Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report

Contract Reference: MB0120 Report Number: 53 Version 2 April 2016

Project Title: Marine Protected Areas Data and Evidence Co-ordination Programme Report No 53. Title: Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report Defra Project Code: MB0120 Defra Contract Manager: Carole Kelly

Funded by:

Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) Marine Science and Evidence Unit Marine Directorate Nobel House 17 Smith Square London SW1P 3JR

Authorship

Louise Brown Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) [email protected]

Stefan Bolam Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) [email protected]

Acknowledgements

We thank Anna Downie and Matthew Curtis, Cefas, for creating earlier drafts of this report.

Disclaimer: The content of this report does not necessarily reflect the views of Defra, nor is Defra liable for the accuracy of information provided, or responsible for any use of the reports content. Although the data provided in this report have been quality assured, the final products - e.g. habitat maps – may be subject to revision following any further data provision or once they have been used in SNCB advice or assessments.

Cefas Document Control

Title: Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report

Submitted to: Marine Protected Areas Survey Co-ordination & Evidence Delivery Group Date submitted: April 2016 Project Manager: David Limpenny Report compiled by: Louise Brown, Stefan Bolam Quality control by: Christopher Barrio Frojan Approved by & date: Keith Weston (13/04/2016) Version: V2

Version Control History Author Date Comment Version L Brown and S 27/01/2016 First draft V1 Bolam L Brown and S 13/04/2016 Revised following external reviewers’comments V2 Bolam

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ...... i List of Tables ...... iii List of Figures ...... iv 1 Executive Summary: Report Card ...... 1 1.1 Features proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation ..... 1 1.2 Features present but not proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation ...... 2 1.3 Evidence of human activities occurring within the rMCZ ...... 2 2 Introduction ...... 3 2.1 Location of the rMCZ ...... 3 2.2 Rationale for site position and designation ...... 4 2.3 Rationale for prioritising this rMCZ for additional evidence collection ...... 5 2.4 Survey aims and objectives ...... 5 3 Methods ...... 7 3.1 Acoustic data acquisition ...... 7 3.2 Ground truth sample acquisition ...... 7 3.3 Production of the updated habitat map ...... 9 3.4 Quality of the updated map ...... 11 4 Results ...... 13 4.1 Site Assessment Document (SAD) habitat map ...... 13 4.2 Updated habitat map based on new survey data ...... 14 4.3 Quality of the updated habitat map ...... 16 4.4 Broadscale habitats identified ...... 16 4.5 Habitat FOCI identified ...... 17 4.6 Species FOCI identified ...... 17 4.7 Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC) ...... 18 4.8 Data limitations and adequacy of the updated habitat map ...... 18 4.9 Observations of human impacts on the seabed ...... 19 5 Conclusions ...... 20 5.1 Presence and extent of broadscale habitats ...... 20 5.2 Presence and extent of habitat FOCI ...... 20 5.3 Presence and distribution of species FOCI ...... 21 5.4 Evidence of human activities impacting the seabed ...... 21 References ...... 22 Data sources ...... 24

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report i Annexes ...... 25 Annex 1. Broadscale habitat features listed in the ENG...... 25 Annex 2. Habitat FOCI listed in the ENG...... 26 Annex 3. Low or limited mobility species FOCI listed in the ENG...... 27 Annex 4. Highly mobile species FOCI listed in the ENG...... 28 Annex 5. Video and stills processing protocol...... 29 Appendices ...... 31 Appendix 1. Survey metadata ...... 31 Appendix 2. Outputs from acoustic surveys ...... 34 Appendix 3. Evidence of human activities within the rMCZ ...... 36 Appendix 4. Species list ...... 37 Appendix 5. Analyses of sediment samples: classification and composition ...... 50 Appendix 6. BSH/EUNIS Level 3 descriptions derived from video and stills ...... 52 Appendix 7. Example images from survey for broadscale habitats ...... 55 Appendix 8. Example images from survey for habitat FOCI ...... 57

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report ii List of Tables

Table 1. Broadscale habitats for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. .... 4 Table 2. Habitat FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation...... 5 Table 3. Species FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation...... 5 Table 4. Description of derivatives calculated for bathymetry...... 10 Table 5. Broadscale habitats identified in this rMCZ...... 17 Table 6. Habitat FOCI identified in this rMCZ...... 17 Table 7. Species FOCI identified in this rMCZ...... 17

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report iii List of Figures

Figure 1. Location of the Morte Platform rMCZ. Bathymetry is from the Defra Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011)...... 4 Figure 2. Location of ground truth sampling sites in the Morte Platform rMCZ. Bathymetry displayed is from Defra’s Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011). . 8 Figure 3. Habitat map from the Site Assessment Document...... 14 Figure 4. Updated map of broadscale habitats based on newly acquired survey data. Insert maps show the location of ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ observations...... 15 Figure 5. Overall MESH confidence score for the updated broadscale habitat map...... 16

Corrigendum

In July 2015 Defra declared the following amendments to reporting of Features of Conservation Importance (FOCI) in MPAG reports to reflect changes described within Defra MCZ consultation and designation material:  The habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Sands and Gravels’ is considered to be adequately protected by its component broadscale habitat features, subtidal sand and/or subtidal coarse sediment, and is no longer included within MCZ designations.  The species FOCI ‘Stalked jellyfish (Haliclystus auricula)’ is now referred to as ‘Haliclystus species’ for the purpose of MCZ protection, to account for potential presence of Haliclystus octoradiatus that has not been consistently differentiated within scientific records. The species are therefore considered jointly as an MCZ feature.  The species FOCI ‘Fan mussel (Atrina pectinata)’ should be correctly referred to as ‘Fan mussel (Atrina fragilis)’.  MCZs are no longer considered to be an appropriate tool for the protection of the species FOCI ‘European eel (Anguilla anguilla)’. They have been identified as habitat generalists for which it is particularly difficult to identify unique nursery or foraging grounds due to their wide distribution across coastal and freshwater zones. Conservation and management of European eels is considered to be more effectively achieved through the Eel Regulations and Eel Management Plans.  The species FOCI ‘Sea snail (Paludinella littorina)’ has been removed from Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. This means that it is no longer a FOCI so has been removed as a feature for MCZ designation.

In January 2016 Defra declared the following amendments to reporting of Features of Conservation Importance (FOCI) in MPAG reports to reflect changes described within Defra MCZ consultation and designation material:  The habitat FOCI ‘Mud Habitats in Deep Water’ is considered to be adequately protected by its component broadscale habitat features, subtidal mud, and is no longer included within MCZ designations.

Whilst the agreed changes will be reflected in MCZ Post-survey Site Reports written after the declaration, those reports produced prior to August 2015 may still contain references to the above FOCI as they appeared in the original Ecological Network Guidance document (NE & JNCC, 2010).

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report iv 1 Executive Summary: Report Card This report details the findings of a dedicated seabed survey at the Morte Platform recommended Marine Conservation Zone (rMCZ). The site is being considered for inclusion in a network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in UK waters, designed to meet conservation objectives under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. Prior to the dedicated survey, the site assessment had been made on the basis of best available evidence, drawn largely from historical data, modelled habitat maps and stakeholder knowledge of the area. The purpose of the survey was to provide direct evidence of the presence and extent of the broadscale habitats (BSH) and habitat FOCI (Features of Conservation Importance) that had been detailed in the original Site Assessment Document (SAD) (Lieberknecht et al., 2011). This Executive Summary is presented in the form of a Report Card comparing the characteristics predicted in the original SAD with the updated habitat map and new sample data that result from the surveys of the site conducted by the Environment Agency (EA) in March 2012 and Cefas in November 2014. The comparison covers broadscale habitats and habitat FOCI.

1.1 Features proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation Extent Extent according Accordance between according to to updated SAD and updated habitat Feature SAD habitat map map Broadscale Habitats Presence Extent A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock 4.86 km2 3 video stills* N/A N/A A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 14.50 km2 3.11 km2  -11.39 km2 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment 6.11 km2 N/A* N/A N/A Habitat FOCI None proposed N/A N/A N/A N/A Species FOCI None proposed N/A N/A N/A N/A * Although the BSH classes ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ and ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ were observed during the 2012 and 2014 surveys, their extent could not be determined.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 1 1.2 Features present but not proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation Extent Extent according Accordance between according to to updated SAD and updated habitat Feature SAD habitat map map Broadscale Habitats Presence Extent A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments* N/A 22.34 km2  +22.34 km2 A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs** N/A 40 stills  Habitat FOCI Subtidal Sands and Gravels*** 6.11 km2 N/A N/A N/A Species FOCI None observed N/A N/A N/A N/A * A difference in the acoustic signature between BSHs ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ could not be detected. Therefore, the hybrid BSH ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’ has been created. ** The BSH ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ has been recorded based solely on still images as the exact nature of the biogenic reef could not be confirmed. *** Removed from list of habitat FOCI in July 2015. See Corrigendum. Its extent is the corrected value calculated using the estimated spatial extent of the BSH ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ stated in the SAD.

1.3 Evidence of human activities occurring within the rMCZ There is evidence of three potential wrecks present within the boundaries of the rMCZ.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 2 2 Introduction In accordance with the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, the UK is committed to the development and implementation of a network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). The network will incorporate existing designated sites (e.g. Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas) along with a number of newly designated sites which, within the English territorial waters and offshore waters of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, will be termed Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs). The first 27 rMCZs were designated in November 2013 and a second tranche of 23 rMCZs in January 2016. In support of this initiative, four regional projects were set up to select sites that could contribute to this network because they contain one or more features specified in the Ecological Network Guidance (ENG; Natural England and the JNCC, 2010). The regional projects proposed a total of 127 rMCZs and compiled a Site Assessment Document (SAD) for each site. The SAD summarises what evidence was available for the presence and extent of the various habitat, species and geological features specified in the ENG, and for which the site was being recommended. Due to the scarcity of survey-derived seabed habitat maps in UK waters, these assessments were necessarily made using best available evidence, which included historical data, modelled habitat maps and stakeholder knowledge of the areas concerned. It became apparent that the best available evidence on features for which some sites had been recommended as MCZs was of variable quality. Consequently, Defra initiated a number of measures aimed at improving the evidence base, one of which took the form of a dedicated survey programme, implemented and co-ordinated by Cefas, to collect and interpret new survey data at selected rMCZ sites. This report provides an interpretation of the survey data collected jointly by the EA (during March 2012) and Cefas (during November 2014) personnel at the Morte Platform rMCZ.

2.1 Location of the rMCZ The Morte Platform rMCZ is a trapezoid shaped site located approximately 5 km off Baggy Point on the North Devon coast (Figure 1).

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 3

Figure 1. Location of the Morte Platform rMCZ. Bathymetry is from the Defra Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011).

