats of the Eddystone Reef provide an important opportunity to use remote seabed video and drop-down camera surveys to monitor and to quantify the response of these benthic ecosystems following the cessation of bottom-towed fishing effort.

A multi-partner collaborative consortium, led by the Marine Conservation Society (MCS), with CIFCA and the University of Exeter (UoE), have undertaken to survey these newly protected habitats to monitor for long- term changes to the seabed as it is released from towed gear fishing pressure. As well as gaining insight into the recovery of these habitats it is anticipated this project will foster a collaborative working relationship between NGOs, regulators and others (such as Universities, and Statutory Nature Conservation Bodies) that will provide a progressive, more cohesive approach to UK marine conservation.

In this report, we detail data collection and seabed image metadata analysis for the first three years of the project at the Eddystone Reef complex.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Figure 1. Eddystone Special Area of Conservation (SAC) study area. (a) Eddystone SAC (grey polygon) in relation to Cornwall Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority (CIFCA) district boundary (broken line polygon). Part (a) is located according to the inset (b). (c) Eddystone SAC detailing areas closed to bottom-towed gear (red hatched polygon) and areas with no gear restrictions (green hatched polygon). In all parts 50 m isobath is drawn and labelled; survey boxes are drawn as blue polygons and labelled in part (c). All map parts are drawn to differing spatial scales. Maps drawn to Projected Coordinate System: British National Grid Transverse Mercator.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Aims & Objectives

Aims of the project

1. To identify any changes to the seabed habitats of Eddystone Reef, now subject to new management restrictions of bottom-towed fishing gears. 2. To identify patterns in the diversity and abundance of sessile and mobile species and commercial species that are recorded during seabed photographic surveys. 3. To collaboratively report the results of the surveys to the local interest groups/stakeholders to illustrate the effects of management measures on commercial and biodiversity interests in Cornish waters.

Objectives of the project

1. Analyse high-resolution photographic imagery of habitats, and the change in the extent and type of habitat over time that are subject to management measures. 2. To highlight how management of bottom-towed fishing gears might result in changes to seabed species and habitats. 3. To foster greater co-ordinated working between regulators, conservation advisors and NGOs, in light of new progressive spatial management of heavy impact mobile fishing gears.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Method

Data collection

Drop-down camera surveys were conducted in June/July 2014, July 2015 and July/October 2016 (see Tables 1,2 and 3 for survey metadata). Photographic images were collected in accordance with the Cornwall Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority (CIFCA) 2014 Field Report V0.3 (2014), 2015 Eddystone Field Report July 2015 V0.2 (2015), Eddystone Field Report 20160718 V0.3 (2016) and Eddystone Field Report 20161010 V0.2 (2016) (see Apendices 1-4). Survey transects in 2015 and 2016 mirrored those established during 2014. Where this was not possible due to limitations imposed by tide or wind direction, transects were made that bisected 2014 survey routes (Figure 2,3 and 4). In 2014, images of very poor quality (image excessively blurred due to camera movement or seabed obscured by sediment suspension) were removed from the stills catalogue before these data were transfered to the University of Exeter (UoE) for analysis. In 2015 and 2016 all images were transferred to UoE for analysis irrespective of image quality.

Camera stills analysis

Analysis of the still images gathered in 2015 and 2016 was undertaken as follows. Firstly, images without spatial reference (no longitude or latitude recorded), or where no movement of the camera frame had been recorded (no change in location between successive images), or where the camera frame was not positioned on the seabed when the image was captured, were removed from the analysis.

Each image (resolution: 5184 x 3456 pixels) was then examined at full frame using a 1920 x 1080 pixel monitor resolution and the following information recorded. The substratum was described and classified using European Union Nature Information System (EUNIS) habitat classifications (e.g. circalittoral mixed sediments: 5.44). The substratum was further categorised based on the visible dominant (> 50%) bottom type using a four part classification: fine (F) , medium (M), coarse (C) and rock/reef feature (R/R). The clarity of each image (image quality) was categorised using a three part classification system: good, moderate and poor based on the sharpness of the image (focus and lack of camera movement) and amount of particle suspension present. To ascertain contact of the camera frame with the

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016 seabed, the on-screen distance between visble laser marks was measured. The number of laser marks present in each image was also counted.

Images were then viewed at full width and panned from top to bottom and the presence of all conspicuous benthic organisms recorded. These were then identified to their highest taxonomic level (e.g. Eunicella verucosa), if this was not possible individuals were recorded by highest generic species description (e.g. bryozoa (encrusting), sea squirt, nudibranch, sponge (encrusting/cushion), sponge (erect)). If required the image was zoomed further to aid identification. Confidence in species identification was recorded on the following scale: low confidence (C1), moderate confidence (C2) and high confidence (C3). The total number of each species within the image was recorded. Where species were encrusting or turf forming (e.g. bryozoa/hydroid turf, encrusting bryozoa) a gridded actate overlay was placed on the monitor screen and a visual assessment of the percentage coverage of these species was made with the image viewed at full frame. As camera look angle was near perpendicular to the seabed no trapezoid correction was made. A relative abundance SACFOR score (S: super abundant, A: abundant, C: common, F: frequent, O: occasional and R: rare) adapted from the Marine Nature Conservation Review (MNCR) SACFOR abundance scales (http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/) was then assigned to each species recorded.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Results

Building on the Eddystone Reef camera survey reports for 2014 and 2015 this report details data collection and seabed image metadata analysis for the first three years (2014 to 2016) of the project at the Eddystone Reef complex.

Survey strategy and image capture

The 2014 Eddystone Reef camera surveys generated 226 images captured from survey boxes 1, 2 and 3 (east to west). Of these images, two were without spatial reference, four had duplicated spatial references, and six images were captured whilst the camera frame was not in contact with the seabed, these images were not analysed. No images were rejected as a result of poor image quality. The number of tows/images per survey box were; box 1 (tows (n = 8): images (n = 132)), box 2 (tows (n = 4): images (n = 71)) and box 3 (tows (n =1): images (n = 11)), (Figures 2a, 3a, 4a and metadata in Table 1).

The 2015 surveys generated 468 images. Forty images were captured whilst the camera frame was not in contact with the seabed, these images were not analysed. No images were rejected as a result of poor image quality, duplication of, or missing spatial reference. The number of tows/images per survey box were; box 1 (tows (n = 7): images (n = 134)), box 2 (tows (n = 8): images (n = 148)) and box 3 (tows (n = 8): images (n = 146)), (Figures 2b, 3b, 4b and metadata in Table 2).

The 2016 surveys generated 483 images. Sixty-two images were out of focus, primarily due to delayed triggering of the remote camera, ten images were captured whilst the camera frame was not in contact with the seabed, four images were blank and one image was without spatial reference. These images (n = 77; 16% of total) were not analysed. The number of tows/analysable images per survey box were; box 1 (tows (n = 8): images (n = 134)), box 2 (tows (n = 7): images (n = 140)) and box 3 (tows (n = 8): images (n = 132)), (Figures 2c, 3c, 4c and metadata in Table 3).

Survey transects in 2015 and 2016 mirrored those established during 2014. Where this was not possible due to limitations imposed by tide or wind direction, transects were made that bisected 2014 survey routes. See Figure 5 for examples of images captured from survey boxes 1 and 2 with near- coincident sampling locations.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Figure 2. Eddystone Reef survey strategy for survey box 1 2014-2016. Location of captured images: analysed images (black circle), deleted images (red cross). The total number of validated images captured for each survey box are detailed in the respective figure legend. In all parts survey boxes are drawn as blue polygons (0.44 km2). Areas closed to bottom- towed gear (BTG) within the SAC (grey hatched polygons), reef features (grey polygon) (Axelsson et al. 2006)1. Blue circles indicate location of images shown in Figure 5. All map parts are drawn to the same spatial scale. Maps drawn to Projected Coordinate System: British National Grid Transverse Mercator.

1. Axelsson, M., Dewey, S., Chaddock, S, and Duke, S (2006) Seastar Survey: Survey of the reef habitat around Eddystone Rocks, Plymouth.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Figure 3. Eddystone Reef survey strategy for survey box 2 2014-2016. Location of captured images: analysed images (black circle), deleted images (red cross). The total number of validated images captured for each survey box are detailed in the respective figure legend. In all parts survey boxes are drawn as blue polygons (0.44 km2). Blue circles indicate location of images shown in Figure 5. All map parts are drawn to the same spatial scale. Maps drawn to Projected Coordinate System: British National Grid Transverse Mercator.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Figure 4. Eddystone Reef survey strategy for survey box 3 2014-2016. Location of captured images: analysed images (black circle), deleted images (red cross). The total number of validated images captured for each survey box are detailed in the respective figure legend. In all parts survey boxes are drawn as blue polygons (0.44 km2). All map parts are drawn to the same spatial scale. Maps drawn to Projected Coordinate System: British National Grid Transverse Mercator.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Figure 5. Example images captured from near-coincident sampling locations from survey boxes 1 and 2, 2014-2016. Distances between locations within box 1; 2014-2015: 13.3 m, 2014-2016: 12.9 m, 2015-2016: 11.4 m, and box 2; 2014-2015: 12.8 m, 2014-2016: 1.9 m, 2015-2016: 11.4 m. Refer to Figures 2 and 3 for location of images.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Table 1. Metadata for 2014 survey tows. Tows are described by survey box, date, start longitude/latitude, end longitude/latitude, total distance of tow (m: image to image), tow speed (ms-1: mean), tow speed (knots: mean), images captured (n), distance between images (m), maximum and minimum distance between images (m) and total number of species counted. Longitude and latitude are given in decimal degrees WGS84.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Table 2. Metadata for 2015 survey tows. Tows are described by survey box, date, start longitude/latitude, end longitude/latitude, total distance of tow (m: image to image), tow speed (ms-1: mean), tow speed (knots: mean), images captured (n), distance between images (m), maximum and minimum distance between images (m) and total number of species counted. Longitude and latitude are given in decimal degrees WGS84.

