Contribution of Existing Protected Areas of Identification of Remaining MPA Search Features Priorities Pdf, 1.40MB

FINAL REPORT

Contribution of existing protected areas to the MPA network and identification of remaining MPA search feature priorities

For further information on this report please contact:

Morven Carruthers Oliver Crawford-Avis Scottish Natural Heritage Joint Nature Conservation Committee Great Glen House Inverdee House Leachkin Road Baxter Street Inverness, IV3 8NW Aberdeen, AB11 9QA Telephone: 01463 725 018 Telephone: 01224 266587 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected]

This report should be quoted as:

Carruthers, M., Chaniotis, P.D., Clark, L., Crawford-Avis, O., Gillham, K., Linwood, M., Oates, J., Steel, L., and Wilson, E. 2011. Contribution of existing protected areas to the MPA network and identification of remaining MPA search feature priorities. Internal report produced by Scottish Natural Heritage, the Joint Nature Conservation Committee and Marine Scotland for the Scottish Marine Protected Areas Project.

This report, or any part of it, should not be reproduced without the permission of Scottish Natural Heritage. This permission will not be withheld unreasonably. This report was produced as part of the Scottish MPA Project and the views expressed by the author(s) should not be taken as the views and policies of the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Scottish Natural Heritage or Scottish Ministers.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Detailed assessments were completed for each of the MPA search features, based on the data available in GeMS1. These were used as a basis to assess the extent to which MPA search features are represented within the existing network of protected areas.

130 protected areas (including marine SACs, SPA extensions, SSSIs with maritime components, and fisheries areas established for nature conservation purposes) were included in the analysis.

A further eight locations (including Areas of Search for SACs and dSACs) were noted, but not considered in the assessment as part of the existing MPA network.

Eight MPA search features are considered to be well represented within the existing network, either in territorial or offshore waters, or both.

A further five MPA search features are not considered to be useful drivers for the selection of MPAs, in light of the data available.

24 SACs and six fisheries areas established for nature conservation were considered to contribute to the protection of MPA search features.

10 further protected areas could provide an additional contribution to the network if they were enhanced with MPA designation.

31 MPA search features are considered to remain priorities, either in territorial or offshore waters, or both.

The list of MPA search features which will be used to focus options for finalising the MPA network will be refined following the outcome of discussions at the 3rd National Stakeholder workshop and agreement of which areas will be enhanced.

1 GeMS - Geodatabase of Marine features in Scotland

Contents

Page no.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 2

1. BACKGROUND ...... 5

2. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ...... 6

3. METHODS...... 6

4. ASSESSMENT OF MPA SEARCH FEATURE PRESENCE AND PRIORITISATION OF REMAINING MPA SEARCH FEATURES...... 9

5. ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS FOR ENHANCING EXISTING PROTECTED AREAS ...... 20

6. NEXT STEPS ...... 27

7. ANNEXES ...... 28 Annex 1 Description of detailed assessments undertaken for MPA search features...... 28 Annex 2 Existing protected areas considered within the analysis ...... 31

List of figures and tables

Page no. Figure 1 Technical process for identifying Nature Conservation MPAs: how MPA search features will be used to complete the MPA network...... 5

Table A(i) Contribution of existing SACs to the MPA network ...... 9

Table A(ii) Contribution of existing fisheries areas established for nature conservation to the MPA network...... 12

Table B Representation of MPA search features within existing SACs and fisheries areas established for nature conservation ...... 12

Table C MPA search features already well represented within existing protected areas ...... 15

Table D MPA search features which are not well represented within existing protected areas but which are not being considered as drivers for developing the MPA network …...... 15

Table E MPA search features considered to be gaps in the existing network...... 16

Table F Occurrence of MPA search features within and adjacent to existing protected areas and preferred options for their contribution to the network...... 21

Table G Existing protected areas containing MPA search features identified as gaps, together with reasons for not considering further ...... 25

1. BACKGROUND

The Scottish MPA Selection Guidelines set out the policy and approach for selecting MPAs and developing an ecologically coherent network of MPAs in Scotland’s seas. MPAs are set within the broader context of Scottish Government’s three pillar approach to marine nature conservation comprising site protection, species protection and wider seas policies and measures. Figure 1 is taken from the MPA Selection Guidelines and shows the technical process for identifying MPAs.

Figure 1 Technical process for identifying Nature Conservation MPAs: how MPA search features will be used to complete the MPA network

Step B in the flow chart above incorporates the current analysis as well as other related tasks. Under Initial steps (Section 5.6), the Scottish MPA Selection Guidelines state:

For biodiversity, the process began with development of a list of MPA search features 2 and a review of: The potential contribution that existing (and proposed) Natura sites and other designations could make to the protection of MPA search features.

2 A list of MPA search features is provided in Annex 3 of the Scottish MPA Selection Guidelines

This analysis is about recognising what these protected areas can deliver beyond their existing qualifying features and management. Included within this analysis are areas with fisheries restrictions which have been put in place for the purpose of nature conservation.

2. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this analysis is to assess which features are already being protected by existing protected areas, which existing protected areas could deliver more to the MPA network through enhancement and therefore identify which MPA search features should remain as priorities in the identification of suitable search locations.