2.2 Rationale for site position and designation The Morte Platform rMCZ was included in the proposed network because of its contribution to Ecological Network Guidance (ENG) criteria to broadscale habitats, and its added ecological importance. For a detailed site description see ‘Finding Sanctuary final report and recommendations’ (Lieberknecht et al., 2011) and ‘The Marine Conservation Zone Project: Ecological Network Guidance’ (Natural England and the JNCC, 2010).

2.2.1 Broadscale habitats proposed for designation Three broadscale habitats (BSH) were included in the recommendations for designation at this site (Table 1). See Annex 1 for the full list of broadscale habitats listed in the ENG.

Table 1. Broadscale habitats for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. EUNIS code & BSH Spatial extent according to the SAD A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock 4.86 km2 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 14.50 km2 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment 6.11 km2

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 4 2.2.2 Habitat FOCI proposed for designation The habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Sands and Gravels’ proposed for designation within the Morte Platform rMCZ (Table 2) has since been removed from the list of FOCI. The full list of habitat FOCI is presented in Annex 2.

Table 2. Habitat FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. Habitat FOCI Spatial extent according to SAD Subtidal Sands and Gravels* N/A * Removed from list of habitat FOCI in July 2015. See Corrigendum.

2.2.3 Species FOCI proposed for designation No ‘Low or limited mobility species’ and no ‘Highly mobile species’ FOCI were included in the recommendations for designation of this rMCZ (Table 3). The full list of these species FOCI is presented in Annexes 3 and 4.

Table 3. Species FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. Species FOCI Occurrence according to SAD Low or limited mobility species None proposed N/A Highly mobile species None proposed N/A

2.3 Rationale for prioritising this rMCZ for additional evidence collection Prioritisation of rMCZ sites for further evidence collection was informed by a gap analysis and evidence assessment. The prime objective was to elevate the confidence status for as many rMCZs as feasible to support designation in terms of the amount and quality of evidence for the presence and extent of broadscale habitats and habitat FOCI and, where possible, species FOCI. The confidence status was originally assessed in the SADs according Technical Protocol E (Natural England and the JNCC, 2012). The confidence score for the presence and extent of broadscale habitats and habitat FOCI reported for the Morte Platform rMCZ was Low/Moderate (Lieberknecht et al., 2011; JNCC and Natural England, 2012). This site was therefore prioritised for additional evidence collection.

2.4 Survey aims and objectives Primary Objectives

 To collect acoustic and groundtruthing data to allow the production of an updated map which could be used to inform the presence of broadscale habitats and habitat FOCI, and allow estimates to be made of their spatial extent within the rMCZ.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 5 Secondary Objectives

 To provide evidence, where possible, of the presence of species FOCI listed within the ENG (Annexes 3 and 4) within the rMCZ.

 To report evidence of human activity occurring within the rMCZ found during the course of the survey. It should be emphasised that surveys were not primarily designed to address the secondary objectives under the current programme of work. Whilst the newly collected data will be utilised for the purposes of reporting against the primary objectives of the current programme of work (given above), it is recognised that these data will be valuable for informing the assessment and monitoring of condition of given habitat features in the future.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 6 3 Methods

3.1 Acoustic data acquisition Multibeam echosounder (MBES) bathymetry and backscatter data were collected at the Morte Platform rMCZ as part of the Civil Hydrography Programme (CHP) in 2002. However, the quality of the backscatter data was not sufficient for habitat mapping purposes. Therefore, another 100% coverage MBES survey was undertaken aboard the RV Cefas Endeavour in November 2014 (Cruise code: CEND 2514). Multibeam bathymetry and backscatter data were acquired using the Kongsberg EM2040 system operated at 300 kHz and deployed on the drop keel, which was lowered to its full extent to minimise the influence of poor weather on the acoustic signal. The raw multibeam bathymetry data were processed using CARIS HIPS. All bathymetric data were collected and processed in accordance with the International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO) Standards for Hydrographic Surveys – Order 1 (Special Publication 44, Edition 4). Multibeam backscatter data were processed with Fledermaus Geocoder Toolbox to produce standard floating point (FP) geotiffs. Both bathymetry and backscatter datasets were gridded at 1 m resolution for analysis (see Appendix 2 for images derived from acoustic data).

3.2 Ground truth sample acquisition Ground truth samples were collected during two surveys using a combination of grab and camera sampling techniques. The grab sampler was used to collect seabed sediments and associated fauna, while the underwater camera was used to collect both video and still images of the seabed (Figure 2; Appendix 1). The first survey was undertaken by the EA on board the CSV Water Guardian (Cruise code: WGDN0412) in March 2012. For this survey, 45 stations were selected, based on a triangular lattice grid, for sediment sampling and drop camera work. Stations were spaced 0.75 km apart to ensure sufficient samples would be collected from each predicted broadscale habitat within the SAD map. Grab sampling was attempted first at each station and if this was unsuccessful the drop camera was deployed. The second survey was undertaken on board the RV Cefas Endeavour (Cruise code: CEND2514) in November 2014. Ground truth sampling positions were also based on a 0.75 km spaced triangular lattice grid, but station positions were adjusted, based on the newly acquired MBES data, to improve the success rate of attaining a valid sample. Drop camera tows were undertaken at a subset of these stations (approx. one third of planned ground truth sampling stations) or when the acoustic data suggested the presence of a rocky substrate.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 7

Figure 2. Location of ground truth sampling sites in the Morte Platform rMCZ. Bathymetry displayed is from Defra’s Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011). In 2012, a Day grab was used during the early part of the survey due to inclement weather and sea conditions. The mini-Hamon grab was adopted during this survey as sea conditions abated, and this grab type was used at all stations during the 2014 survey. On recovery of the mini-Hamon grab, the contents were emptied into a large plastic container and a representative sub-sample of sediment (approx. 0.5 l) taken for Particle Size Analysis (PSA). The remaining sample was photographed and sieved over a 1 mm mesh sieve to collect the benthic fauna. Retained fauna were preserved in buffered formaldehyde solution for later processing ashore. The Day grab samples were treated in an identical manner as the mini-Hamon grab samples, except that PSA sub-samples were taken from the undisturbed sediment using a small sub-corer (3 cm diameter). Video observations were made using a Drop Camera (DC) system which had the capability to collect both video and still images. A four-point laser device was used to provide a reference scale in the video and still images. Set-up and operation followed the MESH ‘Recommended Operating Guidelines (ROG) for underwater video and photographic imaging techniques’ (Coggan et al., 2007). Video was recorded simultaneously to a Sony GV-HD700 DV tape recorder and a computer hard drive. A video overlay was used to provide station metadata, time and position (of the GPS antenna) in the recorded video image. Camera tows lasted a minimum of 10 minutes, with the DC system being towed at ~0.3 knots. Still images were captured at regular one minute intervals (or every 10-15 metres on the 2012 survey) and opportunistically if specific features of interest were encountered. Video and still images were analysed following an established protocol developed and used by

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 8 Cefas (Coggan and Howell, 2005; JNCC, in prep.; see Annex 5). Only still photographs (no video footage) were acquired during the 2012 survey. For further detail on ground truth sample collection see the Morte Platform rMCZ Survey Reports (Godsell et al. (2013) for the 2012 survey; Murray (2015) for the 2014 survey).

3.3 Production of the updated habitat map An updated habitat map was produced following analysis and interpretation of the newly acquired acoustic and ground truth data. Acoustic data were converted into raster images for ease of interpretation (see Appendix 2). The data integration and mapping process involved object-based image analysis and statistical modelling, as described below. Object-based image analysis (OBIA) is a two-step process of segmentation and classification (Blaschke, 2010), implemented using the software package eCognition v9.0.2. Objects were created through segmenting the raster data layers. The resulting objects represent sections of the image which possess homogeneous characteristics across all data layers used in the segmentation process. For each of the identified objects, mean and standard deviation values of primary acoustic data layers and their derivatives were calculated. These values were extracted to PSA point samples and observations of hard substrates in still images for statistical analysis. Rules used to split objects into habitat types in the classification step of OBIA were determined by applying Conditional Inference Tree analysis (CI; Hothorn et al., 2006) to the sample data. CI combines recursive binary partitioning with conditional inference procedures, embedding statistical tests into each classification split. The statistical analyses were carried out in the statistical programming environment R (R Development Core Team, 2012). A step-by-step description of the acoustic data analysis process is given below.

Stage 1. Data preparation Prior to analysis, the bathymetry and backscatter datasets were re-sampled onto a common grid at 1 m resolution. This step results in a spatial grid with a single value for bathymetry (depth) and a single value for backscatter (acoustic reflectance) in each 1 m x 1 m grid cell and it is these data values that are used in the rest of the process.

Stage 2. Derivatives calculated A range of derivatives were calculated for the MBES bathymetry data layer, as detailed in Table 4.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 9 Table 4. Description of derivatives calculated for bathymetry. Derivative Description Slope The slope in degrees using the maximum change in elevation of each cell and its 8 neighbours Roughness Calculated as the difference between the maximum and minimum value of each cell and its 8 neighbours Curvature (profile and Curvature parallel to the direction of slope (profile) and planar) perpendicular to the direction of slope (planar) BPI Bathymetric position index (Lundblad et al., 2006); radii of 3, 5, 10, 25 cells Aspect Expressed as eastness and northness (Wilson et al., 2007)

Stage 3. Segmentation and classification Based on spectral characteristics, images generated from acoustic data can be segmented into small objects. Each object can be defined by a range of features including its layer statistics (mean, mode, standard deviation, skewness, etc.), geometry (extent, shape, etc.) and texture. The segmentation process was undertaken using multi-resolution segmentation. Multi-resolution segmentation commences with a single pixel and consecutively merges it with neighbouring pixels, based on the relative homogeneity criterion. The homogeneity criterion is based on both colour (standard deviation of spectral colours) and shape (standard deviation of a compact shape) of the pixel. The segmentation process continues until a threshold value for the scale parameter, determined by the analyst, is reached. The scale parameter determines the variability allowed within each object. The ultimate aim of the segmentation process is to create objects which represent areas of homogeneity within the image. The segmentation and classification of the acoustic data for the Morte Platform rMCZ occurred in two stages. The aim of the first segmentation was to define and classify the extent of rock within the rMCZ, while that of the second segmentation was to define and classify the extent of sedimentary habitats within the rMCZ.

Rock segmentation and classification When identifying the extent of rocky habitats within the Morte Platform rMCZ the bathymetry, backscatter and slope were used within the multi-resolution segmentation process with weightings of 1, 1, and 3 respectively. The segmentation was undertaken at the pixel level with a scale parameter of 5. These weightings and scale parameter were used as they best selected the distribution of rock within this site. For each object created in this segmentation process, the mean and standard deviation values of the primary acoustic layers (e.g. mean bathymetry value for the grid cells lying within an object) and their derivatives outlined in Table 4 (roughness, slope, etc.) were calculated. Grey level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) texture values, entropy and homogeneity, were also calculated for backscatter. These object- features and related values were exported as GIS shapefiles and extracted to each location associated with ground truthing samples. Ground truthing samples were either classified as “Rock” or “Sediment” depending on their broadscale habitat classification. This provided an analysis dataset for the classification process.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 10 The distribution of values for backscatter, bathymetry and bathymetric derivatives in the broadscale habitat classes found in the ground truth data were analysed to find the variables that best defined habitat classes. CI analysis (Hothorn et al., 2006) was used to identify the acoustic variables that most successfully differentiated between the observed broadscale habitats in the ground truthing datasets, and to establish the best cut-off values for those variables. To produce the updated habitat map, the segmentation objects were classified according to the cut-off values identified in the CI analysis for the appropriate variables and the resulting classified objects were exported into GIS.