Box Tow ID Date Start lon Start lat End lon End lat Total Tow Tow Images Dist. Max. dist. Min. dist. Species distance speed speed (n) between between between (n) (m) (ms-1) (knots) images (m) images images (total) (mean) (mean) (mean) (m) (m) 1 20150709_Box_1_T1 09/07/2015 -4.338 50.216 -4.335 50.217 269 0.26 0.51 15 19 37 3 71 20150709_Box_1_T3 09/07/2015 -4.338 50.217 -4.336 50.218 190 0.25 0.49 14 15 29 4 50 20150709_Box_1_T5 09/07/2015 -4.337 50.215 -4.334 50.217 355 0.28 0.55 21 18 24 10 47 20150709_Box_1_T8a 09/07/2015 -4.332 50.216 -4.329 50.218 322 0.26 0.51 20 17 23 13 81 20150723_Box_1_T2 23/07/2015 -4.334 50.215 -4.336 50.216 199 0.16 0.31 21 10 11 5 57 20150723_Box_1_T8 23/07/2015 -4.328 50.215 -4.329 50.216 202 0.15 0.29 23 9 12 2 180 20150723_Box_1_T9 23/07/2015 -4.332 50.215 -4.332 50.217 160 0.14 0.26 20 8 12 3 65 2 20150709_Box_2_T1 09/07/2015 -4.363 50.226 -4.362 50.225 194 0.15 0.29 21 10 13 5 44 20150709_Box_2_T2 09/07/2015 -4.364 50.225 -4.364 50.224 191 0.15 0.29 20 10 14 2 93 20150709_Box_2_T3 09/07/2015 -4.366 50.228 -4.366 50.227 29 0.12 0.22 5 7 13 7 12 20150709_Box_2_T3a 09/07/2015 -4.366 50.226 -4.364 50.228 319 0.26 0.50 20 17 24 12 50 20150709_Box_2_T6 09/07/2015 -4.370 50.224 -4.366 50.226 354 0.29 0.55 19 20 41 13 71 20150723_Box_2_T7 23/07/2015 -4.368 50.223 -4.365 50.224 257 0.20 0.39 21 13 24 2 112 20150723_Box_2_T8 23/07/2015 -4.372 50.225 -4.370 50.226 227 0.18 0.35 22 11 18 1 97 20150723_Box_2_T9 23/07/2015 -4.363 50.224 -4.361 50.225 153 0.15 0.28 20 8 12 2 50 3 20150709_Box_3_T2 09/07/2015 -4.504 50.247 -4.506 50.246 228 0.14 0.27 20 12 46 5 58 20150709_Box_3_T3 09/07/2015 -4.498 50.246 -4.499 50.245 132 0.10 0.19 21 7 9 3 27 20150709_Box_3_T4 09/07/2015 -4.500 50.247 -4.497 50.246 221 0.16 0.32 22 11 14 5 60 20150709_Box_3_T5 09/07/2015 -4.505 50.248 -4.503 50.248 163 0.13 0.25 20 9 15 3 116 20150723_Box_3_T6 23/07/2015 -4.507 50.245 -4.506 50.245 79 0.20 0.39 6 16 18 11 16 20150723_Box_3_T6a 23/07/2015 -4.507 50.245 -4.503 50.246 276 0.20 0.40 21 14 25 9 84 20150723_Box_3_T7 23/07/2015 -4.503 50.245 -4.499 50.246 284 0.22 0.44 20 15 22 11 60 20150723_Box_3_T8 23/07/2015 -4.498 50.247 -4.496 50.249 252 0.25 0.48 16 17 21 12 41

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Table 3. Metadata for 2016 survey tows. Tows are described by survey box, date, start longitude/latitude, end longitude/latitude, total distance of tow (m: image to image), tow speed (ms-1: mean), tow speed (knots: mean), images captured (n), distance between images (m) and maximum and minimum distance between images (m). Longitude and latitude are given in decimal degrees WGS84.

Box Tow ID Date Start lon Start lat End lon End lat Total Tow Tow Images Dist. Max. dist. Min. dist. Species distance speed speed (n) between between between (n) (m) (ms-1) (knots) images (m) images images (total) (mean) (mean) (mean) (m) (m) 1 20160718_Box_1_T1 08/07/2016 -4.337 50.217 -4.334 50.218 183 0.15 0.28 20 10 17 4 UA* 20160718_Box_1_T2 08/07/2016 -4.337 50.215 -4.334 50.216 233 0.15 0.30 20 12 35 3 UA* 20160718_Box_1_T3 08/07/2016 -4.332 50.216 -4.337 50.217 366 0.16 0.31 4 122 142 107 UA* 20160718_Box_1_T4 08/07/2016 -4.328 50.217 -4.330 50.217 181 0.21 0.41 6 36 56 20 UA* 20161010_Box_1_T1 10/10/2016 -4.329 50.213 -4.330 50.213 58 0.19 0.38 4 19 24 13 UA* 20161010_Box_1_T2 10/10/2016 -4.328 50.216 -4.336 50.217 585 0.16 0.32 59 10 30 5 UA* 20161010_Box_1_T3 10/10/2016 -4.331 50.216 -4.332 50.216 94 0.15 0.30 11 9 11 8 UA* 20161010_Box_1_T4 10/10/2016 -4.332 50.215 -4.332 50.215 71 0.13 0.26 10 8 11 5 UA* 2 20160718_Box_2_T1 08/07/2016 -4.360 50.225 -4.373 50.226 923 0.35 0.68 42 23 49 15 UA* 20160718_Box_2_T2 08/07/2016 -4.360 50.224 -4.365 50.224 348 0.27 0.53 11 35 65 10 UA* 20160718_Box_2_T3 08/07/2016 -4.368 50.225 -4.372 50.227 409 0.27 0.53 17 26 78 5 UA* 20160718_Box_2_T4 08/07/2016 -4.363 50.225 -4.363 50.225 11 0.17 0.33 2 11 11 11 UA* 20160718_Box_2_T5 08/07/2016 -4.365 50.226 -4.364 50.227 190 0.18 0.34 17 12 21 8 UA* 20160718_Box_2_T6 08/07/2016 -4.370 50.225 -4.366 50.227 383 0.21 0.40 31 13 22 8 UA* 20161010_Box_2_T1 10/10/2016 -4.364 50.224 -4.366 50.225 220 0.18 0.36 20 12 26 8 UA* 3 20160718_Box_3_T1 08/07/2016 -4.498 50.246 -4.500 50.246 152 0.16 0.31 10 17 37 9 UA* 20160718_Box_3_T2 08/07/2016 -4.500 50.245 -4.504 50.245 298 0.20 0.39 24 13 30 6 UA* 20160718_Box_3_T3 08/07/2016 -4.503 50.247 -4.508 50.247 349 0.26 0.51 20 18 33 13 UA* 20160718_Box_3_T4 08/07/2016 -4.503 50.249 -4.508 50.249 372 0.31 0.60 17 23 73 12 UA* 20160718_Box_3_T5 08/07/2016 -4.495 50.248 -4.502 50.247 507 0.38 0.75 22 24 97 2 UA* 20160718_Box_3_T6 08/07/2016 -4.495 50.245 -4.500 50.246 346 0.47 0.91 11 35 80 27 UA* 20160718_Box_3_T7 08/07/2016 -4.495 50.248 -4.497 50.248 156 0.33 0.63 8 22 39 18 UA* 20161010_Box_3_T1 10/10/2016 -4.502 50.246 -4.505 50.247 213 0.19 0.36 20 11 13 9 UA*

* Under Analysis (UA)

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Image metadata

The proportion of images captured by substratum was variable among survey boxes and years (Figure 6). See Appendix 5 for examples of substratum composition.

Figure 6. Proportion of images, categorised by substratum, per survey box. Substratum is identified as follows: fine (F), medium (M), coarse (C) and rock/reef (R/R). Fine, medium and coarse substratum are representative of circalittoral coarse or mixed sediments (EUNIS habitat codes 5.14 and 5.44 respectively). Rock or reef features are representative of circalittoral rock and other hard substrata (EUNIS habitat code A4).

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

The number of lasers present per image during the 2014 surveys was variable (Figure 7). Survey box 1 and box 3 had the highest proportion of images with 2 or more lasers present (85.6% and 90.9% respectively), survey box 2 had the highest proportion of images with only 1 laser present (81.7%). The number of lasers present per image during the 2015 and 2016 surveys was highly consistent. For 2015, 100% of all images from survey boxes 1 and 2, and 99.3% from survey box 3 had 3 or more lasers present. For 2016, 100% of all images from survey box 1, and 99.3% and 99.2% from survey boxes 2 and 3 respectively had 3 or more lasers present (Figure 7).

Figure 7. Proportion of images, categorised by number of lasers present in the image, per survey box. The number of laser marks present in each image were counted and the on- screen distance from screen edges to marks and between marks measured, these measurements were used to ascertain contact of the camera frame with the seabed.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Image quality across all survey boxes during the 2014 surveys was predominately moderate/good with less than ~10% of images per survey box being classified as ‘poor’ (Figure 8). See Appendix 5 for examples of image quality. For 2015 and 2016 over 99% of all images were classified as moderate to good (Figure 8).

Figure 8. Proportion of images, categorised by image quality, per survey box. Image quality is identified as follows: poor, moderate (mod) and good.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Species composition

Rock and reef features were predominantly host to mixed Bryozoa, Cnidaria and Porifera communities. Composition of species on circalittoral coarse and mixed sediments among years was mixed. Although, there was evidence for a greater abundance of cup corals on circalittoral coarse and mixed sediments in box 1 than in other survey boxes across years, this is a species that is seen in abundance on rock and reef features throughout all survey boxes. These specimens often manifested themselves as solitary individuals within the substratum. Box 2 had the greatest abundance of spirorbids, this potentially reflects the coarser nature of the substratum which is dominated by medium to coarse cobble and shell. This box also had greatest abundance of crustaceans and scallops (Figures 9-14).