The objectives are to: i. Assess the distribution of MPA search features within existing protected areas including Special Areas of Conservation, Special Protection Areas3, Sites of Special Scientific Interest and fisheries areas established for nature conservation. ii. Assess the protection of MPA search features within existing protected areas. This assessment is to be based on whether or not the feature is considered to be part of the feature(s) covered by the formal designation or the fisheries management. iii. Identify existing protected areas which already contribute to the network. Identify and prioritise options for increasing the contribution that existing protected areas could make to the network if they were to be enhanced by a Nature Conservation MPA. iv. Identify which MPA search features should be considered priorities for selecting new Nature Conservation MPAs in Scotland’s seas.

3. METHODS

The assessment work was carried out in four parts: A. Detailed assessment of each MPA search feature. B. Assessment of presence of MPA search features in existing protected areas. C. Identification of areas which already contribute to the protection of MPA search features and those which could deliver more through enhancing the existing protection. D. Review of prioritisation of MPA search features.

The methods used for each are described below.

A. Detailed assessment of each MPA search feature

Annex 1 provides a description of the detailed assessments undertaken for each MPA search feature. The data on which these assessments are based come from GeMS4 (Ver. 1). The assessments have been produced to provide transparent summaries of all the relevant information on these features and allow ready access to the interpreted data without having to rely on direct access to GeMS.

The detailed assessments for all MPA search features are available online5.

3 The main assessment includes the SPA colony extensions only, although a further 56 SPA colonies were considered specifically in relation to black guillemot and intertidal MPA search features 4 GeMS - Geodatabase of Marine features in Scotland 5 These will be made available at: http://www.snh.gov.uk/protecting-scotlands-nature/protected-areas/national- designations/marine-protected-areas/scottish-mpa-project/

B. Assessment of presence of MPA search features in existing protected areas

A review was undertaken of the extent to which the known distribution of MPA search features within Scotland’s seas lie within existing protected areas. Annex 2 contains a list of all the existing protected areas used in the analysis. These included marine SACs, SPA extensions, SSSIs with maritime components, and fisheries areas established for nature conservation purposes. A further 56 SPA colonies were considered specifically for black guillemot and intertidal MPA search features. Eight locations (including dSACs and Areas of Search for SACs) were noted, but not considered in the assessment as part of the existing MPA network.

The review was based on the detailed assessments completed under A. In particular, the distribution and coverage of MPA search features were assessed against Stage 5 of the Scottish MPA Selection Guidelines: representation - considered to be met if one example is protected and if that reflects the importance of MPA regions for particular features; replication - considered to be met if more than one example is protected (where relevant); geographic range and variation - considered to be met if the protected examples broadly reflect the recorded geographic range and variation; linkages - focus on important locations in the life stages of highly mobile species ; and resilience - consideration of whether a greater proportion of the features should be protected for particularly threatened and/or declining features.

MPA search features not protected within any existing protected areas are considered to remain search priorities across Scotland’s seas. Features already afforded some protection were reviewed in more detail against Stage 5 of the MPA Selection Guidelines. MPA search features which did not meet all of the Stage 5 guidelines (as bulleted above) are also considered to remain search priorities, either across Scotland’s seas or within particular MPA regions. The Stage 5 guidelines closely reflect the OSPAR principles 6 and so this assessment will also help us to understand our contribution to the OSPAR MPA network.

Although the remaining search priorities have been identified by MPA region, this does not necessarily mean that each MPA search feature needs to be included within an MPA in each MPA region. The agreed approach from the MPA Selection Guidelines is that there will be more than one example of each MPA search feature within the MPA network.

C. Identification of areas which already contribute to the protection of MPA search features and those which could deliver more through enhancing the existing protection

The focus of this stage was identifying those areas which already protect MPA search features and those which could be enhanced to address the remaining priority MPA search features identified in Step B.

In making these assessments a number of factors were taken into account. For example, the boundaries of some protected areas are drawn very closely around Natura habitats and so although other features may be recorded within them, the number of records and / or extent of habitat may be very small.

6 Available through: http://www.ospar.org/content/content.asp?menu=00430109150011_000000_000000

There were also occasions when the scale of the protected area was considered to be too small to make a significant contribution to the conservation of the recorded features. This mainly applied to the mobile species (e.g. basking shark and minke whale) but also to a SSSI that represented a very small part of a sea loch. In this case it was felt more appropriate for the assessment against the MPA Selection Guidelines to be carried out over a broader area.

For those existing protected areas where there is considered to be potential to enhance protection, a review of the wider area was also carried out. This considered if there would be a benefit from extending the boundary of a Nature Conservation MPA beyond that of the existing protected area.

D. Review of prioritisation of MPA search features

This stage has not yet been undertaken. It is dependent on agreeing the options for enhancing existing protected areas as well as completing the assessment work on the contribution of other area-based measures and the least damaged/more natural locations.

These options and outcomes will be discussed at the 3rd National Stakeholder Workshop in October 2011. The review will be finalised following this.

4. ASSESSMENT OF MPA SEARCH FEATURE PRESENCE AND PRIORITISATION OF REMAINING MPA SEARCH FEATURES

Annex 2 contains a list of all the protected areas considered within this analysis. Tables A(i) and A(ii) below provide detail on the contribution that existing SACs and fisheries areas established for nature conservation are already making to the protection of MPA search features. For example, within the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC, ocean quahog and European spiny lobster are not named as part of the qualifying feature but are considered to be protected. Table B shows the level of representation of each MPA search feature within existing SACs and fisheries areas established for nature conservation.