Sediment segmentation and classification To classify the extent of sedimentary habitats within the rMCZ the regions of the Morte Platform rMCZ not classified as rocky habitats were resegmented. Firstly, a chessboard segmentation was undertaken at the image object level. A multi- resolution segmentation was then undertaken, also at the image object level, using slope, bathymetry and backscatter (weightings of 1, 2 and 3 respectively) with a scale parameter of 5. These weightings and scale parameter were used as they best selected the distribution of sedimentary habitats within this site. For each object created in this segmentation process, the mean and standard deviation values of the primary acoustic layers (e.g. mean bathymetry value for the grid cells lying within an object) and their derivatives outlined in Table 4 (roughness, slope, etc.) were calculated. Grey level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) texture, entropy and homogeneity values were also calculated for backscatter. Finally, a spectral difference segmentation was used to fuse spectrally similar objects. These objects were exported as GIS shapefiles and extracted to each location associated with a ground truth sample. Groundtruthing samples were restricted to the sedimentary BSH classes ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’. The sedimentary data from PSA samples were analysed to determine whether a real difference could be identified between the two sediment types. However, it was decided that the boundary between BSHs ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ could not be distinguished with confidence. Therefore, sedimentary habitats were defined using a hybrid BSH classification ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’. Finally, the updated broadscale habitat map was exported as a GIS shapefile.

3.4 Quality of the updated map The technical quality of the updated habitat map was assessed using the MESH ‘Confidence Assessment’ Tool1, originally developed by an international consortium of marine scientists working on the MESH (Mapping European Seabed Habitats) project. This tool considers the provenance of the data used to make a biotope/habitat map, including the techniques and technology used to characterise the physical and biological environment, and the expertise of the people who made the map. In its original implementation, the tool was used to make an auditable judgement of the confidence that could be placed on a range of existing, local biotope maps that had been developed using different techniques and data inputs, to

1 http://emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/confidence/confidenceAssessment.html [Accessed 03/12/15]

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 11 be used in compiling a full coverage map for northwest Europe. Where two of the original maps overlapped, that with the highest MESH confidence score would take precedence in the compiled map. Subsequent to the MESH project, the confidence assessment tool has been applied to provide a benchmark score that reflects the technical quality of newly developed habitat/biotope maps. Both physical and biological survey data are required to achieve the top mark of 100 but, as the current MCZ exercise requires the mapping of broadscale physical habitats not biotopes, it excludes the need for biological data. In the absence of biological data, the maximum score attainable for a map based purely on physical data is 88. In applying the tool to the current work, none of the weighting options were altered; that is, the tool was applied in its standard form, as downloaded from the internet.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 12 4 Results During the 2012 survey, a total of 13 out of 45 targeted stations were successfully sampled using a combination of 0.1 m2 mini-Hamon and Day grabs. Eighteen drop camera tows were conducted from the 45 targeted stations, however, poor visibility during the tows resulted in the data acquired being of insufficient quality for any subsequent analyses at all but six of these. A total of 31 grabs were collected from the 54 planned stations during the 2014 survey, while underwater video and still images were successfully acquired at 37 stations. The combined list of benthic taxa found in the grab and video samples from both the 2012 and 2014 surveys is presented in Appendix 4; a total of 421 and 104 taxa were recorded from the grab and video samples respectively. No species FOCI were recorded at the Morte Platform rMCZ during either of the two surveys. A summary of the results from particle size analysis of the sediments from the grab samples is given in Appendix 5. Of the 44 stations from the two surveys where a sample was obtained, coarse sediment was recorded at 22 stations and mixed sediments were recorded at a further 22 stations. The results from the analysis of the seabed video and stills are summarised in Appendix 6. Example images taken during the survey of the BSHs recorded in the video analysis are given in Appendix 7.

4.1 Site Assessment Document (SAD) habitat map The SAD habitat map (Figure 3) was produced using modelled data from the UKSeaMap 2010 v5 (McBreen et al., 2011). For further detail see Lieberknecht et al. (2011).

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 13

Figure 3. Habitat map from the Site Assessment Document.

4.2 Updated habitat map based on new survey data The updated habitat map resulting from an integrated analysis of the 2012 and 2014 dedicated survey data is presented in Figure 4. The results from the PSA suggest that the majority of the site consists of the BSHs ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’. However, it is has not been possible in this instance to define the extent of these two broadscale habitats individually (see Section 3.3); they have, therefore, been defined as a mosaic of both BSHs, labelled as ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’. It was possible to predict the extent of rocky habitats in this rMCZ using photographs taken during video tows. ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ and ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’ were both observed during the ground truthing process. However, despite ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ being observed, all rocky habitats were classified as representing the BSH ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’. This is because the extent of ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ could not be extrapolated across the entire site due to insufficient observations of the BSH (only three stills were classed as such). Therefore, observations of ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ have been plotted as points on the updated habitat map (Figure 4). The BSH ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ was observed to be present from stills and video footage, however it is not possible to confidently ascertain the reef status solely based on this information. Therefore, while the BSH ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ is named within this report, further dedicated survey work is needed to determine the true presence and extent of this BSH. In addition, it was not always possible to confidently distinguish between this BSH and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’. Therefore, images classified as the BSH ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ have been plotted as point observations.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 14

Figure 4. Updated map of broadscale habitats based on newly acquired survey data. Insert maps show the location of ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ observations.

Morte Platform MCZ Post-survey Site Report 15 4.3 Quality of the updated habitat map The updated broadscale habitat map for the Morte Platform rMCZ attained a score of 82 from the MESH Confidence Assessment Tool (Figure 5), which is good given that the maximum possible score for a map based purely on physical data is 88.

Figure 5. Overall MESH confidence score for the updated broadscale habitat map.

4.4 Broadscale habitats identified The broadscale habitat types observed in grab and video ground truthing samples included ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’, ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’, ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’, ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ and ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’. A hybrid of two BSHs, ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’, was the most widespread habitat, occupying 88% of the rMCZ site (Figure 4; Table 5). Rocky habitats cover approximately 12% of the rMCZ and are located predominantly on the south-eastern edge of the rMCZ as a matrix of rocky outcrops and the hybrid BSH ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’. The BSH ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ was observed on video stills, however, there were insufficient observations to extrapolate this BSH across the rMCZ. Therefore, rocky habitats within this site have been classified as the BSH ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’, with ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ plotted as point observations. The bathymetry data (Appendix 2) and SAD map suggest that rocky habitats are more widespread then mapped in the updated habitat map, the dynamic nature of this site means that sediment may be temporarily deposited and then re-suspended,

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 16 meaning that there is the potential for the relative proportion of rock and sediment across the site to change depending on other environmental factors. This means that the ratio of sedimentary to rocky habitats could vary over time. The BSH ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ was observed within the video and stills groundtruthing data. However, CI could not accurately predict its spatial extent due to it having a similar signature to that of the hybrid BSH ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’. Therefore, the category ’A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ was not used in the CI process as it introduced too much uncertainty and was therefore plotted as point observations on the updated broadscale habitat map (Figure 4).

Table 5. Broadscale habitats identified in this rMCZ. Broadscale Habitat Type Spatial extent according to Spatial extent according to (EUNIS Level 3) the SAD the updated habitat map A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock 4.86 km2 3 stills A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 14.50 km2 3.11 km2 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment 6.11 km2 N/A* A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments N/A N/A* A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments N/A 22.34 km2 A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs** N/A 40 stills * It was not possible to calculate the extent of this BSH in isolation because it had the same acoustic signature as another BSH. The extent of the hybrid BSH is provided. ** The BSH ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ has been identified on still images only. Further dedicated survey work is needed to confirm reef status.

4.5 Habitat FOCI identified The habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Sands and Gravels’ identified within the SAD has since been removed from the list of FOCI (Table 6), therefore its extent has not been calculated in the updated habitat map.

Table 6. Habitat FOCI identified in this rMCZ. Spatial extent according Spatial extent according to Habitat FOCI to the SAD the updated habitat map Subtidal Sands and Gravels* 6.11 km2** N/A * Removed from list of habitat FOCI in July 2015. See Corrigendum. ** This is the corrected value calculated using the estimated spatial extent of the BSH ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ in the SAD.

4.6 Species FOCI identified No species FOCI were recorded at the Morte Platform rMCZ during the 2012 and 2014 dedicated surveys.

Table 7. Species FOCI identified in this rMCZ. Previously recorded Identified during evidence Species FOCI within rMCZ gathering survey Low or Limited Mobility Species None recorded N/A N/A Highly Mobile Species None recorded N/A N/A

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 17 4.7 Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC)

4.7.1 Acoustic data Acquisition and processing of the bathymetry data complied with the International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO) Standards for Hydrographic Surveys-Order 1 (Special Publication 44, Edition 4). The accompanying multibeam backscatter data were reviewed and processed by specialist Cefas staff to ensure that they were suitable for use in the subsequent interpretations and production of the updated habitat map.

4.7.2 Particle Size Analysis of sediments PSA on the samples collected in 2012 was carried out by the National Laboratory Service, Environment Agency, and Cefas, while Cefas conducted the PSA on those collected in 2014. All PSA procedures followed standard laboratory practices and complied with the recommendations of the National Marine Biological Analytical Quality Control (NMBAQC) scheme (Mason, 2011). Over-arching quality assurance checks were completed by Cefas. The habitat classification and composition based on the results of the PSA is shown in Appendix 5.

4.7.3 Infaunal samples from grabs Infaunal samples taken during the 2012 survey were processed by Hebog Environmental Ltd, and those from the 2014 survey were processed by MES Ltd. Infaunal processing followed standard laboratory practices and the results were checked in accordance with the recommendations of the NMBAQC scheme (Worsfold et al., 2010).

4.7.4 Video and still images and analysis Video and photographic stills from the 2012 survey were processed by RSS Marine Ltd, while those obtained during the 2014 survey were processed by Seastar Surveys Ltd. All processing was conducted in accordance with the guidance documents developed by Cefas and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) for the acquisition and processing of video and stills data (Coggan and Howell, 2005; JNCC, in prep.; summarised in Annex 5).