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Figure 9. Relative abundance of species (proportion) for survey box 1 (2014-2016) on circalittoral coarse or mixed sediments (CCMS: EUNIS habitat codes 5.14 and 5.44). Species identified by species description grouped by Phyla. Each bar represents the total number of images (n) with species present expressed as a proportion of the total number of images (n) captured within the survey box by year. Phyla are shaded in accordance with the figure legend.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Figure 10. Relative abundance of species (proportion) for survey box 1 (2014-2016) on rock/reef features (R/R: circalittoral rock and other hard substrata EUNIS habitat code A4). Species identified by species description grouped by Phyla. Each bar represents the total number of images (n) with species present expressed as a proportion of the total number of images (n) captured within the survey box. Phyla are shaded in accordance with the figure legend.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Figure 11. Relative abundance of species (proportion) for survey box 2 (2014-2016) on circalittoral coarse or mixed sediments (CCMS: EUNIS habitat codes 5.14 and 5.44). Species identified by species description grouped by Phyla. Each bar represents the total number of images (n) with species present expressed as a proportion of the total number of images (n) captured within the survey box. Phyla are shaded in accordance with the figure legend.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Figure 12. Relative abundance of species (proportion) for survey box 2 (2014-2016) on rock/reef features (R/R: circalittoral rock and other hard substrata EUNIS habitat code A4). Species identified by species description grouped by Phyla. Each bar represents the total number of images (n) with species present expressed as a proportion of the total number of images (n) captured within the survey box. Phyla are shaded in accordance with the figure legend.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Figure 13. Relative abundance of species (proportion) for survey box 3 (2014-2016) on circalittoral coarse or mixed sediments (CCMS: EUNIS habitat codes 5.14 and 5.44). Species identified by species description grouped by Phyla. Each bar represents the total number of images (n) with species present expressed as a proportion of the total number of images (n) captured within the survey box. Phyla are shaded in accordance with the figure legend.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Figure 14. Relative abundance of species (proportion) for survey box 3 (2014-2016) on rock/reef features (R/R: circalittoral rock and other hard substrata EUNIS habitat code A4). Species identified by species description grouped by Phyla. Each bar represents the total number of images (n) with species present expressed as a proportion of the total number of images (n) captured within the survey box. Phyla are shaded in accordance with the figure legend.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Discussion

The 2015 and 2016 Eddystone drop-down camera surveys produced 428 and 406 analysable images. In contrast, the 2014 surveys gathered 214 analysable images. The 2015 and 2014 surveys were conducted over a short time-frame at a similar time each year. Due to operational difficulties, the surveys for 2016 were split between the months of July and October, with 282 analysable images recorded in June and 124 in October. The 2015 and 2016 surveys provided for a more balanced survey effort across survey boxes.

There was a marked improvement in the number of lasers present among survey years, with all images in 2015 and 2016 having 2 or more lasers present. This compared with 86%, 18% and 91% for boxes 1, 2 and 3 respectively in year 2014. Similarly, there was a marked improvement in image quality with less than 0.5% of all images captured in 2015 and no images in 2016 categorised as poor, this compared with ~10% in 2014. The 2015 survey protocol saw refinements made to the lighting rig and improved 'trigger response' of the remote camera. This combined to provide sharper images with reduced movement of the camera frame at the moment of image capture. This was also reflected in image capture for 2016.

The 2015 and 2016 surveys indicated that substratum composition is similar between survey boxes 1 and 3, being a mosaic of sediment, pebble, cobble, shell with rock and reef features. Survey box 2 differs marginally to that found in boxes 1 and 3; whilst rock and reef features are present, the surrounding substratum is largely dominated by medium/coarse cobble and shell.

The 2015 and 2016 surveys have robustly advanced the preliminary survey work of 2014 and have continued to build an extensive library of seabed images for the Eddystone Reef complex. Further surveys proposed for 2017- 2019, using the same survey protocol adopted for 2015 and 2016, will enable the ongoing compilation of a comprehensive database of images to be constructed. These data, coupled with the application of modern-day statistical approaches to investigate seabed community composition will likely offer insight into detectable change in seabed communities between areas that are closed, and those that remain open, to bottom-towed fishing gear.

EDDYSTONE REEF CAMERA SURVEY SUMMARY REPORT 2014-2016

Appendices

Appendix 1: CIFCA 2014 field report

Appendix 2: CIFCA 2015 field report

Appendix 3: CIFCA 2016 field report #1

Appendix 4: CIFCA 2015 field report #2

Appendix 5: Substratum and image quality

Appendix 1: CIFCA 2014 field report

Survey Field Report Eddystone Reef Monitoring 2014

Document History Author/s K Street, C Trundle Version Date Author Change 0.1 21/10/14 K Street Document creation compiling all field reports 0.2 22/10/14 C Trundle Review and ammendments 0.3 16/12/14 K Street Update SeaSpyder spec

Contents

Executive summary 30

1 Introduction 31

1.1 Staff 31

1.2 Geological and Biological Context (Brief summary of origins and development) 31

2 Aims and objectives 33

2.1 Aims 33

2.2 Objectives 33

3 Cruise Narrative 34

3.1 ED140619 34

3.2 ED140716 34

3.3 ED140731 34

4 Results 36

5 Sample stills 37

6 Quality Control 41

6.1 Positioning and Bathymetry 41

6.2 Seabed video and stills 41

7 Human Activities 41

8 Health and safety events 41

APPENDIX 1 – Equipment Calibration 42

APPENDIX 2 – Vessels and Equipment Used 43

APPENDIX 3 Offsets 48

APPENDIX 4 Daily progress reports 49

APPENDIX 5 Survey metadata 51

APPENDIX 6 Lessons Log 52

APPENDIX 7 Full breakdown of survey operation time 54

Executive summary Cornwall IFCA, University of Exeter’s Environmental Sustainability Institute (ESI), and the Marine Conservation Society (MCS) have established a joint project to monitor changes to reef epifaunal assemblages following closure to bottom towed fishing gears in parts of the Eddystone reefs. Cornwall IFCA is responsible for data collection and thus far has conducted three DDV surveys capturing a total of 288 still images and 5hr: 33min of video data.

All partners were present on the first survey to initiate the project, agree the methodology and review the quality of the data collected. Two of the surveys were plagued with equipment failures resulting in a reduction of the expected numbers of sites completed during each survey. Combined with limited vessel and crew availability during favourable weather windows data from the Far Control site is still to be collected. Cornwall IFCA is planning one further DDV survey day within the next month to complete the practical work for 2014.

1 Introduction 1.1 Staff Cornwall IFCA’s Senior Scientific Officer (Colin Trundle) and Scientific Officer (Kimara Street) were both present for all survey days with various members of the Cornwall IFCA team contributing time to assist in the survey operation.

The survey crew for ED140619 were: SIC & Winch Operator Colin Trundle Data Recorder Kimara Street Deck Crew Nigel Beswetherick Daniel McIntyre

The survey crew for ED140716 were: SIC & Winch Operator Colin Trundle Data Recorder Kimara Street Deck Crew Nigel Beswetherick Daniel McIntyre Gavin Purcell

The survey crew for ED140731 were:

SIC & Winch Operator Colin Trundle Data Recorder Kimara Street Deck crew Sam Davis

1.2 Geological and Biological Context (Brief summary of origins and development) On the 1st of January 2014 Cornwall IFCAs Closed Areas (European Marine Sites) Byelaw came into force; prohibiting the use of bottom towed gears in European Marine Sites within the District. The Eddystone section of the Start Point to Plymouth Sound and Eddystone Special Area of Conservation (SAC) has been zoned to protect site features, including a 260m buffer zone, and allow fishing activity to continue in areas with little possibility of gear interaction (figure 1).

Figure 1: Survey Location

Cornwall IFCA, ESI and MCS, with funding from the Pig Shed Trust (Figure 2), have established a collaborative project with the aim of assessing changes to epifaunal assemblages following the prohibition of bottom towed fishing gears.

Figure 2: Project partners present on ED140619

2 Aims and objectives 2.1 Aims • To acquire high quality biological data of a suitable resolution to detect changes to epifaunal assemblages over a period of 3 years in the first instance.

2.2 Objectives • Follow the agreed methodology in undertaking DDV survey work within selected survey boxes. • Provide all data and field report to ESI and MCS.

3 Cruise Narrative 3.1 ED140619

Saint Piran departed Newlyn at 0900 and steamed to Fowey where the project partners were picked up by RIB. The first tow commenced at 1315 when the vessel was in position. The first tow, Box 2 Tow 1, followed the planned tow and was completed successfully, with mainly mixed sediment being recorded. This tow was expected to contain reef habitats, based on available evidence, so it was therefore decided to conduct the next tow to the west, closer to the reef, with the aim of capturing the reef edge. This tow was also largely successful; however the camera became snagged on static fishing gear making it difficult to recover. As a result the connection between the camera and the umbilical became damaged and the camera system was no longer operational, therefore the survey was halted for the day.

3.2 ED140716

Saint Piran departed Newlyn at 10:00 and the first tow commenced at 14:18. The first tow was conducted along the southern edge of Box 3; the Far Control box. It was not possible to conduct any tows further within the box due to the visible static fishing gear markers within the area, indicating a high number of pots/nets and therefore a high risk of loss/damage of the camera. Saint Piran then steamed to Box 1 to commence the second camera tow of the day at 15:30. This was a successful tow achieving 15 stills, mainly recording mixed sediment. During the second tow in Box 1 the winch stopped working. Whilst the engineer tried to solve the problem the data recorder continued to take opportunistic stills and stills at 1 minute intervals, however as there was no control over the height of the camera some of the stills are out of focus as the camera was moving. The camera was recovered manually to the deck with all deck crew helping to haul the camera. The winch issue was believed to be resolved and so a third tow within Box 1 commenced, however the winch temporarily failed again and it was decided to end the survey. In total fifty stills were collected in Box 1 and eleven on Box 3.

3.3 ED140731

Wave Chieftain departed Mylor at 08:30 and equipment was set up on the steam out to the site. Winds were force 4 to 5 SW causing the slightly choppy conditions, this along with big spring tides, meant that some of the drift speeds were slightly faster than would normally be desirable, and caused some lurching of the camera frame away from the seabed. This did not affect the quality of the still images collected. As the team were working on an unfamiliar vessel it was decided to conduct the first tows in Box 4 far from the reef. The vessel was on site at 10:00. Four tows were conducted in Box 4, the prevailing conditions dictated that the direction of the tow was from west to east. The tows were planned around the static gear set within the box. At 12:24 the vessel was on site in Box 1 where a further five tows were conducted. Again the tows were planned to avoid static gear in the area, working with the prevailing conditions and aiming for the best coverage possible over the reef edge and flat ground out to the east of the reef. At 15:40 the vessel was on site at Box 2 where two tows were conducted as two tows had previously been completed (ED 140619). The previous two tows were close to the reef edge so it was therefore decided to gap fill with two more tows further out from the reef. At 18:50 the vessel arrived back at Mylor.