Tables C, D and E summarise the results of the assessment of gaps and prioritisation of MPA search features. In each table, features are listed in the same order as the original MPA search feature list in the Scottish MPA Selection Guidelines: habitats, low or limited mobility species and mobile species. Within each category features are then listed alphabetically. The second column in Tables C and D highlights whether the assessment relates to the MPA search feature when it is in territorial, offshore waters or both. For some features (e.g. ocean quahog) the prioritisation is different in offshore waters compared to territorial. Table E lists all the MPA search features considered to be priorities and highlights in which region there is a gap in coverage within existing protected areas. The final column in Table E provides more detailed notes on the assessment for each MPA search feature in relation to the gaps in coverage of existing protection.

Table A(i) Contribution of existing SACs to the MPA network

Name of SAC Qualifying feature of SAC MPA search feature which is MPA search features considered to be protected by part of qualifying feature the site (but not named as part of qualifying feature) (according to Annex 1 habitats accounts) Berwickshire and North Grey seal Ocean quahog Northumberland Coast Intertidal mudflats and sandflats European spiny lobster Reefs Sea caves Shallow inlets and bays Dornoch Firth and Morrich More Common seal Blue mussel beds Estuaries Seagrass beds Intertidal mudflats and sandflats Reefs Subtidal sandbanks Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary Common seal Blue mussel beds Ocean quahog Estuaries Seagrass beds Intertidal mudflats and sandflats Sandeels Subtidal sandbanks

Name of SAC Qualifying feature of SAC MPA search feature which is MPA search features considered to be protected by part of qualifying feature the site (but not named as part of qualifying feature) (according to Annex 1 habitats accounts) Isle of May Grey seal Reefs Moray Firth Bottlenose dolphin Seagrass beds Blue mussel beds Subtidal sandbanks Sandeels Horse mussel beds Kelp and seaweed communities on sublittoral sediment Ocean quahog Faray and Holm of Faray Grey seal Loch of Stenness Saline lagoons Seagrass beds Mousa Common seal Reefs Sea caves Papa Stour Reefs Sea caves Sanday Common seal Seagrass beds Kelp and seaweed communities on sublittoral sediment Intertidal mudflats and sandflats Horse mussel beds Low or variable salinity habitats Reefs Sandeels Tide-swept algal communities Subtidal sandbanks Sullom Voe Saline lagoons Blue mussel beds Kelp and seaweed communities on sublittoral sediment Reefs Horse mussel beds Tide-swept algal communities Shallow inlets and bays Burrowed mud Ocean quahog The Vadills Saline lagoons Seagrass beds Kelp and seaweed communities on sublittoral sediment Maerl beds Tide-swept algal communities Yell Sound Coast Common seal Ascrib, Isay and Dunvegan Common seal Eileanan agus Sgeiran Lios mor Common seal Firth of Lorn Reefs Northern sea fan and sponge communities Tide-swept algal communities European spiny lobster Shelf deeps Loch Creran Reefs Horse mussel beds Low or variable salinity habitats

Name of SAC Qualifying feature of SAC MPA search feature which is MPA search features considered to be protected by part of qualifying feature the site (but not named as part of qualifying feature) (according to Annex 1 habitats accounts) Loch Laxford Reefs Blue mussel beds Inshore deep mud with burrowing heart urchins Shallow inlets and bays Horse mussel beds Kelp and seaweed communities on sublittoral sediment Maerl beds Low or variable salinity habitats Sea loch egg wrack beds Maerl or coarse shell gravel with burrowing sea Burrowed mud cucumbers Tide-swept algal communities Northern feather star communities on mixed substrata Ocean quahog European spiny lobster Loch Moidart and Loch Shiel Intertidal mudflats and sandflats Sea loch egg wrack beds Woods Loch Roag Lagoons Saline lagoons Seagrass beds Tide-swept algal communities Lochs Duich, Long and Alsh Reefs Horse mussel beds Low or variable salinity habitats Reef Tide-swept algal communities Loch nam Madadh Intertidal mudflats and sandflats Burrowed mud Kelp and seaweed communities on sublittoral sediment Saline lagoons Maerl beds Maerl or coarse shell gravel with burrowing sea Reefs Seagrass beds cucumbers Shallow inlets and bays Low or variable salinity habitats Northern sea fan and sponge communities Subtidal sandbanks Tide-swept algal communities Moine Mhor Intertidal mudflats and sandflats Seagrass beds Monach Islands Grey seal North Rona Grey seal Reefs Sea caves Obain Loch Euphoirt Saline lagoons Seagrass beds Low or variable salinity habitats Sound of Arisaig (Loch Ailort to Subtidal sandbanks Maerl beds Kelp and seaweed communities on sublittoral sediment Loch Ceann Traigh) Seagrass beds Maerl or coarse shell gravel with burrowing sea cucumbers Ocean quahog South-East Islay Skerries Common seal South Uist Machair Saline lagoons

Table A(ii) Contribution of existing fisheries areas established for nature conservation to the MPA network

Fisheries areas established for nature MPA search features considered to be protected by conservation the fisheries area (inc. to protect Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems7) Hatton Bank Burrowed mud Carbonate mound communities Coral gardens (suspected) Offshore deep-sea muds Offshore subtidal sands and gravels Darwin Mounds Offshore deep sea muds Offshore subtidal sands and gravels West Rockall Mound Offshore deep sea muds North West Rockall Offshore subtidal sands and gravels Lamlash Bay Fan mussel aggregations Kelp and seaweed communities on sublittoral sediment Maerl beds East Coast Scotland sandeel closure Sandeels