4.8 Data limitations and adequacy of the updated habitat map The 2012 and 2014 surveys have provided substantial and robust evidence of the presence of the broadscale habitats mapped. The quality of the derived habitat map, in which a hybrid BSH class has been mapped, is assessed to be High (MESH assessment tool). It was not possible to differentiate between the BSHs ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ and map them separately, as the acoustic signatures of each BSH type were statistically indistinguishable. Also, sources of potential misclassification of habitats arise from the location of groundtruthing samples in relation to habitat types. Although the BSHs ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ and ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ were observed in the groundtruthing samples, it was not possible to predict

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 18 their extent across the whole site. It was not possible to predict the extent of ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ due to the insufficient number of samples representing this BSH. It was not possible to predict the extent of ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ due to the similarity of its acoustic signature with ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’. Therefore, these two BSHs were plotted as point observations on the updated broadscale habitat map. It is impractical (and undesirable) to sample the entire area of the site with grabs and video, so there is a chance that a BSH or FOCI may exist within the site which has not been recorded, especially if it was limited in extent. The precise location of the boundaries between the broadscale habitats depicted on the map should be regarded as indicative, not definitive. In nature, such boundaries are rarely abrupt and normally, one BSH grades into another across a transitional boundary. In contrast, the mapped boundaries are abrupt and have been placed using best professional judgement. This may have implications when calculating the overall extent of any of the mapped habitats or FOCI. The updated broadscale habitat map is a snapshot representing the distribution of broadscale habitat types at the time of survey. It is also important to note that the habitat boundaries delineated in this report are likely to shift with variations in hydrodynamic conditions, which will re-suspend and re-deposit the finer fraction of the sediments, covering and exposing underlying rocky habitats in the process.

4.8.1 Presence of Species FOCI No species FOCI were included in the recommendations for proposal of this rMCZ, and none was recorded during the 2012 and 2014 surveys for this site.

4.9 Observations of human impacts on the seabed There is evidence from the MBES bathymetry and backscatter images of three potential wrecks present within the boundaries of the Morte Platform rMCZ (see Appendix 3).

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 19 5 Conclusions

5.1 Presence and extent of broadscale habitats

5.1.1 Presence  The 2012 and 2014 dedicated groundtruthing surveys have confirmed the presence of the BSHs ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’, ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’ and ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ which were included in the recommendations made by the SAD for designating this site as an MCZ.

 The 2012 and 2014 dedicated groundtruthing surveys have confirmed the presence of BSHs ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ and ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’. These BSHs were not included in the recommendations made by the SAD for designating this site as an MCZ.

 The BSH ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ was identified from video footage and still photographs, therefore, further survey work is required to confidently ascertain the presence and extent of this BSH.

 The BSHs ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ could not be distinguished from one another on the acoustic data record, therefore a hybrid BSH type has been defined as ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’.

5.1.2 Extent  The spatial extent of the BSH ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’ is 3.11 km2. This is 11.39 km2 less than its extent in the SAD habitat map.

 The spatial extent of each of the BSHs ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ could not be determined in the mapping process.

 The spatial extent of the BSH hybrid ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’ is 22.34 km2. This was not identified in the SAD map.

 The spatial extent of each of the BSHs ‘A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock’ and ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ could not be determined during the mapping process. Occurrence of both BSHs has been represented as point data on the updated habitat map.

5.2 Presence and extent of habitat FOCI

5.2.1 Presence  The 2012 and 2014 dedicated groundtruthing surveys did not identify any habitat FOCI.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 20 5.3 Presence and distribution of species FOCI

5.3.1 Low or limited mobility species  No low or limited mobility species were recorded at this site during the 2012 or 2014 dedicated surveys. This observation is consistent with the evidence presented in the SAD.

5.3.2 Highly mobile species FOCI  No highly mobile species FOCI were recorded at this site during the 2012 or 2014 dedicated surveys. This observation is consistent with the evidence presented in the SAD.

5.4 Evidence of human activities impacting the seabed There is evidence from the MBES bathymetry and backscatter images of three potential wrecks present within the boundaries of the rMCZ (Appendix 3).

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 21 References

Astrium (2011). Creation of a high resolution Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the British Isles continental shelf: Final Report. Prepared for Defra, Contract Reference: 13820. 26 pp. Blaschke, T. (2010). Object based image analysis for remote sensing. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing 65, 2-16. Coggan, R., Mitchell, A., White, J. and Golding, N. (2007). Recommended operating guidelines (ROG) for underwater video and photographic imaging techniques. www.searchmesh.net/PDF/GMHM3_video_ROG.pdf [Accessed 03/12/15] Coggan, R. and Howell, K. (2005). Draft SOP for the collection and analysis of video and still images for groundtruthing an acoustic basemap. Video survey SOP version 5. 10 pp. Godsell, N., Fraser, M. and Jones, N. (2013) Morte Platform rMCZ. JNCC (in prep.). Video/Stills Camera Standard Operating Procedure for Survey and Analysis: for groundtruthing and classifying an acoustic basemap, and development of new biotopes within the UK Marine Habitat Classification. JNCC Video and Stills Processing SOP v2. 6 pp. JNCC and Natural England (2012). Marine Conservation Zone Project: JNCC and Natural England's advice to Defra on recommended Marine Conservation Zones. Peterborough and Sheffield. 1455 pp. Lieberknecht, L.M., Hooper, T.E.J., Mullier, T.M., Murphy, A., Neilly, M., Carr, H., Haines, R., Lewin, S., and Hughes, E. (2011) Finding Sanctuary final report and recommendations. Lundblad, E. R., Wright, D. J., Miller, J., Larkin, E. M., Rinehart, R., Naar, D. F., Donahue, B. T., Anderson, S. M. and Battista, T. (2006). A benthic terrain classification scheme for American Samoa. Marine Geodesy 29, 89-111. Mason, C. (2011). NMBAQC’s Best Practice Guidance Particle Size Analysis (PSA) for Supporting Biological Analysis. McBreen, F., Askew, N., Cameron, A., Connor, D., Ellwood, H. and Carter, A. (2011). UKSeaMap 2010 v5: Predictive mapping of seabed habitats in UK waters. JNCC Report, No. 446. Available online from http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/ukseamap. Murray, J. (2015) Morte Platform Survey Report. Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2010). The Marine Conservation Zone Project: Ecological Network Guidance. Sheffield and Peterborough, UK. Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2012). SNCB MCZ Advice Project-Assessing the scientific confidence in the presence and extent of features in recommended Marine Conservation Zones (Technical Protocol E)

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 22 R Development Core Team (2012). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3- 900051-07-0, URL http://www.R-project.org [Accessed 08/01/16] Wilson, M.F.J., O’Connell, B., Brown, C., Guinan, J.C. and Grehan, A.J. (2007). Multiscale terrain analysis of multibeam bathymetry data for habitat mapping on the continental slope. Marine Geodesy 30, 3-35. Worsfold, T.M., Hall, D.J. and O’Reilly, M. (2010). Guidelines for processing marine macrobenthic invertebrate samples: a processing requirements protocol version 1 (June 2010). Unicomarine Report NMBAQCMbPRP to the NMBAQC Committee. 33 pp. http://www.nmbaqcs.org/media/1175/nmbaqc-inv-prp-v10- june2010.pdf [Accessed 08/01/16]

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 23 Data sources

All enquiries in relation to this report should be addressed to the following e-mail address: [email protected]

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 24 Annexes

Annex 1. Broadscale habitat features listed in the ENG. Broadscale Habitat Type EUNIS Level 3 Code High energy intertidal rock A1.1 Moderate energy intertidal rock A1.2 Low energy intertidal rock A1.3 Intertidal coarse sediment A2.1 Intertidal sand and muddy sand A2.2 Intertidal mud A2.3 Intertidal mixed sediments A2.4 Coastal saltmarshes and saline reed beds A2.5 Intertidal sediments dominated by aquatic angiosperms A2.6 Intertidal biogenic reefs A2.7 High energy infralittoral rock* A3.1 Moderate energy infralittoral rock* A3.2 Low energy infralittoral rock* A3.3 High energy circalittoral rock** A4.1 Moderate energy circalittoral rock** A4.2 Low energy circalittoral rock** A4.3 Subtidal coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal sand A5.2 Subtidal mud A5.3 Subtidal mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal macrophyte-dominated sediment A5.5 Subtidal biogenic reefs A5.6 Deep-sea bed*** A6 * Infralittoral rock includes habitats of bedrock, boulders and cobble which occur in the shallow subtidal zone and typically support seaweed communities ** Circalittoral rock is characterised by animal dominated communities, rather than seaweed dominated communities *** The deep-sea bed broadscale habitat encompasses several different habitat sub-types, all of which should be protected within the MPA network. The broadscale habitat deep-sea bed habitat is found only in the south-west of the MCZ project area and MCZs identified for this broadscale habitat should seek to protect the variety of sub-types known to occur in the region.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 25 Annex 2. Habitat FOCI listed in the ENG. Habitat Features of Conservation Importance (FOCI) Blue Mussel Beds (including Intertidal Beds on Mixed and Sandy Sediments)** Cold-Water Coral Reefs *** Coral Gardens*** Deep-Sea Sponge Aggregations*** Estuarine Rocky Habitats File Shell Beds*** Fragile Sponge and Anthozoan Communities on Subtidal Rocky Habitats Intertidal Underboulder Communities Littoral Chalk Communities Maerl Beds Horse Mussel (Modiolus modiolus) Beds Mud Habitats in Deep Water***** Sea-Pen and Burrowing Megafauna Communities Native Oyster (Ostrea edulis) Beds Peat and Clay Exposures Honeycomb Worm (Sabellaria alveolata) Reefs Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs Seagrass Beds Sheltered Muddy Gravels Subtidal Chalk Subtidal Sands and Gravels**** Tide-Swept Channels * Habitat FOCI have been identified from the ‘OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats’ and the ‘UK List of Priority Species and Habitats (UK BAP)’. ** Only includes ‘natural’ beds on a variety of sediment types. Excludes artificially created mussel beds and those which occur on rocks and boulders. *** Coldwater coral reefs, coral gardens, deep sea sponge aggregations and file shell beds currently do not have distributional data which demonstrate their presence within the MCZ project area. **** Subtidal Sands and Gravels are considered to be adequately protected by its component habitat features subtidal sand and/or subtidal coarse sediment, and is no longer included within MCZ designations. ***** ‘Mud Habitats in Deep Water’ is considered to be adequately protected by its component broadscale habitat feature ‘Subtidal mud’ and is no longer included within MCZ designation.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 26 Annex 3. Low or limited mobility species FOCI listed in the ENG. Group Scientific name Common Name Brown Algae Padina pavonica Peacock’s Tail Red Algae Cruoria cruoriaeformis Burgundy Maerl Paint Weed Grateloupia montagnei Grateloup’s Little-Lobed Weed Lithothamnion corallioides Coral Maerl Phymatolithon calcareum Common Maerl Annelida Alkmaria romijni** Tentacled Lagoon-Worm** Armandia cirrhosa** Lagoon Sandworm** Teleostei Gobius cobitis Giant Goby Gobius couchi Couch’s Goby Hippocampus guttulatus Long Snouted Seahorse Hippocampus hippocampus Short Snouted Seahorse Bryozoa Victorella pavida Trembling Sea Mat Cnidaria Amphianthus dohrnii Sea-Fan Anemone Eunicella verrucosa Pink Sea-Fan Haliclystus auricula*** Stalked Jellyfish*** Leptopsammia pruvoti Sunset Cup Coral Lucernariopsis campanulata Stalked Jellyfish Lucernariopsis cruxmelitensis Stalked Jellyfish Nematostella vectensis Starlet Sea Anemone Crustacea Gammarus insensibilis** Lagoon Sand Shrimp** Gitanopsis bispinosa Amphipod Shrimp Pollicipes pollicipes Gooseneck Barnacle Palinurus elephas Spiny Lobster Mollusca Arctica islandica Ocean Quahog Atrina pectinata**** Fan Mussel**** Caecum armoricum** Defolin’s Lagoon Snail** Ostrea edulis Native Oyster Paludinella littorina***** Sea Snail***** Tenellia adspersa** Lagoon Sea Slug** * Species FOCI have been identified from the ‘OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats’, the ‘UK List of Priority Species and Habitats (UK BAP)’ and Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. ** Those lagoonal species FOCI may be afforded sufficient protection through coastal lagoons designated as SACs under the EC Habitats Directive. However, this needs to be assessed by individual regional projects. *** The stalked jellyfish Haliclystus auricula is now referred to as Haliclystus species for the purpose of MCZ protection to account for potential presence of Haliclystus octoradiatus that has not been consistently differentiated within scientific records. The species are therefore considered jointly as an MCZ feature. **** Fan mussel should be correctly described as Atrina fragilis. ***** The sea snail (Paludinella littorina) has been removed from Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. This means that it is no longer a Feature of Conservation Importance (FOCI) so has been removed as a feature for MCZ designation.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 27 Annex 4. Highly mobile species FOCI listed in the ENG. Group Scientific name Common Name Teleostei Osmerus eperlanus Smelt Anguilla anguilla** European Eel** Elasmobranchii Raja undulata Undulate Ray * Species FOCI have been identified from the ‘OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats’, the ‘UK List of Priority Species and Habitats (UK BAP)’ and Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. ** MCZs are no longer considered to be an appropriate tool for the protection of European eels. They have been identified as habitat generalists for which it is particularly difficult to identify unique nursery or foraging grounds due to their wide distribution across coastal and freshwater zones. Conservation and management of European eels is considered to be more effectively achieved through the Eel Regulations and Eel Management Plans.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 28 Annex 5. Video and stills processing protocol. The purpose of the analysis of the video and still images is to identify which habitats exist in a video record, provide semi-quantitative data on their physical and biological characteristics and to note where one habitat changes to another. A minimum of 10% of the videos should be re-analysed for QA purposes. Video Analysis