4 Results In total 288 stills have been collected and 5hours and 33minutes of video data. At least four tows have been conducted in the Treatment and Near Control sites, however the Far Control site remains to be completed (Figure 3). Camera tows have also been completed within a fourth survey box; an area of distinctly different habitat which is now closed to towed gear.

Figure 3: Stills locations from all surveys to date.

5 Sample stills Tow ID Approx. Number of Length Stills Sample Still (meters) ED141619 265 28 _Box2_1

ED140619 300 14 _Box2_2

ED140716 350 11 _Box3_1

ED140716 500 15 _Box1_1

ED140716 430 (including 24 _Box1_2 90m of no stills data only video)

ED140716 100 11 _Box1_3

ED140731 540 18 _Box4_1

ED140731 430 20 _Box4_2

ED140731 180 10 _Box4_3

ED140731 150 14 _Box4_4

ED140731 220 20 _Box1_1

ED140731 200 22 _Box1_2

ED140731 70 16 _Box1_3

ED140731 80 14 _Box1_4

ED140731 200 21 _Box1_5

ED140731 100 15 _Box2_1

ED140731 120 15 _Box2_2

6 Quality Control 6.1 Positioning and Bathymetry

GPS positioning was calibrated with known positions at the start of each day (as outlined in annex 1), and offsets on GPS antenna position and deployment area were recorded (annex 3). 6.2 Seabed video and stills

At the time of image capture, notes were made of any image ‘defects’ if they were identified. Many defects were only noticed during the cataloguing process. Accordingly, the stills log spreadsheet contains a field to describe image faults.

7 Human Activities No obvious changes to habitat were noted due to anthropogenic activity on survey sites.

8 Health and safety events There were no health and safety events to report or near misses.

APPENDIX 1 – Equipment Calibration At the start of each day, all timing devices were synched to the time from the Furuno GP32 GPS, i.e. the one that was displayed in the Olex. This was set at UTC + 1. On all surveys, it proved impossible to change the date/time on the camera so all timings were referenced to that on the GP 32. GPS positioning was calibrated every day at the start of the survey against an object of known position.

APPENDIX 2 – Vessels and Equipment Used Three survey days have been carried out to date using two different vessels and two different camera systems. Both vessels and camera systems are described below with the relevant cruise code.

Equipment Specifications

Kongsberg System (ED140619 and ED140713)

• Kongsberg OE 14-208 video/stills camera

• Kongsberg OE 11-142 Flash unit

• 4 Seatronics SEA LED lights

• 200m umbillical and ‘Y’ splice

• Topside camera and light control unit

• LS Electronics GPS video overlay unit, with remote GPS antenna

• Scaling; 2 x Z Bolt battery lasers pointers (for image scaling). ED 140619 set at 120mm spacing, ED140713 set at 200mm spacing.

• Cornwall IFCA aluminium camera frame {1000mm (l) x 750mm (w) x 750mm (h)}

• Samsung NX550P laptop PC to capture streamed video

• Acer laptop running Kongsberg GUI to control still image capture

• Samsung NX550P laptop as back for other laptops

• Pinnacle video capture hardware/software

• Panasonic Toughbook operating Olex Navigation software

• Evermore SA 320 GPS (position data for Olex)

Figure 4: Camera, strobe and light set up within the Figure 5: Camera, strobe and light set up within the drop frame drop frame

Seaspyder System (ED140716)

Camera System • STR Seaspyder 18Mp U/W digital still camera (18 mega pixels) • STR Seaspyder High power U/W camera flash • 4 STR Seaspyder 20W High intensity LED light • 2 STR Seaspyder Subsea scaling laser (Red; 100mm spacing) • Seaspyder camera frame (Figure 6)

Recording Equipment • Seaspyder top side equipment ( 2 monitors and 2 PCs) running SeaSpyder software • 1 Lap top with Pinnacle video capture hardware/software • Pro forma recording sheet

Figure 7: Lab set up

Figure 6: SeaSpyder Camera System

Saint Piran (ED140619 and ED140716)

Length 27.07m Beam 6.75m Draught 1.7m Construction Aluminium, double chine Propulsion 2x 38 000cc twin turbo Cummins KTA38-M2 engines Speed Cruising 16/18 knots, max speed 22 knots

Figure 6: FPV Saint Piran

Wave Chieftain (ED140731) Length 12.8m Beam 5.18m Speed 28 knots top speed, 18 knots cruising speed

Figure 8: Wave Chieftain (Source: http://www.cornishfishing.co.uk)

Survey Method and Crew Responsibilities Helm Winch Operator Scribe Deck Crew Before Fill header data tow into recording sheet; tow number etc Type video file name When Notify all crew Hold clapper board Take still and short on vessel is in position to camera video of clapper site for start of tow board file Start Control vessel Lower camera Note time and Tape umbilical to of tow along camera tow pausing under the position of back line every 5m deck crews deployment (approx.) direction Start video recording Start ‘Track’ on Olex

First Control vessel Communicated to Take a still and Add Monitor rope and still along camera tow crew when camera a ‘Mark’ on the umbilical is on the seabed Olex . (observe second monitor) Record; time, position (from Olex mark), depth, comments.

Label Olex mark

Repeat for each still at 60 second intervals to the end of tow End of Manoeuvre vessel Directly after last Record end of tow Monitor rope and tow for safe recovery still winch camera End video umbilical. of camera. to surface. recording. Secure camera cage. Position vessel for Secure camera next camera tow cage . Finish the Olex ‘Track’ Repeat whole process for each tow

APPENDIX 3 Offsets Camera deployment area

ED140619 and ED140716 on ‘Saint Piran’ the camera was deployed to the stern of the vessel on the starboard side.

ED140731 on ‘Wave Chieftain’ the camera was deployed over the starboard side just aft of the wheel house.

Video Overlay GPS and GP32

Accuracy

The GP32 for the Olex (Evermore SA320) is accurate to 3m. The GPS for the video overlay is accurate to less than 10m.

Position

Both GPS antenna were positioned as close to the camera deployment area as possible. On ‘Saint Piran’ within 4m of the deployment area (forward and 1m inboard), on Wave Chieftain was less than a meter to port from the deployment area.

APPENDIX 4 Daily progress reports Figures 9, 10 and 11 below shows the locations of stills collected per day.

Figure 9 ED140619

Figure 10 ED140716

Figure 11: ED140731

APPENDIX 5 Survey metadata

Tow_ID Date Time of Time of Video No of SOL SOL EOL EOL SOL EOL Length Stills Latitude Longitude Latitude Longitude (min:sec) ED_140619_Box_2_1 19/06/2014 13:13:33 13:39:35 00:26:02 28 50.22742 4.36707 50.30020 5.20540 ED_140619_Box_2_6 19/06/2014 14:08:07 14:21:09 00:13:02 14 50.22557 4.36978 50.29840 5.20809 ED_140716_Box_3_1 16/07/2014 14:31:43 14:43:05 00:11:22 11 50.24462 4.50338 50.31967 5.34204 ED_140716_Box_1_1 16/07/2014 15:31:13 15:45:11 00:13:58 15 50.21685 4.32852 50.28899 5.16667 ED_140716_Box_1_2 16/07/2014 16:00:22 16:26:34 00:26:12 24 50.21420 4.33228 50.28640 5.17039 ED_140716_Box_1_3 16/07/2014 17:30:30 17:37:01 00:06:31 11 50.21490 4.32695 50.28702 5.16507 ED_140731_Box4_1 31/07/2014 10:10:39 10:28:43 00:18:04 18 50.20035 4.39223 50.27355 5.23013 ED_140731_Box4_2 31/07/2014 10:53:30 11:12:34 00:19:04 20 50.19883 4.40083 50.19905 4.39515 ED_140731_Box4_3 31/07/2014 11:25:43 11:34:44 00:09:01 10 50.20403 4.40318 50.20392 4.40115 ED_140731_Box4_4 31/07/2014 11:54:43 12:08:45 00:14:02 14 50.19473 4.40362 50.19472 4.40203 ED_140731_Box1_1 31/07/2014 12:32:08 12:51:12 00:19:04 20 50.21650 4.33697 50.21650 4.33410 ED_140731_Box1_2 31/07/2014 12:13:02 13:36:08 01:23:06 22 50.21448 4.33663 50.21477 4.33412 ED_140731_Box1_3 31/07/2014 13:56:02 14:11:02 00:15:00 16 50.21812 4.33688 50.21833 4.33605 ED_140731_Box1_4 31/07/2014 14:22:57 14:36:01 00:13:04 14 50.21713 4.33173 50.21660 4.33132 ED_140731_Box1_5 31/07/2014 15:05:56 15:23:26 00:17:30 21 50.21597 4.33812 50.21428 4.33767 ED_140731_Box2_1 31/07/2014 15:45:07 15:59:10 00:14:03 15 50.22550 4.36297 50.22622 4.36300 ED_140731_Box2_2 31/07/2014 16:09:45 16:23:48 00:14:03 15 50.22300 4.36400 50.22397 4.36420 Total 05:33:08 288

APPENDIX 6 Lessons Log ED140619 • What went well; learnt from previous surveys

Equipment set up and crew all worked well; as tested previously. The camera angle and lighting also worked well in the CIFCA frame resulting in clear, well lit stills.

• Adaptations that worked well

• Adaptations for next survey

The camera became caught on a pot rope that hadn’t been visible on the video, this was totally unforeseen, and all crew worked calmly and effectively to recover the camera. In the future, as is the case with all surveys, all crew will continue to keep a look out for pot buoys to try to prevent this happening again. Back up kit could be carried on future surveys, e.g. umbilical and camera, to could prevent lost time whilst kit is down for any reason, e.g. damage or malfunction. This is dependent on price, availability and space on the vessel.