Table B Representation of MPA search features within existing SACs and fisheries areas established for nature conservation

MPA search feature SACs and fisheries areas established for nature conservation that are contributing to the protection of MPA search feature Habitats Blue mussel beds Dornoch Firth and Morrich More, Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary, Moray Firth, Sullom Voe, Loch Laxford, Luce Bay and Sands, Solway Firth Burrowed mud Sullom Voe, Loch Laxford, Loch nam Madadh, Hatton Bank Carbonate mound communities Hatton Bank Coral gardens Hatton Bank (suspected) Deep sea sponge aggregations Flame shell beds Horse mussel beds Moray Firth, Sanday, Sullom Voe, Loch Creran, Loch Laxford, Lochs Duich, Long and Alsh Reefs, Sunart Inshore deep mud with burrowing Loch Laxford heart urchins Kelp and seaweed communities Moray Firth, Sanday, Sullom Voe, The Vadills, Loch Laxford, on sublittoral sediment Loch nam Madadh, Sound of Arisaig (Loch Ailort to Loch Ceann Traigh), Luce Bay and Sands, Lamlash Bay Low or variable salinity habitats Sanday, Loch Creran, Loch Laxford, Lochs Duich, Long and Alsh Reefs, Loch nam Madadh, Obain Loch Euphoirt, Sunart Maerl beds The Vadills, Loch Laxford, Loch nam Madadh, Sound of Arisaig (Loch Ailort to Loch Ceann Traigh), Lamlash Bay Maerl or coarse shell gravel with Loch Laxford, Loch nam Madadh, Sound of Arisaig (Loch Ailort burrowing sea cucumbers to Loch Ceann Traigh) Native oysters Northern sea fan and sponge Firth of Lorn, Loch nam Madadh, St Kilda, Sunart communities

7 These areas are set up to protect vulnerable deep sea habitats (deep water corals and deep sea sponges). According to EC Regulation 40 2008 it is prohibited to conduct bottom trawling and fishing with static gear, including bottom set gill-nets and long-lines, within these areas

MPA search feature SACs and fisheries areas established for nature conservation that are contributing to the protection of MPA search feature Offshore deep sea muds Hatton Bank, Darwin Mounds, West Rockall Mound Offshore subtidal sands and Hatton Bank, Darwin Mounds, North West Rockall gravels Seagrass beds Dornoch Firth and Morrich More, Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary, Moray Firth, Loch of Stenness, Sanday, The Vadills, Loch Roag Lagoons, Loch nam Madadh, Moine Mhor, Obain Loch Euphoirt, Sound of Arisaig (Loch Ailort to Loch Ceann Traigh) Sea loch egg wrack beds Loch Laxford, Loch Moidart and Loch Shiel Woods Seamount communities Shallow tide-swept coarse sands with burrowing bivalves Tide-swept algal communities Sanday, Sullom Voe, The Vadills, Firth of Lorn, Loch Laxford, Loch Roag Lagoons, Lochs Duich, Long and Alsh Reefs, Loch nam Madadh, Sunart, Treshnish Isles, Luce Bay and Sands Low or limited mobility species Burrowing sea anemone aggregations Northern feather star Loch Laxford, Stanton Banks communities on mixed substrata Fan mussel aggregations Lamlash Bay Heart cockle aggregations Ocean quahog aggregations Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast, Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary, Moray Firth, Sullom Voe, Loch Laxford, Sound of Arisaig (Loch Ailort to Loch Ceann Traigh), Luce Bay and Sands Mobile species European spiny lobster Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast, Firth of Lorn, Loch Laxford, St Kilda, Sunart Blue ling Orange roughy Sandeels Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary, Loch nam Madadh, Moray Firth, Sanday, Solway Firth, Sound of Arisaig (Loch Ailort to Loch Ceann Traigh), East Coast Scotland sandeel closure8 Basking shark Common skate Minke whale Risso’s dolphin White-beaked dolphin Black guillemot Large-scale features Continental slope Fronts Seamounts Shelf banks and mounds Shelf deeps Firth of Lorn

8 Sandeels are considered well represented within the East MPA region through the East Coast of Scotland sandeel closure. Although sandeels are also recorded within several SACs, this is based on individual records of sandeel presence, rather than known areas of high concentration. Until further analyses of the level of contribution provided by these SACs is completed, sandeels are not considered well represented in any region.

Table C MPA search features already well represented within existing protected areas

MPA search feature Scottish marine area Blue mussel beds Territorial Carbonate mound communities Offshore Kelp and seaweed communities on sublittoral sediment Territorial Maerl or coarse shell gravel with burrowing sea cucumbers Territorial Northern sea fan and sponge communities Territorial Seagrass beds Territorial Sea loch egg wrack beds Territorial Tide-swept algal communities Territorial

Table D MPA search features which are not well represented within existing protected areas but which are not being considered as drivers for developing the MPA network

Following further review of the available data for these species, they were considered not to be useful drivers for developing the MPA network. They may still be considered at Stage 5 to determine whether they could add to the broader representivity of the network.