 The video record is initially viewed rapidly (at approximately 4x normal speed) in order to segment it into sections representing different habitats. The start and end points of each segment are logged, and each segment subsequently subject to more detailed analysis. Brief changes in habitat type lasting less than one minute of the video record are considered as incidental patches and are not logged.

 For each segment, note the start and end time and position from the information on the video overlay. View the segment at normal or slower than normal speed, noting the physical and biological characteristics, such as substrate type, seabed character, species and life forms present. For each taxon record an actual abundance (where feasible) or a semi quantitative abundance (e.g. SACFOR scale).

 Record the analyses on the video pro-forma provided (paper and/or electronic), which is a modified version of the Sublittoral Habitat Recording Form used in the Marine Nature Conservation Review (MNCR) surveys.

 When each segment has been analysed, review the information recorded and assign the segment to one of the broadscale habitat (BSH) types or habitat FOCI listed in the Ecological Network Guidance (as reproduced in Annexes 1 and 2 above). Note also any species FOCI observed (as per Annex 3 above). Stills analysis

 Still images should be analysed separately, to supplement and validate the video analysis, and provide more detailed (i.e. higher resolution) information than can be extracted from a moving video image.

 For each segment of video, select three still images that are representative of the BSH or FOCI to which the video segment has been assigned. For each image, note the time and position it was taken, using information from the associated video overlay.

 View the image at normal or greater than normal magnification, noting the physical and biological characteristics, such as substrate type, seabed character, species and life forms present. For each taxon record an actual abundance (where feasible) or a semi quantitative abundance (e.g. SACFOR scale).

 Record the analysis on the stills pro-forma provided (paper and/or electronic), which is a modified version of the Sublittoral Habitat Recording Form used in the MNCR surveys. Assign each still image to the same BSH or habitat FOCI as its ‘parent’ segment in the video.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 29 Taxon identification In all analyses, the identification of taxa should be limited to a level that can be confidently achieved from the available image. Hence, taxon identity could range from the ‘life form’ level (e.g. sponge, hydroid, anemone) to the species level (e.g. Asterias rubens, Alcyonium digitatum). Avoid the temptation to guess the species identity if it cannot be determined positively from the image. For example, Spirobranchus sp. would be acceptable, but Spirobranchus triqueter would not, as the specific identification normally requires the specimen to be inspected under a microscope.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 30 Appendices

Appendix 1. Survey metadata WGDN0412

Date Cruise Stn No. Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 27/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 3 Mort03 DG 51.20948 -4.32701 27/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 4 Mort04 DG 51.20948 -4.31519 27/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 6 Mort06 DG 51.21499 -4.33298 27/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 7 Mort07 DG 51.21505 -4.32237 27/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 8 Mort08 DG 51.21561 -4.31157 27/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 10 Mort10 DG 51.22074 -4.33876 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 11 Mort11 SOL DC 51.22094 -4.32806 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 11 Mort11 EOL DC 51.22011 -4.32734 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 12 Mort12 SOL DC 51.22152 -4.31694 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 12 Mort12 EOL DC 51.22022 -4.317 27/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 13 Mort13 DG 51.2215 -4.30663 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 16 Mort16 HG 51.22629 -4.33425 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 17 Mort17 SOL DC 51.22723 -4.3237 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 17 Mort17 EOL DC 51.22701 -4.32157 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 18 Mort18 SOL DC 51.22733 -4.31082 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 18 Mort18 EOL DC 51.22615 -4.31228 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 19 Mort19 HG 51.22727 -4.30089 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 22 Mort22 HG 51.23226 -4.33947 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 25 Mort25 HG 51.23268 -4.3065 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 26 Mort26 SOL DC 51.23359 -4.29428 28/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 26 Mort26 EOL DC 51.23262 -4.29643 29/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 30 Mort30 SOL DC 51.24022 -4.31242 29/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 30 Mort30 EOL DC 51.23817 -4.31281 29/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 32 Mort32 HG 51.23877 -4.29148 29/03/2012 WGDN 04/12 35 Mort35 DG 51.24465 -4.31817 Key: DG – Day Grab; HG - Mini Hamon Grab; DC – Drop Camera; EOL - End of Line; SOL – Start of Line

CEND 2514

Date Cruise Stn No. Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 25/11/2014 CEND2514 17 GT52 HG 51.23893 -4.26522 25/11/2014 CEND2514 18 GT51 HG 51.24163 -4.26528 25/11/2014 CEND2514 19 GT54 HG 51.24483 -4.26019 25/11/2014 CEND2514 20 GT53 HG 51.25084 -4.26595 25/11/2014 CEND2514 25 GT39 SOL DC 51.25512 -4.29455 25/11/2014 CEND2514 25 GT39 EOL DC 51.25511 -4.29323 25/11/2014 CEND2514 26 GT42 SOL DC 51.24995 -4.28817 25/11/2014 CEND2514 26 GT42 EOL DC 51.25019 -4.28703 25/11/2014 CEND2514 27 GT45 SOL DC 51.24456 -4.28285 25/11/2014 CEND2514 27 GT45 EOL DC 51.24484 -4.28175 25/11/2014 CEND2514 29 GT48 HG 51.23925 -4.27734 25/11/2014 CEND2514 31 GT44 HG 51.23291 -4.28157 25/11/2014 CEND2514 33 GT38 HG 51.2435 -4.29221 25/11/2014 CEND2514 34 GT30 HG 51.24606 -4.29949

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 31 Date Cruise Stn No. Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 25/11/2014 CEND2514 35 GT35 HG 51.25028 -4.29778 25/11/2014 CEND2514 37 GT21 SOL DC 51.24449 -4.31372 25/11/2014 CEND2514 37 GT21 EOL DC 51.24418 -4.31493 25/11/2014 CEND2514 40 GT37 HG 51.2342 -4.29422 25/11/2014 CEND2514 41 GT37 SOL DC 51.23413 -4.2944 25/11/2014 CEND2514 41 GT37 EOL DC 51.23361 -4.29563 25/11/2014 CEND2514 42 GT40 SOL DC 51.22954 -4.28795 25/11/2014 CEND2514 42 GT40 EOL DC 51.22906 -4.28898 25/11/2014 CEND2514 43 GT47 SOL DC 51.22711 -4.2813 25/11/2014 CEND2514 43 GT47 EOL DC 51.22649 -4.28249 25/11/2014 CEND2514 44 GT36 SOL DC 51.2212 -4.29179 25/11/2014 CEND2514 44 GT36 EOL DC 51.22025 -4.29234 25/11/2014 CEND2514 45 GT33 SOL DC 51.22624 -4.29932 25/11/2014 CEND2514 45 GT33 EOL DC 51.22625 -4.29759 25/11/2014 CEND2514 46 GT29 HG 51.23244 -4.3032 25/11/2014 CEND2514 47 GT20 HG 51.23236 -4.31408 25/11/2014 CEND2514 48 GT20 SOL DC 51.23245 -4.3137 25/11/2014 CEND2514 48 GT20 EOL DC 51.23272 -4.31229 25/11/2014 CEND2514 49 GT17 HG 51.23627 -4.32105 25/11/2014 CEND2514 50 GT13 HG 51.24395 -4.325 26/11/2014 CEND2514 52 GT12 HG 51.23387 -4.32712 26/11/2014 CEND2514 53 GT16 HG 51.22646 -4.31906 26/11/2014 CEND2514 54 GT24 HG 51.22664 -4.308 26/11/2014 CEND2514 58 GT23 SOL DC 51.21515 -4.30754 26/11/2014 CEND2514 58 GT23 EOL DC 51.21531 -4.30628 26/11/2014 CEND2514 59 GT32 SOL DC 51.21578 -4.29645 26/11/2014 CEND2514 59 GT32 EOL DC 51.21505 -4.297 26/11/2014 CEND2514 60 GT28 SOL DC 51.22047 -4.30216 26/11/2014 CEND2514 60 GT28 EOL DC 51.2201 -4.30329 26/11/2014 CEND2514 61 GT24 SOL DC 51.22693 -4.30802 26/11/2014 CEND2514 61 GT24 EOL DC 51.22664 -4.30896 26/11/2014 CEND2514 64 GT11 HG 51.22082 -4.32388 26/11/2014 CEND2514 65 GT08 HG 51.22661 -4.32952 26/11/2014 CEND2514 66 GT06 HG 51.23 -4.33 26/11/2014 CEND2514 67 GT03 HG 51.23214 -4.34582 26/11/2014 CEND2514 68 GT03 SOL DC 51.23218 -4.34537 26/11/2014 CEND2514 68 GT03 EOL DC 51.23164 -4.34677 26/11/2014 CEND2514 69 GT04 SOL DC 51.22805 -4.34154 26/11/2014 CEND2514 69 GT04 EOL DC 51.22746 -4.34251 26/11/2014 CEND2514 70 GT09 SOL DC 51.23848 -4.32985 26/11/2014 CEND2514 70 GT09 EOL DC 51.23771 -4.33053 26/11/2014 CEND2514 71 GT08 SOL DC 51.22621 -4.32996 26/11/2014 CEND2514 71 GT08 EOL DC 51.22651 -4.32873 26/11/2020 CEND2514 74 GT04 HG 51.22803 -4.34185 26/11/2020 CEND2514 75 GT01 HG 51.22619 -4.35118 26/11/2020 CEND2514 76 GT02 HG 51.22054 -4.34533 26/11/2014 CEND2514 77 GT05 SOL DC 51.22046 -4.3351 26/11/2014 CEND2514 77 GT05 EOL DC 51.22128 -4.33427 26/11/2014 CEND2514 78 GT15 SOL DC 51.21483 -4.31819 26/11/2014 CEND2514 78 GT15 EOL DC 51.21547 -4.31923 26/11/2014 CEND2514 79 GT10 SOL DC 51.209 -4.32308 26/11/2014 CEND2514 79 GT10 EOL DC 51.20953 -4.32435 26/11/2014 CEND2514 80 GT14 SOL DC 51.20368 -4.31785