ED140716 The Seaspyder kit was used because this is the kit that will be readily available to Cornwall IFCA in the future to use for surveys, which will make survey planning a lot easier. The camera has higher resolution stills the Kongsberg camera and the added benefit of being able to download images straight from the camera without taking the camera out of the frame minimising the risk of losing data. As this was the first time of using the camera the survey team were unfamiliar with the camera functions and could not get perfect quality stills. To try to minimise this effect an engineer came with the camera, however his expertise was in the hardware not the software. This issue will be resolved with practice, however may have been a bit optimistic for the first time using new equipment. • What went well; learnt from previous surveys

Deck and lab set up. • Adaptations that worked well

The lights were lowered in the frame to provide better lighting for the video and stills. This was seen to be an improvement on the previous trial with this camera. • Adaptations for next survey

Saint Piran can no longer be used for camera work as the winch is not designed for such repetitive, continuous use and has obviously been struggling. Therefore in future other survey vessels will be used with suitable winches or haulers. The lasers seemed to be working intermittently, possibly due to them not being tightened up enough, or batteries fading. New batteries will be used for every survey, and the tightness of the seal checked. ED140731 • What went well; learnt from previous surveys

NA • Adaptations that worked well

The equipment set up worked well on Wave Chieftain; top side set up worked well in the wheelhouse and the winch operator could view the monitor from the winch. • Adaptations for next survey

The conditions were slightly challenging with strong tides and choppy seas, this may have been exasperated by working on a mono-hull boat with less stability than a catamaran. Cornwall IFCA is looking to purchase a new catamaran research vessel which will be used in future surveys when ready. This may alleviate some of the lurching of the camera, and allow the team to choose better weather days, rather than having to book a week in advance of the survey.

APPENDIX 7 Full breakdown of survey operation time ED140619 - 19/06/2014 Time Activity 0800-0900 Load equipment on Saint Piran and begin mobilisation 0900-1130 Steam to Fowey river mouth 1130-1200 2 trips for Lyonesse to ferry guests from Fowey 1200-1230 Steam to 1st survey site, introductions and safety brief 1230-1515 On station, carry out 2 tows before damaging equipment, time spent trying to rectify the issue. Unresolvable so survey abandoned 1700-1730 Return to Fowey river mouth 1730-1800 Ferry guests ashore. 1800-2345 Fishery patrol from Eddystone to Lizard Point then return to Newlyn 2345-0000 Secure vessel and away.

ED140716 – 16/07/14 Time Activity 0900-1100 Load equipment on Saint Piran and begin mobilisation 1100-1400 Steam to first station 1400-1745 On station, 4 tows completed before winch failed. Repair attempts failed so survey abandoned 1800-2230 Fishery patrol from Eddystone area to Lizard Point then return to Newlyn 2230-2245 Secure vessel and away.

ED140731– 31/07/14 Time Activity 0630-0715 Travel from Penzance to Mylor, meet Wave Chieftain 0715-0745 Load equipment and mobilise 0745-0930 Steam to first station 0930-1630 On station, 11 tows completed before survey abandoned due to increasing wind 1645-1900 Return to Mylor, demobilise and ashore 1900-2000 Return to Penzance

Appendix 2: CIFCA 2015 field report This document is a .docx conversion of original CIFCA .pdf report

MCS/UoE/Cornwall IFCA Eddystone Reefs Project – DDV Surveys 09/07/2015 23/07/2015

Document History Version Date Author Change 0.1 13/08/2015 C Trundle Initial draft 0.2 05/10/2015 C Trundle Completion of 1st draft 0.3

Contents

. Project Background 5 2

. Aims and objectives 6

2.1. Aims 6

2.2. Objectives 6 3

. Survey Approach 6

3.1. Equipment Specifications 6

3.2. PPE 8

3.3. Methodology 8

3.4. Data handling 9 4

. Results 9 5

. Representative Stills Images 13 6

. Daily Log 19 th 6.1. 9 July 2015 19

6.2. 23rd July 2015 20

Annex 1: RV Tiger Lily Deck Plan & Offsets 21

Annex 2: Chart Showing the Locations of Still Images 22

1. Project Background

Cornwall IFCA, Marine Conservation Society (MCS) and the University of Exeter Environment Sustainability Institute (ESI) with funding from Pig Shed Trust, are collaborating on a study in the Eddystone reefs, part of the Start Point to Plymouth Sound and Eddystone SAC. The aim of this study is to assess any changes in epifaunal assemblages within areas closed and open to bottom towed fishing gears’ resulting from new European Marine Site management measures introduced in January 2014. The work carried out was the second year of the study and replicated the previous year’s data collection along with additional data collection. The data is to be collected from 1 treatment area i.e. that is within an area closed to towed gears and 2 control areas where towed gears are permitted. 1 of the control areas is near to the treatment area the other being further away. All sites were selected for their similarity, i.e. they are all of similar bathymetry, they all have reef to the western side and have all been/are subject to towed gears.

Figure 1: Location of survey boxes used in the project.

2. Aims and objectives

2.1. Aims

• Collect high quality video and still image data from the agreed survey boxes to enable assessment of any changes to epifaunal assemblages following cessation of bottom towed fishing gears using 1 treatment and 2 control areas.

2.2. Objectives

• Complete drop down video/stills surveys using the MESH recommended operating guidelines for underwater video surveys.

• Repeat camera tows carried out in 2014 and add further tows.

3. Survey Approach

3.1. Equipment Specifications

The camera used for the DDV survey was an STR SeaSpyder drop camera system contained in a custom built frame. The system enables high resolution still images of the seabed to be taken using a surface controlled digital SLR camera whilst simultaneously recording separate real time video. The video feed is recorded to the Seaspyder topside PC with user- programmable overlays of positional information, bearing and depth. The system details are available online: http://www.str-subsea.com/sales/str-seaspyder-drop-camera-system . The only additional equipment on the IFCA Seaspyder is a 4 point red laser scaler set up around the camera bottle. The scaler has sides of 200mm and was calibrated before the start of the survey.

Figure 1: Cornwall IFCA’s dedicated survey vessel, R/V Tiger Lily VI.

Figure 2: SeaSpyder drop camera housed in a purpose built frame on the aft deck of R/V Tiger Lily VI.

3.2. PPE

R/V Tiger Lily VI is MCA coded to Cat 2 and is fitted with all necessary safety equipment, including life rafts, lifejackets, first aid kits and fire suppression systems. While working on deck all crew are required to wear lifejackets, PLBs and steel toe cap boots.

3.3. Methodology

Prior to the deployment of the SeaSpyder for each transect, the text overlay was checked and adjusted to display the survey name and transect number. The position, heading and depth info was checked to ensure that it was updating correctly. The SeaSpyder camera was deployed from the starboard side davit of R/V Tiger Lily VI and lowered to the seabed, during which the video record was started. A waypoint (mark) was created in OLEX to indicate the start of the transect; this was repeated at the end of the transect. The SeaSpyder was ‘flown’ with the frame legs just above the seabed and periodically landed on the seabed to allow a high quality still image to be taken. Still images were captured at a frequency of one every 60 seconds; images separation varied slightly to ensure that the stills taken were of good quality (e.g. taken when the frame was stable and the lens unobstructed) this sometimes led to a delay. Immediately upon having captured a stills image a waypoint (mark) was created in OLEX.

The transects were planned to cover the transitions of habitat in each box. From the reef to the west of each box, over boulder and subsequently out onto the sediment areas.

Figure 4: SeaSpyder drop camera in the deployment position from R/V Tiger Lily VI.

3.4. Data handling

Stills images from the SeaSpyder camera are initially stored on the internal computer (sub- surface). Subsequent to completion of each transect, batches of still images were transferred to the topside unit using FileZilla and filed by transect number. Video files are automatically saved on the SeaSpyder topside unit data drive (D:/). Stills and video files were transferred from the topside unit to a WD Passport for transport and storage.

4. Results

The first day of survey was carried out on 09 July 2015. Although it was not the smallest tide of the set (4.8m Devonport), the weather was forecast to be < 10 knots from the North West. It was decided on the day to carry out a 4 tows in each of the 3 survey boxes. This was to ensure data was collected from each site on the day in case vessel breakdowns etc. prevented any further sampling for the project. As Box 3 (far control) is nearest to Mylor, that was the box that was surveyed first, moving onto Box 2 (near control) then to Box 1 (treatment). During the first tow in Box 3, communications between the stills camera and topside control were intermittently lost. The video feed was unaffected during the comm out incidents. When the camera was recovered an examination of all connections was made, following this the comm out incidents seemed to become less frequent. For consistency, each tow was approximately 20 minutes to provide 20 still images. To avoid confusion, when previous tows from 2014 were being replicated the original tow ID was used. New tows were given sequential ID’s appropriate to the survey box. The survey of the 09 July generated 300 minutes of video and 245 still images from 13 tows. It was felt that the tows covered all habitats within present within the survey boxes.

On the survey of the 23rd July 2015 we were joined by Joanna Murray and Paul Whomersley of CEFAS who were observing the operation and results of the SeaSpyder camera set up. It was decided to try and complete an equal number of tows in each box, a method used in the previous survey on the 09 July. The survey started in Box 3, where serious comm out issues plagued the first tow. Eventually the camera was recovered and all connections checked. This time it did not rectify the issue and the camera had to be recovered again. The tow was reset and this time it was able to be completed. 3 tows were completed in Box 3 before moving on to Boxes 2 and 1. 3 tows were carried

out in each of the other boxes. Some tows outputted proportionally more images for their length as the CEFAS staff asked to see results of images captured whilst the camera frame was ‘flying’. On the day, 9 tows were completed providing 225 minutes of video and 223 stills.

A total of 23 tows were completed during the 2 survey days resulting in 526 minutes of video being recorded along with the capture of 468 still images. A summary of the data collected is given in Table 1 (below).

Tow Date Transect Start Finish Video Length No. of Stills Comments Length 09/07/15 Box 3_T2 06:52 07:26 00:34 264m 20 Mostly coarse sediment and shell. 09/07/15 Box 3_T3 07:48 08:12 00:24 129m 21 “

09/07/15 Box 3_T4 08:21 08:47 00:26 237m 22 Mostly coarse sediment and shell with cobble in places. 09/07/15 Box 3_T5 09:02 09:26 00:24 175m 21 Mix of reef with sediment areas and coarse sediments.

09/07/15 Box 2_T1 10:04 10:26 00:22 225m 21 Pebble/cobble and shell. 09/07/15 Box 2_T2 10:33 10:58 00:25 182m 20 Pebble/cobble and shell with sediment toward EOL

09/07/15 Box 2_T3 11:06 11:15 00:09 90m 5 Drift not following 2014 tow, recover and reset. 09/07/15 Box 2_3a 11:21 11:44 00:23 340m 20 Pebble/cobble and shell.