MPA search feature Scottish marine area Burrowing sea anemone aggregations Territorial European spiny lobster Territorial Fan mussel aggregations Offshore Heart cockle aggregations Territorial Ocean quahog Territorial

Table E MPA search features considered to remain search priorities This table highlights those MPA search features which are considered to remain search priorities. The final column in the table provides detail on how this assessment was applied to each MPA search feature. It should be noted that for habitats and low or limited mobility species, MPA search features are only listed where there are more than one or two records within that MPA region and where we have confidence in the data. For mobile species, a slightly different approach was taken which took into account areas considered to be important to key life stages where these were known and also reflected issues to do with scale and viability. Therefore mobile species are not simply listed as priorities wherever they have been sighted. MPA search features highlighted in bold are considered to be priorities wherever they are recorded.

Although the remaining search priorities have been identified by MPA region this does not necessarily mean that each MPA search feature needs to be included within an MPA in each MPA region. The agreed approach from the MPA Selection Guidelines is that there will be more than one example of each MPA search feature within the MPA network.

MPA search feature SW West Far-west North East Comments (applicable marine area) region region region region region Habitats Burrowed mud (both) 9 9 9 Recorded in all MPA regions. Close to the coast, Pachycerianthus multiplicatus, Funiculina quadrangularis and the MegMax biotope are still considered a search priority. Away from the coast, all component biotopes of this search feature remain a search priority. Only one example of burrowed mud away from the coast is considered adequately protected. Gap in South West, West and East MPA regions, however given the proportion of burrowed mud in the East region offshore it is of greatest importance here. Coral gardens (off.) 9 Recorded only in Far West MPA region where it remains a priority whilst noting the that suspected records do fall within the Hatton Bank Fisheries Area. Deep sea sponge 9 9 Confirmed records in the North MPA region only. There are also aggregations (off.) suspected records in the Far West MPA region. Considered to have no existing protection, this feature remains a search priority in both applicable MPA regions. Flame shell beds (terr.) 9 Main distribution in West MPA region but still considered a search priority wherever it is occurs, because it is not currently protected within existing areas. However, as only 1 record exists outside the West MPA region (in the South West) this has not been listed. Horse mussel beds (terr.) 9 9 Recorded in all MPA regions and included within some existing protected areas. Best known examples of horse mussel beds in North and East MPA regions are not within existing protected areas.

MPA search feature SW West Far-west North East Comments (applicable marine area) region region region region region Inshore deep mud with 9 Main distribution in West MPA region and only protected in one burrowing heart urchins existing protected area. Only 1 record outside West MPA region (terr.) (South West). Low or variable salinity 9 9 Recorded in the South West, West and North MPA regions. Well habitats (terr.) represented within existing protected areas in the West but not in the South West and North MPA regions. Maerl beds (terr.) 9 Recorded in the South West, West and North MPA regions and included within some existing protected areas. Still considered a search priority in the North MPA region. Native oysters (terr.) 9 9 Main distribution in the West and South West MPA regions but not within existing protected areas. However, as only 2 other records exist outside the West and South West MPA regions (North), these have not been listed. Northern sea fan and 9 9 Recorded in West and North MPA regions but not within existing sponge communities (off.) protected areas in offshore waters. However this feature is likely to be afforded protection in the future if the Pobie Bank Reef becomes designated as an SAC. Offshore deep sea muds 9 9 9 Recorded in all offshore regions apart from the West (predominantly in (off.) the Far West and North MPA regions). Beyond the continental shelf examples of Atlantic influenced deep sea muds are considered to be protected by Darwin Mounds fisheries area and the West Rockall mound fisheries area. However, Arctic influenced deep sea muds in the north region including those of the shelf and slope, and the deeper Atlantic influenced muds are not considered to be afforded adequate protection. Offshore subtidal sands 9 9 9 9 Recorded in all offshore regions. Atlantic influenced subtidal sands and gravels (off.) and gravels beyond the continental shelf in the Far West region are considered adequately protected; however slope records are not within existing protected areas. Arctic influenced subtidal sands and gravels in the North MPA region (Faroe-Shetland Channel) and shelf biotopes in the East and West MPA regions are not considered adequately present within existing protected areas. Seamount communities 9 Recorded only in Far West MPA region outwith existing protected (off.) areas.

MPA search feature SW West Far-west North East Comments (applicable marine area) region region region region region Shallow tide-swept coarse 9 9 Main distribution in West MPA region outwith existing protected areas. sands with burrowing There are uncertain records in the North MPA region. bivalves (terr.) Low or limited mobility species Fan mussel aggregations 9 Main distribution in West MPA region outwith existing protected areas. (terr.) All other records (except one recent record of a single fan mussel in the North) are considered to be historic, particularly offshore. Northern feather star 9 Recorded in West MPA region outwith existing protected areas. communities on mixed substrata (both) Ocean quahog (off.) 9 9 Predominantly recorded in the North and East MPA regions, with only a few records in the West MPA region but outwith existing protected areas. Mobile species Basking shark (terr.) 9 9 Main distribution in South West and West MPA regions although sightings have been recorded in all MPA regions but currently protected within existing protected areas. Common skate (terr.) 9 Main distribution in West MPA region with only two records recorded elsewhere (North and South West). Minke whale (terr.) 9 9 Main distribution in the West and East MPA regions although has been recorded in all MPA regions. Blue ling (off.) 9 Recorded in the Far West MPA region outwith any existing protected areas. Orange roughy (off.) 9 Recorded only in Far West MPA region but data might not be sufficient. Orange roughy remains a priority due to its threatened and/or declining status. Risso’s dolphin (terr.) 9 Main distribution in the West MPA region although has been recorded in all MPA regions. Sandeels (both) 9 9 Recorded in West, North, East and South West MPA regions but effectively protected through the East Coast Scotland closure. Coastal sandeel populations in the West and North MPA regions are smaller and more isolated and have limited existing protection. White-beaked dolphin (terr.) 9 9 9 Main distribution in the West, North and East MPA regions although has been recorded in all MPA regions.