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 32 Date Cruise Stn No. Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 26/11/2014 CEND2514 80 GT14 EOL DC 51.20296 -4.3186 26/11/2014 CEND2514 81 GT18 SOL DC 51.2074 -4.31093 26/11/2014 CEND2514 81 GT18 EOL DC 51.20705 -4.31185 26/11/2014 CEND2514 83 GT07 HG 51.21491 -4.32902 26/11/2014 CEND2514 84 GT22 SOL DC 51.2052 -4.30599 26/11/2014 CEND2514 84 GT22 EOL DC 51.20475 -4.30682 26/11/2014 CEND2514 85 GT10 HG 51.20935 -4.32372 26/11/2014 CEND2514 86 GT27 SOL DC 51.20952 -4.30167 26/11/2014 CEND2514 86 GT27 EOL DC 51.2092 -4.30253 26/11/2014 CEND2514 87 GT19 SOL DC 51.22091 -4.31278 26/11/2014 CEND2514 87 GT19 EOL DC 51.22038 -4.31372 26/11/2014 CEND2514 88 GT44 SOL DC 51.23336 -4.28116 26/11/2014 CEND2514 88 GT44 EOL DC 51.23267 -4.2823 26/11/2014 CEND2514 89 GT50 SOL DC 51.2337 -4.27216 26/11/2014 CEND2514 89 GT50 EOL DC 51.23417 -4.27088 26/11/2014 CEND2514 90 GT41 SOL DC 51.23846 -4.28762 26/11/2014 CEND2514 90 GT41 EOL DC 51.2388 -4.28675 26/11/2014 CEND2514 91 GT47 HG 51.22724 -4.28191 26/11/2014 CEND2514 92 GT36 HG 51.22082 -4.29155 27/11/2014 CEND2514 94 GT21 HG 51.24436 -4.31398 27/11/2014 CEND2514 95 GT42 HG 51.25034 -4.28725 27/11/2014 CEND2514 97 GT54 SOL DC 51.24486 -4.26071 27/11/2014 CEND2514 97 GT54 EOL DC 51.24487 -4.25922 27/11/2014 CEND2514 98 GT49 SOL DC 51.25134 -4.27484 27/11/2014 CEND2514 98 GT49 EOL DC 51.25108 -4.27611 27/11/2014 CEND2514 99 GT46 SOL DC 51.2564 -4.28159 27/11/2014 CEND2514 99 GT46 EOL DC 51.25602 -4.28256 27/11/2014 CEND2514 103 GT56 HG 51.23896 -4.26503 27/11/2014 CEND2514 104 GT43 SOL DC 51.2612 -4.29162 27/11/2014 CEND2514 104 GT43 EOL DC 51.2608 -4.2925 27/11/2014 CEND2514 105 GT31 SOL DC 51.25605 -4.30303 27/11/2014 CEND2514 105 GT31 EOL DC 51.2558 -4.30415 27/11/2014 CEND2514 106 GT26 SOL DC 51.25054 -4.30875 27/11/2014 CEND2514 106 GT26 EOL DC 51.24988 -4.30928 27/11/2014 CEND2514 107 GT25 SOL DC 51.23825 -4.30865 27/11/2014 CEND2514 107 GT25 EOL DC 51.23856 -4.30803 27/11/2014 CEND2514 108 GT34 SOL DC 51.23855 -4.29813 27/11/2014 CEND2514 108 GT34 EOL DC 51.23877 -4.2972 Key: HG - Mini Hamon Grab; DC – Drop Camera; EOL - End of Line; SOL – Start of Line

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 33 Appendix 2. Outputs from acoustic surveys

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 34

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 35 Appendix 3. Evidence of human activities within the rMCZ

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 36 Appendix 4. Species list Species list for grab samples (Species FOCI indicated by grey shading, if present). Percentage occurrence was calculated as the ‘Number of samples where the species occurs/total number of samples’ x 100.

Taxa % Occurrence SPONGES PORIFERA 19 Cliona celata 12 PORIFERA (Type A) 12 Suberitidae 9 Stelligera rigida 5 Hymeraphia 2 Sycon ciliata 2 HYDROIDS, CORALS, JELLYFISH, ANEMONES ACTINIARIA 42 Hydrallmania falcata 35 Sertularia 28 Campanulariidae 5 Halecium 5 Dynamena pumila 2 Edwardsiidae 2 FLATWORMS TURBELLARIA 19 PLATYHELMINTHES 14 RIBBON WORMS NEMERTEA 81 Cerebratulus 16 Tubulanus polymorphus 12 Oerstedia dorsalis 2 NEMATODES NEMATODA 63 PEANUT WORMS SIPUNCULA 33 Nephasoma minutum 16 Golfingia elongata 7 Phascolion strombus 5 Aspidosiphon muelleri 2 Golfingia vulgaris 2 SEGMENTED WORMS Mediomastus fragilis 81 Laonice bahusiensis 79 Clymenura 70 Glycera lapidum 70 Spirobranchus lamarcki 70 Sabellaria spinulosa 67

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 37 Taxa % Occurrence Lumbrineris cingulata 63 Caulleriella alata 56 Glycera 51 Sphaerosyllis bulbosa 51 Ampharete lindstroemi 49 Scalibregma celticum 49 Aonides paucibranchiata 47 Polynoidae 44 Hydroides norvegicus 40 Marphysa bellii 40 Notomastus latericeus 40 Lysidice unicornis 37 Dipolydora coeca 35 Pholoe baltica (sensu Petersen) 35 Pholoe inornata (sensu Petersen) 35 Syllis garciai 35 Polycirrus 33 Syllidia armata 30 Eulalia mustela 28 Laonice 28 Terebellides stroemi 28 Eunereis longissima 26 Lumbrineris gracilis 26 Notomastus 26 Praxillella affinis 26 Spirobranchus 26 Jasmineira elegans 23 Malmgrenia arenicolae 23 Schistomeringos rudolphi 23 Syllidae (Type A) 23 Syllis armillaris 23 Ampharetidae 21 Asclerocheilus intermedius 21 Nephtys kersivalensis 21 Paradoneis lyra 21 Spiophanes kroyeri 21 Syllis (Type E) 21 Aonides oxycephala 19 Dipolydora caulleryi 19 Eteone longa (agg) 19 Nephtys 19 Paraehlersia ferrugina 19 Prosphaerosyllis chauseyensis 19 Protodorvillea kefersteini 19 Syllis variegata 19 Chaetozone zetlandica 16

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 38 Taxa % Occurrence Eumida 16 Goniadella gracilis 16 Lepidonotus squamatus 16 Spirobranchus triqueter 16 Aphelochaeta 14 Glycinde nordmanni 14 Lumbrineridae 14 Odontosyllis fulgurans 14 Phyllodocidae 14 Polycirrus norvegicus 14 Serpulidae 14 Sphaerosyllis taylori 14 Chone dunerificta 12 Dipolydora socialis 12 Eteone longa 12 Eumida sanguinea 12 Eusyllis blomstrandi 12 Goniadella bobretzkii 12 Nereididae 12 Prionospio 12 Serpula vermicularis 12 Syllis 12 Aphelochaeta (Type A) 9 Eulalia ornata 9 Eulalia tripunctata 9 Exogone hebes 9 Exogone naidina 9 Grania 9 Lanice conchilega 9 Maldanidae (Type A) 9 Phisidia aurea 9 Polygordius 9 Sabellidae 9 Scalibregma inflatum 9 Sphaerodorum gracilis 9 Spionidae 9 Sthenelais boa 9 Syllides 9 Ampharete octocirrata 7 Anaitides longipes 7 Aphelochaeta marioni 7 Clymenura johnstoni 7 Goniadidae 7 Malmgrenia darbouxi 7 Marphysa 7 Paraonidae 7

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 39 Taxa % Occurrence Parasabella 7 Pseudomystides limbata 7 Pterocirrus 7 Rullierinereis ancornunezi 7 Scolelepis tridentata 7 Scoloplos armiger 7 Sphaerosyllis hystrix 7 Amphicteis midas 5 Branchiomma 5 Chone duneri 5 Euclymene lombricoides 5 Eulalia aurea 5 Eulalia bilineata 5 Exogone verugera 5 Glycera fallax 5 Glycera unicornis 5 Loimia medusa 5 Lumbrineriopsis paradoxa 5 Maldanidae 5 Malmgrenia ljungmani 5 Mysta picta 5 Nephtys caeca 5 Orbinia sertulata 5 Owenia 5 Petaloproctus 5 Pisione remota 5 Psamathe fusca 5 Pseudonotomastus southerni 5 Pseudopotamilla 5 Pseudopotamilla reniformis 5 Pygospio elegans 5 Sabellides octocirrata 5 Schistomeringos neglecta 5 Scolelepis korsuni 5 Scoletoma magnidentata 5 Syllis (Type D) 5 Syllis licheri 5 Terebellidae 5 Thelepus cincinnatus 5 Thelepus setosus 5 Anaitides groenlandica 2 Arenicola 2 Capitellidae 2 Cirratulus 2 Dioplosyllis cirrosa (?) 2 Drilonereis filum 2