09/07/15 Box 2_T6 11:51 12:14 00:23 390m 21 Onto reef then out over sediment/shell/pebble. 09/07/15 Box 1_T5 12:28 13:02 00:34 410m 21 Sediment and shell.

09/07/15 Box 1_T1 13:09 13:29 00:20 310m 18 Mostly coarse sediment/shell, image 7 on reef. 09/07/15 Box 1_T3 13:38 13:51 00:13 195m 15 Pebble/cobble and shell. Tow truncated to avoid overrun.

09/07/15 Box 1_T8a 13:57 14:21 00:24 350m 20 Sediment and shell with some cobble/pebble. Total 13 301 min 3297m 245

23/07/15 Box 3_T6 08:13 08:25 00:12 130m 6 Incomplete notes

23/07/15 Box 3_T6a 08:39 09:02 00:43 275m 22 “

23/07/15 Box 3_T7 09:15 09:37 00:22 260m 20 “

23/07/15 Box 3_T8 09:50 10:08 00:18 280m 16 “

23/07/15 Box 2_T7 10:43 11:05 00:22 265m 25 Tow started south of southern boundary line.

23/07/15 Box 2_T8 11:19 11:41 00:22 255m 36 Additional stills from taking images whilst cage ‘flying’.

23/07/15 Box 2_T9 11:52 12:11 00:19 180m 21 Nudibranch in image 008

23/07/15 Box 1_T9 13:04 13:25 00:21 165m 21

23/07/15 Box 1_T8 13:54 14:18 00:24 205m 35 Additional ‘flying’ stills

23/07/15 Box 1_T2 14:31 14:53 00:22 200m 21

Total 10 225 min 2215m 223

Table 1: Summary of transects.

5. Representative Stills Images

The following images are representative of the habitats recorded during this survey.

Transect Representative Image Box 3_T2

Box 3_T3

Box 3_T4

Box 3_T5

Box 3_T6

Box 3_T6a

Box 3_T7

Box 3_T8

Box 2_T1

Box 2_T2

Box 2_T3

Box 2_T3a

Box 2_T6

Box 2_T7

Box 2_T8

Box 2_T8 (2)

Box 2_T9

Box 1_T5

Box 1_T1

Box 1_T3

Box 1_T9

Box 1_T8

Box 1_T8 (2)

Box 1_T2

6. Daily Log

6.1. 9th July 2015

Crew: Colin Trundle (SiC) - Cornwall IFCA, Holly Latham (SO) - Cornwall IFCA, Dan Matthew (skipper) - Cornwall IFCA, Dr Carly Daniels – National Lobster Hatchery Vessel: R/V Tiger Lily All times are in UTC.

Time Activity 0500 Depart Mylor and head for Box 3. Camera equipment test en route, all found to be ok. 0642 Arrive on site at Box 3, carry out trial drifts. 0653 Start Box 3 - T2. 0703 Lost comms. 0705 Restart stills camera, pc running slower than usual. 0727 End T2, haul frame to surface. Restart all Seapyder units. 0746 Start Box 3 – T3. 0812 End Box 3 – T3. 0815 Still images transferred to PC 0821 Start Box 3 – T4. Possible filigree worm, scallops visible around boulder areas. 0847 End Box 3 – T4. 0902 Start Box 3 – T5. 0927 End Box 3 – T5. T5 stills transferred. 0935 Transit to Box 2. 0955 Arrive Box 2. Drift trials. 1001 Start Box 2 – T1. Running SE from EOL T1 2014. Cobble & boulder, broken shell 1026 End Box 2 – T1. T1 stills transferred. 1032 Start Box 2 – T2. Cobble & boulder, broken shell 1057 End Box 2 – T2. Comms lost on lift. 1108 Start Box 2 – T3. Cobble & boulder, broken shell. 1115 Unable to follow S drift, raise frame and move to southern end of T3. 1119 Start Box 2 – T3a. 1144 End Box 2 – T3a. 1150 Start Box 2 – T6. Onto reef, large boulders then out onto sediment with boulder. 1213 End Box 2 – T6. T3 ended up being SW – NE. 1225 Transit to Box 1. 1235 Start Box 1 – T5. Noticeable scallops and small ross coral on sediment. 1258 Comms lost, reconnection in water. 1302 End Box 1 – T5. 1310 Start Box 1 – T1. Expected drift to the NE so start SW of 2014 SOL. PSF on sediment. 1330 End Box 1 – T1 1339 Start Box 1 – T3. Small DMF on sediment 1355 End Box 1 – T3. Transfer stills. 1358 Start Box 1 – T8a. 1421 End Box 1 – T8a. Transfer files. 1428 Recover all equipment and transit to Mylor.

6.2. 23rd July 2015

Staff: Colin Trundle (SiC) – Cornwall IFCA, Holly Latham (SO) – Cornwall IFCA, Dan Matthew (Skipper) – Cornwall IFCA, Joanna Murray & Paul Whomersley - CEFAS Vessel: R/V Tiger Lily All times are in UTC.

Time Activity 0630 Depart Mylor and head for Box 3. Camera equipment test en route, all found to be ok. 0800 Arrive at Box 3. Trial drifts before deployment. 0814 Box 3 T6 start. 0816 Comms lost, recover, reset and redeploy. 0824 Comms lost, recover and reset. 0834 Reposition on T6, relabel as T6a, redeploy. 0903 Box 3 T6a end. 0911 Box 3 T7 start. 0937 Box 3 T7 end. 0948 Box 3 T8 start. 1010 Box 3 T8 end. 1014 Depart Box 3 and make way to Box 2. 1038 Arrive Box 2. 1040 Box 2 T7 start. 1105 Box 2 T7 end. 1116 Box 2 T8 start. 1141 Box 2 T8 end. Images transferred. 1153 Box 2 T9 start. 1211 Box 2 T9 end. 1215 Transit to Box 1. 1300 Box 1 T9 start. 1326 Box 1 T9 end. Whilst camera on deck attend to an enforcement issue nearby. 1353 Box 1 T8 start. 1418 Box 1 T8 end. 1428 Box 1 T2 start. 1453 Box 1 T2 end. 1500 Recover all equipment and transit to Mylor. 1700 Alongside at Mylor, partial demob then away.

Annex 1: RV Tiger Lily Deck Plan & Offsets

Offset (m)

NMEA Device Make/Model Offset Name X (Forw’d) Y (Port) Z (+) Navigation depth sounder Furuno Navnet Furuno transducer 5.0 0.75

Survey GPS Furuno GP32 Furuno mushroom antenna 4.8 1.5

Annex 2: Chart Showing the Locations of Still Images

Appendix 3: CIFCA 2016 field report #1

Eddystone Reefs Drop Down Video (20160718_CIFCA_SAC_EDD_DDV) Survey Field Report 18/07/16

Authors: Colin Trundle, Kimara Street, Annie Jenkin, Ryan Mathews and Hilary Naylor Document History Version Date Author Change 0.1 02/03/16 K Street Initial draft 0.2 25/10/16 H Naylor Additions to draft 0.3 03/11/2016 C Trundle Additions and minor corrections

Contents 1. Project Background 5 2. Aims and objectives 6 2.1. Aims 6 2.2. Objectives 6 3. Survey Approach 6 3.1. Equipment Specifications 6 3.2. PPE 8 3.3. Methodology 8 3.4. Data handling 9 4. Results 9 5. Representative Stills Images 13 6. Daily Log 17 6.1. 18th July 2016 17 Annex 1: RV Tiger Lily Deck Plan & Offsets 19 Annex 2: Chart Showing the Locations of Still Images 20

1. Project Background

Figure 1: Location of survey boxes used in the project.

2. Aims and objectives

2.1. Aims

2.2. Objectives

• Complete drop down video/stills surveys using the MESH recommended operating guidelines for underwater video surveys. • Repeat camera tows carried out in 2014 and 2015.

3. Survey Approach

3.1. Equipment Specifications

The Eddystone Reefs surveys were completed from Cornwall IFCA’s survey vessel R/V Tiger Lily VI. This vessel has been refitted for survey work and includes a purpose built survey station within the wheelhouse, fitted with an uninterruptable power supply (UPS) and a dedicated GPS with NMEA outputs. All positions are recorded using the Long/Lat WGS84 projection and sourced from the dedicated survey GPS (Furuno GP- 32). All times are recorded as UTC and taken from the same source as the position data. The clocks on all of the data capture PCs were synched prior to departing the vessel’s mooring. The camera used for the DDV survey was an STR SeaSpyder drop camera system contained in a custom built frame. The system enables high resolution still images of the seabed to be taken using a surface controlled digital SLR camera whilst simultaneously recording separate real time video. The video feed is recorded to the Seaspyder topside PC with user-programmable overlays of positional information, bearing and depth. The system details are available online: http://www.str- subsea.com/sales/str-seaspyder-drop-camera-system The only additional equipment on the IFCA Seaspyder is a 4 point red laser scaler set up around the camera bottle. The scaler has sides of 200mm and was calibrated

before the start of the survey. For the survey of the 18th July, the lasers were calibrated at 244mm horizontally for the upper pair and 220mm for the lower pair.

Figure 12: Cornwall IFCA’s dedicated survey vessel, R/V Tiger Lily VI.

Figure 13: SeaSpyder drop camera housed in a purpose built frame on the aft deck of R/V Tiger Lily VI.

3.2. PPE

3.3. Methodology

Figure 4: SeaSpyder drop camera in the deployment position from R/V Tiger Lily VI.

3.4. Data handling

OLEX was used to record waypoints/ marks at the start and end of each transect and at the location of every stills image. These were transferred out of OLEX as a .gz file, extracted using 7-Zip (7-Zip V9.20) and converted to a .txt file using OLEX to GPSU File Converter (OLEX to GPSU File Converter V1.05). The resulting file could then be converted to .txt file using MS Notepad. When opened in Excel, the file had all irrelevant header data removed and replacement field headers applied. Once completed and reviewed, the Excel file was then transferred to the GI software where data points were created which enabled a visualisation of the location of each still image to be made. The Seaspyder system was used to log a navigation file sourced from the NMEA data input that creates the time/position video overlay. The log file was captured as .txt and opened in Excel. The GGL sentence was the most appropriate for the information required to display the vessel’s track during the data collection. All GGL data was selected and copied to a new workbook. The data was corrected so that it could be transferred to the GI software. A table of data points that described the vessel’s course over ground (COG) was created from the processed file. Filtering the data using the times of each tow enabled the exact track of the tow to be isolated and displayed. Stills images from the SeaSpyder camera are initially stored on the internal computer (sub-surface). Subsequent to completion of each transect, batches of still images were

transferred to the topside unit using FileZilla and filed by transect number. Video files are automatically saved on the SeaSpyder topside unit data drive (D:/). Stills and video files were transferred from the topside unit to a WD Passport for transport and storage.