MPA search feature SW West Far-west North East Comments (applicable marine area) region region region region region Black guillemot (terr.) 9 9 9 9 Recorded in West, North, East and South West MPA regions. Colonies are protected within three SSSIs (North and West MPA regions); no foraging areas are considered to be protected within the existing network. Large-scale features Continental slope (off.) 9 9 Occurs in the North and Far West MPA regions outwith existing protected areas. Seamounts (off.) 9 Recorded only in Far West MPA region outwith existing protected areas. Fronts (tbc) 9 9 9 9 9 To be confirmed. Further work is underway to define the fronts large- scale feature. Until this has been completed, fronts remain a search priority. Shelf banks and mounds 9 9 9 Occurs in the West, North and East MPA regions outwith existing (both) protected areas. Records in the West region in inshore waters only. Shelf deeps (both) 9 9 9 9 Occurs in the South West, West, North and East MPA regions. Only the Corryvreckan, in the West MPA region, is situated within an existing protected area.

5. ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS FOR ENHANCING EXISTING PROTECTED AREAS

The options for enhancing existing protected areas with Nature Conservation MPAs are presented in Table F. This table provides detail on the MPA search features present within each area, and whether they are considered to be protected through the existing designations, or would benefit from enhancement. The table also considers the wider area within which each existing protected area is located and highlights whether the existing area or an amended one (either larger or smaller) would be most appropriate in terms of addressing remaining search priorities and contributing to the development of the MPA network.

Details of those areas which overlap with MPA search features, but which are considered unlikely to make a significant contribution to the conservation of the MPA search features recorded within them are provided in Table G.

These tables do not take into account the full options for enhancing existing protected areas for black guillemot or large-scale features, which will be presented in separate analyses. In addition, further assessment of the sandeel data is underway to take into account the locations of coastal fishing grounds, which may change some of the recommendations provided in relation to this search feature.

This assessment has been based on the presence of MPA search features. Further work is required to assess the quality including extent of these features within existing protected areas. This is because the focus of monitoring and assessment to date has been on the designated features of protected areas and not on MPA search features.

Table F Occurrence of MPA search features within and adjacent to existing protected areas and preferred options for their contribution to the network

Search features listed in bold have been identified as a remaining search priority in that region. * Shading indicates that the current boundary of the SAC and all the features within it are the preferred option for consideration of its contribution to the MPA network. ** Shading indicates that the amended area as described in this column and the ‘Comments’ column is the preferred boundary option for further consideration. # Protected area overlaps with a least damaged/more natural location. § These two colony extensions are adjacent and so should probably be considered as one area.

Existing Type MPA search features Other MPA search features MPA search features in the Comments protected considered to be within existing protected area* possible amended area** area protected* Loch Creran SAC Horse mussel beds Kelp and seaweed communities on There are records of tide-swept algae Site is currently a discrete Low or variable salinity sublittoral sediment outside of the site boundary outside loch habitats Blue mussel beds the mouth of loch Burrowed mud Native oysters Seagrass beds Ocean quahog Flame shell beds Loch Sunart SAC Horse mussel beds Sea loch egg wrack beds The site is adjacent to the minke The site would need to be Low or variable salinity Northern feather star whale broad search area and there significantly larger to be habitats aggregations on mixed substrata are small areas of shelf deeps just appropriate in terms of Northern sea fan and Blue mussel beds outside the site. Records outside the enabling an MPA to make sponge communities Kelp and seaweed communities on site include lots of basking shark a contribution to the Tide-swept algal sublittoral sediment and common skate, along with conservation of basking communities Maerl beds some records of burrowed mud, shark or minke whale. European spiny lobster Native oysters northern feather star communities Results of tope and Seagrass beds on mixed substrata, fan mussel spurdog tagging should Burrowed mud (though record very old), native also be considered for this Flame shell beds oysters, sea loch egg wrack, site when available. Ocean quahog northern sea fan and sponge Basking shark communities, ocean quahog, maerl Common skate or coarse shell gravel with burrowing Minke whale sea cucumbers, seagrass beds, and Shelf deeps kelp and seaweed communities on sublittoral sediments.