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 40 Taxa % Occurrence Enchytraeidae 2 Erinaceusyllis 2 Eulalia expusilla 2 Eulalia microoculata 2 Eunicidae 2 Eurysyllis (Type A) 2 Flabelligera affinis 2 Gattyana cirrhosa 2 Gyptis rosea 2 Harmothoe impar 2 Hesionidae 2 Heteroclymene robusta 2 Hydroides 2 Lepidonotus 2 Lumbrineris futilis 2 Lysidice ninetta 2 Lysilla loveni 2 Malmgrenia andreapolis 2 Malmgrenia castanea 2 Marphysa sanguinea 2 Megalomma (Type A) 2 Microspio mecznikowianus 2 Nereiphylla rubiginosa 2 Nicomache 2 Notocirrus scoticus 2 Notoproctus 2 Oenonidae 2 Orbinia norvegica 2 Orbiniidae 2 Owenia fusiformis 2 Parasabella cambrensis 2 Parasabella langerhansi 2 Pholoe 2 Pholoe assimilis 2 Poecilochaetus serpens 2 Polycirrus medusa 2 Polynoe scolopendrina 2 Procerastea 2 Prosphaerosyllis 2 Pseudopolydora 2 Pseudopolydora pulchra 2 Sabella pavonina 2 Scoletoma 2 Scoletoma fragilis 2 Sphaerosyllis tetralix 2 Spio 2

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 41 Taxa % Occurrence Spio armata 2 Spiochaetopterus typicus 2 Spiophanes 2 Spiophanes bombyx 2 Spirorbidae 2 Syllidae 2 Syllis columbretensis 2 Syllis cornuta 2 Tharyx killariensis 2 Trypanosyllis coeliaca 2 Tubificoides pseudogaster 2 Vermiliopsis striaticeps 2 SEA SPIDERS Anoplodactylus petiolatus 26 Achelia echinata 12 Callipallene brevirostris 2 Callipallenidae 2 CRUSTACEANS Verruca stroemia 49 Pisidia longicornis 28 Ampelisca spinipes 26 Monodaeus couchii 26 Gammaropsis maculata 23 Cheirocratus 19 Unciola crenatipalma 19 Ampeliscidae 16 Othomaera othonis 16 Socarnes erythrophthalmus 16 THORACICA 16 Pilumnus hirtellus 14 Isaeidae 12 Maerella tenuimana 12 Melitidae 12 Monocorophium sextonae 12 Paguridae 12 Urothoe elegans 12 Anthura gracilis 9 Atelecyclus rotundatus 9 Ericthonius punctatus 9 Leptocheirus pectinatus 9 Balanus crenatus 7 Ebalia 7 Ericthonius 7 Abludomelita obtusata 5 Acidostoma obesum (sensu Stoddart & Lowry) 5 Ampelisca diadema 5

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 42 Taxa % Occurrence Animoceradocus semiserratus 5 Corophiidae 5 Cumella pygmaea 5 Dyopedos monacantha 5 Ebalia tuberosa 5 Harpinia pectinata 5 Liljeborgia kinahani 5 Liocarcinus 5 OSTRACODA 5 Acidostoma neglectum 2 Ampelisca 2 Anapagurus hyndmanni 2 Bopyridae 2 Cheirocratus sundevallii 2 COPEPODA 2 Cressa dubia 2 DECAPODA 2 Ebalia tumefacta 2 Eriopisa elongata 2 Galathea 2 Gammaropsis longicornis 2 Gnathia oxyuraea 2 Guernea coalita 2 Heteromysis microps 2 Iphimedia perplexa 2 Janira maculosa 2 Listriella mollis 2 Lysianassidae 2 Macropodia 2 Munna 2 Nicippe tumida 2 Nototropis vedlomensis 2 Pandalina brevirostris 2 Parametaphoxus fultoni 2 Photis longicaudata 2 Pinnotheres pisum 2 Pseudoparatanais batei 2 Stenothoe marina 2 TANAIDACEA 2 Tanaopsis graciloides 2 Tritaeta gibbosa 2 Xanthidae 2 MOLLUSCS Leptochiton asellus 47 Mytilidae 47 Gibbula tumida 44

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 43 Taxa % Occurrence Clausinella fasciata 30 Myidae 26 Sphenia binghami 26 Timoclea ovata 26 GASTROPODA 23 Spisula elliptica 23 Anomiidae 21 BIVALVIA 19 Diplodonta rotundata 19 Mactridae 19 Thecacera pennigera 19 Veneridae 19 Abra alba 16 Mytilus edulis 14 Cardiidae 12 POLYPLACOPHORA 12 Thracia 12 Abra 9 Caecum glabrum 9 Kurtiella bidentata 9 Moerella donacina 9 Dosinia lupinus 7 Gari tellinella 7 Hiatella arctica 7 Nucula nucleus 7 Onchidoris 7 Polititapes rhomboides 7 Thracia villosiuscula 7 Corbula gibba 5 Dosinia 5 Euspira nitida 5 Modiolus barbatus 5 Onchidorididae 5 Onoba semicostata 5 Pectinidae 5 ANOMALODESMATA 2 Dosinia exoleta 2 Epitonium clathrus 2 Epitonium turtonis 2 Gari 2 Hyala vitrea 2 Jujubinus montagui 2 Lyonsia norwegica 2 Mimachlamys varia 2 Montacuta substriata 2 Mysia undata 2

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 44 Taxa % Occurrence Nassariidae 2 Neomenia carinata 2 Palliolum tigerinum 2 Parvicardium scabrum 2 Pododesmus patelliformis 2 Tellimya ferruginosa 2 BRACHIOPODS BRACHIOPODA 2 BRYOZOANS Escharella immersa 77 Schizomavella 70 Disporella hispida 63 Conopeum reticulum 30 Tubulipora 30 Alcyonidium 28 Flustra foliacea 28 Electra pilosa 23 Cellepora pumicosa 21 Chorizopora brongniartii 16 Pentapora fascialis 14 Bugula 12 Schizomavella auriculata 12 Bicellariella ciliata 9 Crisia 9 Escharella variolosa 7 Plagioecia sarniensis 7 Porella concinna 7 Stomatoporina incurvata 7 Amphiblestrum auritum 5 Callopora discreta 5 Crassimarginatella solidula 5 Escharella ventricosa 5 Hincksina flustroides 5 Microporella ciliata 5 Tubulipora liliacea 5 Vesicularia spinosa 5 Alcyonidioides mytili 2 Alcyonidium diaphanum 2 Amphiblestrum flemingii 2 Cauloramphus spiniferum 2 Crisia aculeata 2 CYCLOSTOMATIDA 2 Electra monostachys 2 Eurystrotos compacta 2 Omalosecosa ramulosa 2 Phylactella labrosa 2

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 45 Taxa % Occurrence Puellina bifida 2 Puellina innominata 2 Pyripora catenularia 2 HORSESHOE WORMS Phoronis 58 SEA STARS, URCHINS, SEA CUCUMBERS OPHIUROIDEA 60 Amphipholis squamata 58 Echinocyamus pusillus 33 ECHINOIDEA 5 Ophiactis balli 5 Ophiothrix fragilis 5 Ophiura albida 5 Echinus 2 HOLOTHURIOIDEA 2 Leptosynapta cruenta 2 Ophiothrix 2 Ophiura 2 Ophiura ophiura 2 Psammechinus miliaris 2 ACORN WORMS HEMICHORDATA 5 SEA SQUIRTS Dendrodoa grossularia 58 ASCIDIACEA 21 Didemnidae 5 Didemnum maculosum 2 Molgula oculata 2 Pyura tessellata 2

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 46 Species list for video samples (Species FOCI indicated by grey shading, if present). Percentage occurrence was calculated as the ‘Number of samples where the species occurs/total number of samples’ x 100.

Taxa % Occurrence SPONGES Porifera (encrusting) 59 Porifera (branching type1) 20 Porifera (globose) 9 Raspailia ramosa 7 Cliona celata 5 Porifera (branching type2) 5 Haliclona simulans 2 Hemimycale columella 2 HYDROIDS, CORALS, JELLYFISH, ANEMONES Hydrozoa (turf) 80 Urticina sp. 70 Actiniaria 66 Alcyonium digitatum 61 Hydrozoa 52 Sagartiidae 50 Tubularia indivisa 30 Capnea sanguinea 20 Hydrallmania falcata 18 Sagartia sp. 16 Sagartia troglodytes 11 Abietinaria abietina 9 Sertularia 9 Metridium senile 7 Nemertesia sp. 7 Nemertesia antennina 7 Actinothoe sphyrodeta 5 Cerianthus lloydii 5 Plumularoidea 5 Sagartia elegans 5 Sertularia sp. 5 Zoantharia 2 SEGMENTED WORMS Serpulidae 91 Spirobranchus sp. 82 Sabellaria spinulosa 73 Sabella pavonina 41 Polychaeta 30 Bispira volutacornis 5 Salmacina dysteri 5 Myxicola infundibulum 2

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 47 Taxa % Occurrence CRUSTACEANS Paguridae 70 Ebalia sp. 41 Brachyura 34 Thoracica 34 Inachidae 32 Pandalidae 30 Munida rugosa 14 Maja squinado 7 Cancer pagurus 5 Galatheoidea 5 Liocarcinus sp. 5 Necora puber 5 Caridea 2 Decapoda 2 Homarus gammarus 2 Hyas sp. 2 Macropodia sp. 2 Portunidae 2 Semibalanus balanoides 2 MOLLUSCS Calliostoma zizyphinum 34 Polyplacophora 25 Gastropoda 18 Trochidae 16 Pectinidae 11 Bivalvia 9 Buccinum undatum 7 Aequipecten opercularis 5 BRACHIOPODS BRACHIOPODA 7 BRYOZOANS Bryozoa (encrusting) 80 Flustra foliacea 57 Pentapora fascialis 50 Bryozoa (turf) 45 Alcyonidium diaphanum 11 Bryozoa (erect) 2 Cellepora pumicosa 2 SEA STARS, URCHINS, SEA CUCUMBERS Asterias rubens 66 Marthasterias glacialis 18 Asteroidea 11 Echinus esculentus 9 Ophiura albida 9 Ophiura 5 Crossaster papposus 2 Ophiothrix fragilis 2 Ophiuroidea 2 Henricia 2

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 48 Taxa % Occurrence SEA SQUIRTS ASCIDIACEA (non colonial) 36 ASCIDIACEA (colonial) 2 Dendrodoa grossularia 2 FISH Scyliorhinus canicula 7 TELEOSTEI 9 Pleuronectiformes 7 Gadidae 5 Anguilla anguilla 2 Callionymus lyra 2 Trisopterus luscus 2 ALGAE Phaeophyceae 5