4. Results

It was intended to carry out the Eddystone Project DDV surveys over two days, the 18th and 19th of July 2016. The plan was to carry out four tows in each box on the first day and three in each box on the second. This approach was taken to follow the previous year’s survey effort. Unfortunately the forecast deteriorated meaning that the predicted conditions for the second day would be outside of operating parameters. The crew decided to attempt to collect an amount of data equal to that collected in 2015 by carrying out 6 tows in each box but increasing the number of images from 20 to 23 from each tow. It was felt this could be done in a long day, increasing the tow length can save time as it takes around five minutes to get the camera frame from the sea surface to the seabed. The time is taken securing the power/comms cable to the lifting rope. On the 18th, the vessel departed her mooring in flat seas and light airs. However by the time survey Box 3 was reached the wind had increased to F3-4 from the east/southeast making less than ideal conditions in which to carry out the survey. The survey began in Box 3 then moved onto Boxes 2 and 1 respectively. The first deployment at tow 1 in Box 3 was beset with intermittent communication failures to the stills camera. Even if comms to the stills camera are lost, the Seaspyder system will continue to capture the video data. On recovery of the camera frame, all of the connections were checked and on the second deployment more frequent tapes were applied to the lifting rope. Although these solutions didn’t completely remove the comm failures they were noticeably reduced. However during Box 2_T4 the comms were lost to the extent that the tow was aborted after 11 mins as only 4 stills had been captured. The camera frame was recovered to the surface and a complete restart was tried. This didn’t seem to have much effect so a call was made to Technical Support for advice. Unfortunately they were unable to provide a solution but made suggestions that meant logging data files that would enable them to assess any issues afterwards. Box 2_T5 suffered loss of camera comms 10 times. The survey continued through Box

2 with continued communication issues. Once Box 2 was completed it was decided to try changing the 240v AC power supply from the inverter to the generator. There were no recorded comm failures in Box 1, although the ‘fix’ seemed to work it is more likely that this may have been purely coincidental. To enable more data to be collected extended length tows were made in both Boxes 2 and 3. Keeping the camera frame at the seabed meant that time was not spent in recovery and redeployment. These extended tows were made when previous tows were being followed, e.g. Box 1_T3 which consisted of 46 still images. Unfortunately, on reviewing the data 78% of the images from Boxes 3 and 4 were judged to be not of the standard suitable for this project and were accordingly discarded with a view to them being repeated.

Date Transect Start Finish Video Tow Length No. of Stills Comments Length (m) (pre QC) 18/07/2016 Box 3_T1 07:13 07:40 00:23 271 11 Tow ended at bottom set net 18/07/2016 Box 3_T2 07:50 08:15 00:25 292 24 18/07/2016 Box 3_T3 08:26 08:49 00:23 351 22 18/07/2016 Box 3_T4 09:02 09:25 00:23 410 20 18/07/2016 Box 3_T5 09:38 10:00 00:22 515 22 Extended distance due to comm out breaks 18/07/2016 Box 3_T6 10:18 10:31 00:13 345 12 18/07/2016 Box 3_T7 10:45 10:55 00:10 200 10

18/07/2016 Box 2_T1 11:54 12:39 00:45 951 45 Double length tow through the centre of the box 18/07/2016 Box 2_T2 12:59 13:20 00:21 346 12 18/07/2016 Box 2_T3 13:42 14:07 00:25 409 18 18/07/2016 Box 2_T4 14:27 14:30 00:03 43 3 Truncated due to comm out issues

18/07/2016 Box 2_T5 15:12 15:30 00:22 190 18 18/07/2016 Box 2_T6 15:44 16:15 00:31 380 31 Extended tow 18/07/2016 Box 1_T1 16:44 17:07 00:23 202 21 18/07/2016 Box 1_T2 17:20 17:45 00:25 250 24 5 images to be discarded 18/07/2016 Box 1_T3 18:28 19:14 00:46 400 46 Double length tow but images too poor to be used –discard all 18/07/2016 Box 1_T4 19:28 19:47 00:19 240 19 Unusable images – discard all

Total 17 399 5795 358 (pre QC)

Table 1: Summary of transects.

5. Representative Stills Images

The following images are representative of the habitats recorded during this survey. Trans Representative Image 1 Representative Image 2 ect Box1_ T1

Box1_ T2

Box1_ T3

Box1_ T4

Box2_ T1

Box2_ T2

Box2_ T3

Box2_ T4

Box2_ T5

Box2_ T6

Box3_ T1

Box3_ T2

Box3_ T3

Box3_ T4

Box3_ T5

Box3_ T6

Box3_ T7

6. Daily Log

6.1. 18th July 2016

Crew: Colin Trundle (SiC) - Cornwall IFCA, Kimara Street (SO) - Cornwall IFCA, Hilary Naylor (SO) - Cornwall IFCA Dan Matthew (skipper) - Cornwall IFCA, Vessel: R/V Tiger Lily All times are in UTC. Time Activity 0500 Survey crew arrive on vessel 0515 Camera equipment test, all OK 0530 Depart Mylor 0700 Arrive on site at Middle Rocks (Box 3) 0713 Start Box 3- T1. Northern end of 2015 T7. 0728 Fishing gear sighted on vessel drift, vessel give a nudge astern to alter drift course 0740 Fishing gear observed in video, camera brought to surface to avoid entanglement, therefore EOL 0747 Start Box 3- T2. Southern end of 2015 T7. 0815 End Box 3-T2 0823 Start Box 3- T3. South of 2015 T5. 0858 Start Box 3- T4. Aiming to intersect 2015 T5. 0926 End Box 3- T4 0934 Start Box 3- T5 1002 End Box 3- T5 1013 Start Box 3- T6. Drift speed at the beginning of the two between 0.7- 1knts, the tow was still started with a view to stopping early if the drift speed was deemed too fast. Drift aiming to intersect 2015 T3. 1033 End Box 3- T6. Tow stopped early due to drift speed. 1042 Start Box 3- T7. Extra tow in addition to short T6. The skipper uses ships engines to slow drift speed. 1057 End of Box 3- T7. Steam to Box 2.

1137 Arrive in Box 2, check drift: east to west 1.5knts, the skipper will therefore use the ships engines again to slow drift speed 1149 Start Box 2- T1. As the drift is straight east to west three drifts are planned to cover the most ground. T1 will start in the middle of the box, therefore if the drift alters to the north or south it can be corrected in subsequent tows. 1239 End Box2- T1 1255 Start Box 2- T2, to the south of T1 1321 End Box 2- T2. Multiple comm’s issues. Suspected to be due to cable, therefore next tow will use more tape at smaller intervals. 1327 Camera aboard. Power down, check and clean all connectors. 1336 Start Box 2- T3. 1407 End Box 2- T3 1418 Start Box 2- T4 1433 End Box 2- T4. Tow aborted due to continuing comm’s issues. 1437 Call STR for assistance. Unsure of root of issues, possibly a cable issue which could only be identified by testing at STR. Suggested hire of new cable. 1507 Start Box 2- T5 1530 End Box 2- T5. Still several comm’s issues in tow. 1538 Start Box 2- T6 1615 End Box 2- T6. Long tow to join ED21 (2014 tow) and increase number of stills in box. 1620 Steam to Box 1 1641 Start Box 1- T1 1707 End Box 1- T1 1710 Steam to box 1 1720 Start Box 1- T2 1743 Decided to continue on tow to minimise time wasted deploying and recovering the camera as current tow direction will intersect two previous tows. 1746 Camera stationary, assumed may be snagged on fishing gear therefore brought to surface. 1747 Camera on surface with no indication of fishing gear. Break for dinner 1825 Start Box 1- T3 End Box 1- T3 1915 Steam to north east corner of Box 1 for last tow. 1928 Start Box 1- T4 1948 End Box 1- T4 1950 Camera recovered and transit to Mylor. 2200 Moor up Myor.

Annex 1: RV Tiger Lily Deck Plan & Offsets

Offset (m) NMEA Device Make/Model Offset Name X (Forw’d) Y (Port) Z (+) Navigation depth sounder Furuno Navnet Furuno transducer 5.0 0.75 -0.5 Survey GPS Furuno GP32 Furuno mushroom antenna 4.8 1.5

Annex 2: Chart Showing the Locations of Still Images

Appendix 4: CIFCA 2016 field report #2

Eddystone Reefs Drop Down Video (20161010_CIFCA_SAC_EDD_DDV) Survey Field Report 10/10/2016

Authors: Colin Trundle, Kimara Street, Annie Jenkin, Ryan Mathews and Hilary Naylor

Document History Version Date Author Change 0.1 18/10/2016 C Trundle Initial draft 0.2 03/11/2016 C Trundle Review and corrections 0.3

Contents

1. Project Background 5

2. Aims and objectives 6

2.1. Aims 6

2.2. Objectives 6

3. Survey Approach 6

3.1. Equipment Specifications 6

3.2. PPE 8

3.3. Methodology 8

3.4. Data handling 9

4. Results 10

5. Representative Stills Images 12

6. Daily Log 13

6.1. 10th October 2016 13

7. Annex 1: RV Tiger Lily Deck Plan & Offsets 15

8. Annex 2: Chart Showing the Locations of Still Images 16

1. Project Background

Figure 1: Location of survey boxes used in the project.

The survey carried out on the 10th October 2016 was the second day used to complete the data gathering for 2016. It was intended to capture the data over the 18th and 19th of July 2016 so that the work would be completed before 1st of August when Tiger Lily VI was due to be slipped for a major refit. Unfortunately, at the last minute the forecast for the 20th deteriorated to the extent it would have been very difficult/almost impossible to collect acceptable data in the predicted conditions. The crew decided to attempt to collect all data on the 19th July. During the review of the data collected on the day it was found that 2 tows, amounting to around 50 images, had suffered from a malfunctioning focussing mechanism of the stills camera rendering the majority of the those 50 images unusable. In the project specifications, it was agreed that all data should be collected within 3 months of the 1st survey date. This meant that a second day of data gathering would have to be carried out before the 18th October. Fortunately the second day’s data was collected within the agreed timeframe.