Existing Type MPA search features Other MPA search features MPA search features in the Comments protected considered to be within existing protected area* possible amended area** area protected* Lochs Duich, SAC Horse mussel beds Sea loch egg wrack beds Within the loch system but outside Consideration should be Long and Low or variable salinity Kelp and seaweed communities on the site boundary are small areas of given to extending the Alsh# habitats sublittoral sediment shelf deeps along with records of boundary of the SAC to Tide-swept algal Northern feather star burrowed mud, sea loch egg wrack encompass the entirety of communities aggregations on mixed substrata beds, blue mussel beds, inshore the sea lochs within a NC Inshore deep mud with burrowing deep mud with burrowing heart MPA. The main features heart urchins urchins, ocean quahog and this would include would Burrowed mud northern feather star communities be burrowed mud, inshore Maerl beds on mixed substrata. Additionally, deep mud with burrowing Flame shell beds just outside the boundary of the site heart urchins and shelf Blue mussel beds and outside of Loch Alsh are records deeps. Ocean quahog of horse mussel beds, maerl beds Basking shark and kelp and seaweed communities Shelf deeps on sublittoral sediment and outside the site in Kyle Rhea are records of tide-swept algal communities and more burrowed mud. Rum§ SPA N/A Horse mussel beds Outside the site boundary there are Unless the site is amended Kelp and seaweed communities on many records of basking shark to be significantly larger sublittoral sediment along with records of burrowed the scale of the Northern sea fan and deep sponge mud, common skate, European area / location is unlikely to communities spiny lobster, northern feather star be appropriate in terms of Seagrass beds aggregations on mixed substrata, enabling an MPA to make Burrowing sea anemone (single northern sea fan and sponge a contribution to the record) communities, ocean quahog and conservation of minke Sandeels maerl beds. The site is also within the whale and common skate. Basking shark minke whale broad search area and The site could be merged Common skate shelf deeps span the boundary. with Canna and Sanday Minke whale and extended to a much Fan mussel aggregations bigger site to afford Maerl beds protection to the mobile Ocean quahog species. Black guillemot Northern feather star aggregations on mixed substrata

Existing Type MPA search features Other MPA search features MPA search features in the Comments protected considered to be within existing protected area* possible amended area** area protected* Canna and SPA N/A Horse mussel beds Outside the site boundary there are Unless the site is amended Sanday§ Kelp and seaweed communities on many records of basking shark to be significantly larger sublittoral sediment along with records of burrowed the scale of the Maerl or coarse shell gravel with mud, common skate, European area / location is unlikely to burrowing sea cucumbers spiny lobster, northern feather star be appropriate in terms of Seagrass beds aggregations on mixed substrata, enabling an MPA to make Fan mussel aggregations northern sea fan and sponge a contribution to the European spiny lobster communities, ocean quahog and conservation of minke Sandeels maerl beds. The site is also within the whale. Site could be Basking shark minke whale broad search area and merged with Rum and Minke whale shelf deeps span the boundary. extended to a much bigger Burrowed mud site to afford protection to Maerl beds the mobile species. Black guillemot Hoy# SPA N/A Kelp and seaweed communities on Records outside the site boundary Site could be extended to sublittoral sediment include common skate, ocean include the horse mussel Maerl beds quahog, kelp and seaweed beds Maerl or coarse shell gravel with communities on sublittoral sediment, burrowing sea cucumbers maerl or coarse shell gravel with Ocean quahog burrowing sea cucumbers, horse European spiny lobster mussel beds and European spiny Sandeels lobster. Basking shark Black guillemot Copinsay# SPA N/A Horse mussel beds none Fan mussel Black guillemot Fetlar SPA N/A Horse mussel beds Records outside the site boundary Kelp and seaweed communities on include sandeels, basking shark, sublittoral sediment kelp and seaweed communities, Maerl beds maerl beds, tide swept algal Shallow tide-swept coarse sand communities, seagrass beds, horse with burrowing bivalves mussel beds and shallow tide- Ocean quahog swept coarse sand with burrowing Basking shark bivalves. Black guillemot

Existing Type MPA search features Other MPA search features MPA search features in the Comments protected considered to be within existing protected area* possible amended area** area protected* Wyville SAC Offshore deep sea muds nil Offshore deep sea muds Only a very small area of Thomson Offshore subtidal sands Offshore subtidal sands and gravels Offshore deep sea mud Ridge and gravels within site which would not be considered to be viable. If extended north-eastward it would also cover a proportion components of deep sea mud not currently covered. Modelled data, requiring verification. Hatton Bank VME Carbonate mound Blue ling spawning grounds Coral gardens (suspected) Coral gardens - Closure communities Offshore subtidal sands and gravels confirmation of presence is Offshore subtidal sands Blue ling spawning grounds desirable. Extending south and gravels to cover the Bank summit Burrowed mud and to the West to a depth Coral gardens of 1500 m would include (suspected) the remaining Bank Offshore deep-sea muds records.

Offshore deep muds - the area within this closure is too small to be considered viable.

Offshore subtidal sands and gravels - extending North West would cover variation with changing depth and substrate.

Blue ling - extension south and east could cover more of the spawning grounds.

Table G Existing protected areas containing MPA search features considered as priorites, together with reasons for not considering further