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 49 Appendix 5. Analyses of sediment samples: classification and composition Stn No. Stn Code Latitude Longitude Sediment Description EUNIS Level 3/BSH Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt/clay (%) 3 Mort 03 51.209475 -4.327012 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 66.91 24.75 8.34 4 Mort 04 51.209478 -4.315190 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 68.96 29.10 1.95 6 Mort 06 51.215610 -4.311572 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 47.84 44.91 7.25 7 Mort 07 51.215050 -4.322365 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 83.39 14.53 2.08 8 Mort 08 51.214990 -4.332977 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 66.71 31.04 2.25 10 Mort 10 51.220742 -4.338758 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 65.97 29.73 4.29 13 Mort 13 51.221498 -4.306632 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 85.59 13.69 0.72 16 Mort 16 51.227272 -4.300890 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediments 70.67 27.54 1.79 19 Mort 19 51.226287 -4.334253 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 37.56 52.01 10.44 22 Mort 22 51.232258 -4.339468 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 45.01 47.51 7.48 25 Mort 25 51.232683 -4.306500 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 89.17 10.83 0.00 32 Mort 32 51.238767 -4.291478 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 72.96 25.92 1.13 35 Mort 35 51.244653 -4.318173 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 39.88 51.19 8.93 75 GT01 51.226190 -4.351179 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 38.21 52.73 9.06 76 GT02 51.220540 -4.345325 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 59.55 38.71 1.74 67 GT03 51.232140 -4.345815 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 29.63 62.97 7.41 74 GT04 51.228030 -4.341845 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 28.03 55.82 16.15 66 GT06 51.230000 -4.330000 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 52.16 40.57 7.27 83 GT07 51.214910 -4.329020 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 64.31 27.81 7.89 65 GT08 51.226610 -4.329518 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 50.16 41.94 7.90 85 GT10 51.209350 -4.323721 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 75.48 22.84 1.68 64 GT11 51.220820 -4.323877 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 63.42 35.64 0.94 52 GT12 51.233870 -4.327118 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 41.13 50.61 8.26 50 GT13 51.243950 -4.325002 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 46.29 47.10 6.61 53 GT16 51.226460 -4.319063 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 71.65 27.54 0.81 49 GT17 51.236270 -4.321047 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 72.26 23.94 3.80 47 GT20 51.232360 -4.314075 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 51.15 45.70 3.15 94 GT21 51.244360 -4.313978 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 55.45 40.60 3.94 54 GT24 51.226640 -4.308004 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 53.56 45.09 1.35 46 GT29 51.232440 -4.303195 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 61.60 37.33 1.07 34 GT30 51.246060 -4.299492 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 56.34 36.54 7.12

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 50 Stn No. Stn Code Latitude Longitude Sediment Description EUNIS Level 3/BSH Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt/clay (%) 35 GT35 51.250280 -4.297780 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 50.26 42.29 7.45 92 GT36 51.220820 -4.291552 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 60.60 33.67 5.73 40 GT37 51.234200 -4.294222 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 45.02 46.60 8.38 33 GT38 51.243500 -4.292210 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 55.85 31.91 12.24 95 GT42 51.250340 -4.287250 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 62.66 34.07 3.27 31 GT44 51.232910 -4.281575 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 76.83 20.82 2.35 91 GT47 51.227240 -4.281905 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 87.52 8.70 3.77 29 GT48 51.239250 -4.277344 mixed sediments A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments 72.42 19.01 8.58 18 GT51 51.241630 -4.265275 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 87.73 11.45 0.83 17 GT52 51.238930 -4.265224 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 71.49 28.51 0.00 20 GT53 51.250840 -4.265945 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 86.83 12.30 0.87 19 GT54 51.244830 -4.260191 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 63.74 33.35 2.91 103 GT56 51.238960 -4.265030 coarse sediment A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment 68.30 31.03 0.68

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 51 Appendix 6. BSH/EUNIS Level 3 descriptions derived from video and stills Station Station No. Code Latitude Longitude Habitat No. EUNIS Level 3/BSH MNCR Code 11 Mort11 51.22076 -4.3281 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS 11 Mort11 51.22068 -4.32802 2 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx 11 Mort11 51.22036 -4.3276 3 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS 11 Mort11 51.22028 -4.32748 4 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx 11 Mort11 51.22018 -4.3274 5 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS 11 Mort11 51.22011 -4.32734 6 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx 12 Mort12 51.22109 -4.31701 1 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx 12 Mort12 51.22097 -4.31702 2 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS 12 Mort12 51.22085 -4.31703 3 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx 17 Mort17 51.22724 -4.32304 1 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx 17 Mort17 51.22722 -4.32288 2 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS 17 Mort17 51.22712 -4.32215 3 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx 17 Mort17 51.22701 -4.32157 4 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS 18 Mort18 51.2269 -4.31185 1 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx 18 Mort18 51.22682 -4.31192 2 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS 18 Mort18 51.22674 -4.31197 3 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx 18 Mort18 51.22666 -4.31202 4 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS 26 Mort26 51.23326 -4.29509 1 A4.2 Moderate Energy Circalittoral Rock SM.SSSaG 26 Mort26 51.23318 -4.29525 2 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS 30 Mort30 51.23872 -4.31286 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 68 GT03 51.23218 -4.34537 1 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx.CMx 69 GT04 51.22805 -4.34154 1 A5.6 Subtidal Biogenic Reef* SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx 77 GT05 51.22046 -4.33510 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 71 GT08 51.22621 -4.32996 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 70 GT09 51.23848 -4.32985 1 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx.CMx 79 GT10 51.20906 -4.32321 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 79 GT10 51.20913 -4.31336 2 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx.CMx 79 GT10 51.20916 -4.37344 3 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 80 GT14 51.20368 -4.31785 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 78 GT15 51.21483 -4.31819 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 78 GT15 51.21502 -4.31851 2 A5.6 Subtidal Biogenic Reef* SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 52 Station Station No. Code Latitude Longitude Habitat No. EUNIS Level 3/BSH MNCR Code 78 GT15 51.21512 -4.31864 3 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 78 GT15 51.21530 -4.31894 4 A5.6 Subtidal Biogenic Reef* SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx 81 GT18 51.20740 -4.31093 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 87 GT19 51.22091 -4.31278 1 A4.2 Moderate Energy Circalittoral Rock CR.MCR.CSab.Sspi 87 GT19 51.22085 -4.31290 2 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 48 GT20 51.23245 -4.31370 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 48 GT20 51.23265 -4.31253 2 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 37 GT21 51.24449 -4.31372 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 84 GT22 51.20520 -4.30599 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 84 GT22 51.20497 -4.30640 2 A4.1 High Energy Circalittoral Rock CR.HCR.XFa 84 GT22 51.20490 -4.30653 3 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 84 GT22 51.20490 -4.30654 4 A4.1 High Energy Circalittoral Rock CR.HCR.XFa 58 GT23 51.21515 -4.30754 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 58 GT23 51.21521 -4.30713 2 A5.6 Subtidal Biogenic Reef* SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx 58 GT23 51.21524 -4.30683 3 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 58 GT23 51.21526 -4.30660 4 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 61 GT24 51.22693 -4.30802 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 107 GT25 51.23825 -4.30865 1 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx.CMx 106 GT26 51.25054 -4.30875 1 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx.CMx 86 GT27 51.20952 -4.30167 1 A5.6 Subtidal Biogenic Reef* SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx 86 GT27 51.20949 -4.30174 2 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 86 GT27 51.20941 -4.30194 3 A4.2 Moderate Energy Circalittoral Rock CR.MCR.CSab.Sspi 86 GT27 51.20936 -4.30207 4 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 60 GT28 51.22047 -4.30216 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 105 GT31 51.25605 -4.30303 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 59 GT32 51.21578 -4.29645 1 A5.6 Subtidal Biogenic Reef* SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx 59 GT32 51.21545 -4.29669 2 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 59 GT32 51.21535 -4.29677 3 A4.2 Moderate Energy Circalittoral Rock CR.MCR 59 GT32 51.21516 -4.29693 4 A5.6 Subtidal Biogenic Reef* SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx 45 GT33 51.22624 -4.29932 1 A5.4 Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx.CMx 108 GT34 51.23855 -4.29813 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 44 GT36 51.22120 -4.29179 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 44 GT36 51.22039 -4.29225 2 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 53 Station Station No. Code Latitude Longitude Habitat No. EUNIS Level 3/BSH MNCR Code 41 GT37 51.23413 -4.29440 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 41 GT37 51.23380 -4.29515 2 A5.6 Subtidal Biogenic Reef* SS.SBR.PoR.SspiMx 25 GT39 51.25512 -4.29455 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 42 GT40 51.22954 -4.28795 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 90 GT41 51.23846 -4.28762 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 26 GT42 51.24995 -4.28817 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 104 GT43 51.26120 -4.29162 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 88 GT44 51.23336 -4.28116 1 A4.2 Moderate Energy Circalittoral Rock CR.MCR 27 GT45 51.24456 -4.28285 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 99 GT46 51.25640 -4.28159 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 43 GT47 51.22711 -4.28130 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 98 GT49 51.25134 -4.27484 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 98 GT49 51.25128 -4.27516 2 A4.2 Moderate Energy Circalittoral Rock CR.MCR.EcCr.FaAlCr.Flu 89 GT50 51.23370 -4.27216 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS 97 GT54 51.24486 -4.26071 1 A5.1 Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.CCS BSHs for the stations sampled during the 2012 survey, and for station GT10 during 2014, were classified using data from video stills only.

*The BSH ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ has been classified based solely on video still images, further dedicated survey work would need to be undertaken to confirm reef status.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 54 Appendix 7. Example images from survey for broadscale habitats Broadscale Habitats Description Example Image taken during survey A4.1 High energy Occurs on extremely circalittoral rock wave-exposed to exposed circalittoral bedrock and boulders, subject to tidal streams ranging from strong to very strong.

A4.2 Moderate energy Mainly occurs on circalittoral rock exposed to moderately wave-exposed circalittoral bedrock and boulders, subject to moderately strong and weak tidal streams.

A5.1 Subtidal coarse Coarse sediments sediment including coarse sand, gravel, pebbles, shingle and cobbles which are often unstable due to tidal currents and/or wave action.

A5.4 Subtidal mixed Subtidal mixed sediments (heterogeneous) sediments found from the extreme low water mark to deep offshore circalittoral habitats.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 55 A5.6 Subtidal biogenic Mixed sediments with reefs* elevated clumps of Sabellaria spinulosa aggregations

*The BSH ‘A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reefs’ has been classified based solely on video still images further dedicated survey work would need to be undertaken to confirm reef status.

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 56 Appendix 8. Example images from survey for habitat FOCI Habitat FOCI Description Example Image taken during survey

None observed N/A N/A

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 57 This page intentionally left blank

Morte Platform rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 58

© Crown Copyright 2016