2. Aims and objectives

2.1. Aims

2.2. Objectives

• Complete drop down video/stills surveys using the MESH recommended operating guidelines for underwater video surveys. • Repeat camera tows carried out in 2014 and 2015 were possible and add further tows.

3. Survey Approach

3.1. Equipment Specifications

The Eddystone Reefs surveys were completed from Cornwall IFCA’s survey vessel R/V Tiger Lily VI. This vessel has been refitted for survey work and includes a purpose built survey station within the wheelhouse, fitted with an uninterruptable power supply (UPS) and a dedicated GPS with NMEA outputs. All positions are recorded using the Long/Lat WGS84 projection and sourced from the dedicated survey GPS (Furuno GP- 32). All times are recorded as UTC and taken from the same source as the position data. The clocks on all of the data capture PCs were synched prior to departing the vessel’s mooring. The camera used for the DDV survey was an STR SeaSpyder drop camera system contained in a custom built frame. The system enables high resolution still images of the seabed to be taken using a surface controlled digital SLR camera whilst simultaneously recording separate real time video. The video feed is recorded to the Seaspyder topside PC with user-programmable overlays of positional information, bearing and depth. The system details are available online: http://www.str- subsea.com/sales/str-seaspyder-drop-camera-system . The only additional equipment on the IFCA Seaspyder is a 4 point red laser scaler set up around the camera bottle. The scaler has sides of 200mm and was calibrated before the start of the survey. For the survey of the 10th October, the lasers were calibrated at 205mm horizontally for the upper pair and 200mm for the lower pair.

Figure 14: Cornwall IFCA’s dedicated survey vessel, R/V Tiger Lily VI.

Figure 15: SeaSpyder drop camera housed in a purpose built frame on the aft deck of R/V Tiger Lily VI.

3.2. PPE

R/V Tiger Lily VI is MCA coded to Cat 2 and is fitted with all necessary safety equipment, including life rafts, lifejackets, first aid kits and fire suppression systems.

While working on deck all crew are required to wear lifejackets, PLBs and steel toe cap boots. There were no reported accidents or near misses on the day.

3.3. Methodology

Figure 4: SeaSpyder drop camera in the deployment position from R/V Tiger Lily VI.

3.4. Data handling

OLEX was used to record waypoints/ marks at the start and end of each transect and at the location of every stills image. These were transferred out of OLEX as a .gz file, extracted using 7-Zip (7-Zip V9.20) and converted to a .txt file using OLEX to GPSU File Converter (OLEX to GPSU File Converter V1.05). the resulting file could then be converted to .txt file using MS Notepad. When opened in Excel, the file had all irrelevant header data removed and replacement field headers applied. Once completed and reviewed, the Excel file was then transferred to the GI software where data points were created to give a visualisation of the location of each still image. The Seaspyder system was used to log a navigation file sourced from the NMEA data input that creates the time/position video overlay. The log file was captured as .txt and opened in Excel. The GGL sentence was the most appropriate for the information required to display the vessel’s track during the data collection. All GGL data was selected and copied to a new workbook. The data was corrected so that it could be transferred to the GI software. A table of data points that described the vessel’s course over ground (COG) was created from the processed file. Filtering the data using the times of each tow enabled the exact track of the tow to be isolated and displayed. Stills images from the SeaSpyder camera are initially stored on the internal computer (sub-surface). Subsequent to completion of each transect, batches of still images were transferred to the topside unit using FileZilla and filed by transect number. Video files are automatically saved on the SeaSpyder topside unit data drive (D:/). Stills and video files were transferred from the topside unit to a WD Passport for transport and storage.

4. Results

This second day of the 2016 data collection surveys was carried out on 10 October 2016. Although it was not the smallest tide of the set (4.42m Devonport), the weather was forecast to be < 10 knots from the North east. Despite wind speeds of < 10 knots for the previous two days, prior to that there had been winds exceeding 25 knots from the east for several days which had left a reasonable but decaying swell. It was decided to continue to the survey site and make a final assessment once there. Trial drifts at Box 1 indicated that the swell was decaying and the conditions were within operational parameters.

The purpose of the survey of the 10th was to repeat tows that had provided substandard data on the 19th July. This survey was carried within 3 months of the original survey day. Although it was only necessary to repeat the failed tows from the July survey in Box 1, it was decided to complete an extra tow in each of Boxes 2 and 3. It was felt that the additional tows would highlight any potential temporal variations across the entire survey area. The first tow in Box 1 was aborted soon after starting due to excessive comm out issues and that the direction of drift changed from NW to W once the camera was deployed. Due to the westerly direction of drift it was decided to try to replicate the tows that failed the previous QA. The transect that was carried out on the 18th July was followed almost identically in terms of both length and direction. Another two tows were carried out in Box 1 followed by one in each of boxes 2 and 3. The 6 tows provided 127 minutes of video, 128 still images and covered a total of 1420 meters. The day provided many observations of marine wildlife. During passage to the site there were numerous sightings of common dolphins and a sighting of tuna leaping from the water. On the passage between tows 2 and 3 in Box 1, a minke whale surfaced several times approximately 15 meters off the vessel’s port side, luckily video of the event was captured. During tow 4 there was another observation of tuna breaking the surface. Whilst transiting between Box 1 and Box 2 around 20 common dolphins were recorded bow riding and swimming alongside and on the return to Mylor two groups of harbour porpoise were seen, one of which passed within 20 meters of the vessel. A summary of the data collected is given in Table 1 (below).

Date Transect Start Finish Video Tow Length No. of Stills Comments Length 10/10/2016 Box 1_T1 10:46 10:52 00:06 106m 5 Reef transition 10/10/2016 Box 1_T2 11:07 12:09 01:02 616m 60 Coarse sediment with shell. Some reef. 10/10/2016 Box 1_T3 12:40 12:50 00:10 111m 11 Mostly coarse sediment and shell. 10/10/2016 Box 1_T4 13:13 13:22 00:09 100m 10 Mostly coarse sediment and shell, some bedrock. 10/10/2016 Box 2_T1 13:53 14:13 00:20 247m 20 Pebble/cobble and shell. 10/10/2016 Box 3_T1 14:45 15:05 00:20 238m 22 Mixed sediment with some hydroid coverage. Total 6 127 min 1418m 128* * Image count carried out prior to QA Table 1: Summary of transects.

5. Representative Stills Images

The following images are representative of the habitats recorded during this survey. Transect Representative Image Box 1_T1

Box 1_T2

Box 1_T3

Box 1_T4

Box 2_T1

Box 3_T1

6. Daily Log

6.1. 10th October 2016

Crew: Colin Trundle (SiC) - Cornwall IFCA, Kimara Street (SO) - Cornwall IFCA, Hilary Naylor (SO) - Cornwall IFCA, Annie Jenkin (SO) - Cornwall IFCA, Ryan Mathews (SO) - Cornwall IFCA, Dan McIntyre (skipper) - Cornwall IFCA. Guests: Sangeeta McNair, Caz Waddell, Kate Owen - Natural England Marine Team (Truro) Vessel: R/V Tiger Lily All times are in UTC. Time Activity 0700 Crew muster aboard Tiger Lily and prepare for sea 0800 Guests arrive, welcomed aboard and safety brief given. 0830 Depart Mylor and make way to Hands Deep reef (survey box 1). Remnants of easterly swell combined with moderate east wind meant that sea conditions restricted passage speed to c.14knts 10:32 Arrive at Box 1. Day shapes raised (Restricted in ability to manoeuvre). Trial drift before deploying the camera frame. Drift was north westerly. 10:42 Vessel positioned to carry out a NW drift to cover the SE corner of the box. Camera frame deployed. 10:46 Box_1_T1 SOL. Comms issues at 10:47 & 10:48 10:52 Box_1_T1 EOL. Drift changed to W and therefore all data was being collected outside the box.

10:59 On station and test drift for Box_1_T2 11:02 Camera frame deployed. 11:07 Box_1_T2 SOL. Vessel track followed the tow that failed 18/07/2016 so continued for 50 images. 12:09 Box_1_T2 EOL 12:17 Minke whale observed 10-15 meters off port side, video captured. 12:30 On station and test drift. 12:35 Box_1_T3 camera deployed. 12:40 Box_1_T3 SOL. 11 images captured. Tow headed north toward tow 2 so aborted after 10 mins. 12:50 Box_1_T3 EOL 13:00 On site and drift trial 13:07 Deploy camera frame. 13:13 Box_1_T4 SOL 13:22 Box_1_T4 EOL. Strike day shapes. Make way to Box 2. 13:33 During passage to Box 2, >20 common dolphins observed bow riding and swimming in the vessel’s wake. 13:45 Arrive Box 2; raise day shapes and trial drift. 13:50 Deploy camera frame. 13:53 Box_2_T1 SOL 14:13 Box_2_T1 EOL. Strike day shapes and make way to Box 3 14:40 Arrive Box 3; Raise day shapes and drift trial. 14:45 Box_3_T1 SOL 15:05 Box_3_T1 EOL. Strike day shapes and make way for Mylor 15:45 Observe 2 groups of harbour porpoise, 1 passing within 20 meters of the vessel 16:53 Arrive at St Mawes bank. NE staff using camera equipment to observe maerl bed. 17:30 Alongside and ashore

7. Annex 1: RV Tiger Lily Deck Plan & Offsets

Offset (m) NMEA Device Make/Model Offset Name X (Forw’d) Y (Port) Z (+) Navigation depth sounder Furuno Navnet Furuno transducer 5.0 0.75 -0.5 Survey GPS Furuno GP32 Furuno mushroom antenna 4.8 1.5

8. Annex 2: Chart Showing the Locations of Still Images

Appendix 5: Substratum and image quality

The dominant substratum for each image was categorised using a 4 part classification system: rock, coarse, medium and fine. The clarity of each image (image quality) was categorised using a 3 part classification system: good, medium and poor. Examples for each of these categories is shown above.