Existing protected Type MPA search features Reason for not considering further area considered priorities Luce Bay SAC Basking shark Whilst there are sightings records there are no effort related data available and so it is difficult to make comparisons between this area and others. In addition, basking shark is the only feature considered to remain a priority for search in this region and there is a question over whether the scale of the area is appropriate in terms of enabling an MPA to make a contribution to the conservation of this species. Ailsa Craig SPA Basking shark See Luce Bay discussion above. Handa SPA Basking shark, sandeels See discussion under Luce Bay for basking shark and under Rousay for sandeels. Cape Wrath SPA Minke whale, white-beaked The only MPA search features considered as search priorities are both mobile species and dolphin there is a question over whether the scale of the area is appropriate in terms of enabling an MPA to make a contribution to the conservation of minke whale or white-beaked dolphin. This area is on the edge of a Broad Search Area identified for these two species. Rousay SPA Sandeels The only MPA search feature within this SPA colony extension is sandeels. The colony extensions were put in place to support social activities (preening, loafing etc) rather than feeding activity. Through the analysis on offshore aggregation SPAs other areas which provide more important feeding habitat for birds may be identified. There is also an issue over whether the scale of the area is appropriate in terms of enabling an MPA to make a contribution to the conservation of this species. In addition, further analysis of the sandeel data is underway to take into account coastal fishing grounds, which may change some of the recommendations in this table. Fair Isle SPA Sandeels See Rousay discussion above. Mousa SAC Sandeels See Rousay discussion above. Noss SPA Sandeels See Rousay discussion above. Foula SPA Sandeels See Rousay discussion above. Mingulay and SPA Sandeels See Rousay discussion above. Berneray North Rona and SPA Sandeels See Rousay discussion above. Sula Sgeir Cape Wrath SPA Sandeels See Rousay discussion above. Sumburgh Head SPA Sandeels See Rousay discussion above. Ulva, Danna and SSSI Native oyster A number of remaining MPA search feature priorities occur within Loch Sween and it is the McCormaig recommended that assessment against the MPA Selection Guidelines is carried out at the Isles scale of the sea loch rather than just within the SSSI.

Existing protected Type MPA search features Reason for not considering further area considered priorities Stanton Banks SAC Burrowed mud, offshore subtidal There are five records of the seapens and burrowing megafauna biotope of burrowed mud sands and gravels, offshore deep and a small amount of offshore deep-sea muds which lie within the SAC boundary. muds, northern feather star However, the boundary for the SAC has been drawn very tightly around the Annex I reefs aggregations on mixed substrata feature. Therefore it is not considered that enhancing this SAC with a NC MPA would add (pending review of MPA search significantly to the conservation of the MPA search features. feature status) North West Rockall SAC / Although enhancement was considered, extending the boundary a considerable distance VME would only afford protection to one point record of suspected coral garden and off-shelf closure offshore subtidal sands and gravels, the latter of which is not considered a gap in the network. Therefore, this was not considered as an appropriate enhancement opportunity. Braemar pockmarks SAC Burrowed mud This SAC is considered too small to be considered as a viable enhancement opportunity for burrowed mud in the East MPA region. Scanner pockmark SAC Burrowed mud This SAC is considered too small to be considered as a viable enhancement opportunity for burrowed mud in the East MPA region.

6. NEXT STEPS

The options for enhancing existing protected areas with Nature Conservation MPAs and the provisional prioritisation of MPA search features presented in this draft will be discussed at the 3rd National MPA stakeholder workshop. Following the workshop the results will be reviewed to provide a finalised list of: existing protected areas that could be enhanced via a Nature Conservation MPA to protect MPA search features; and remaining MPA search feature priorities which takes account of the contribution of existing protected areas, other area-based measures and least damaged/more natural locations to the MPA network. This will provide a focus for developing the options for completing the MPA network.

7. ANNEXES Annex 1 Description of detailed assessments undertaken for MPA search features

The detailed assessments for each MPA search feature were based on the records available within GeMS. The total number of records available within GeMS was noted for each feature.

Recorded distribution A short description of the recorded distribution in Scottish offshore and territorial waters, relative to the Scottish MPA regions, was provided for each search feature. The wider distribution of the feature was also noted, where relevant, to place the feature’s Scottish distribution into context. In addition, any known ecological parameters which typically influence the local distribution of the feature were outlined.

Occurrence within existing protected areas Within the detailed assessments the term protected areas was used to describe the following types of area:

Special Areas of Conservation (SACs); Special Protection Area - marine extensions (SPAs); and Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs).

Areas with fisheries restrictions were included in the detailed assessments because these assessments were also being used to support work on the contribution of other area-based measures. These areas were referred to as fisheries areas.

Each MPA search feature was described in terms of its occurrence within protected areas and fisheries areas and the protection afforded to the feature through presence in these areas. A summary table and illustrative map was compiled for each feature to outline the number and relative proportion of records:

present within protected areas / fisheries areas and considered to be effectively protected either through their qualifying feature or existing management; or present within protected areas / fisheries areas, but not protected through their qualifying feature or existing management; or outside any protected areas or fisheries areas.

Occurrence within proposed protected areas For the purpose of this report, proposed protected areas were considered to include the following types of area:

draft Special Areas of Conservation (dSACs); Areas of Search for Special Areas of Conservation (AoS SAC); and draft fisheries areas, in the case of offshore waters.

The occurrence of records within a proposed protected area was flagged for information purposes. However, proposed protected areas were not included in the analysis. It was not considered possible to assess the contribution of proposed protected areas to the MPA network, given that it is not certain whether such areas will progress to designation. Therefore, any records falling within proposed protected areas would be categorised as ‘outside any protected areas’ for the purposes of this analysis.

Data quality A brief assessment of the quality of the data available through GeMS was provided in terms of the age of existing records and the presence of any known data or knowledge gaps. This was to provide an indication of confidence in the records.

Potential contribution to the MPA network Protected areas or fisheries areas which were considered to protect records of a given MPA search feature, either through the qualifying feature or under existing management, have the potential to contribute to the MPA network. In order to further understand the contribution to the network from such areas, those records regarded as protected were assessed against the following stage five MPA selection guidelines:

Representation of features within the network Consideration was given to the representation of each search feature within the existing network. Lists of protected areas and fisheries areas potentially contributing to the network were compiled for each search feature. These areas were considered in the context of the requirements for protection of a viable example of any given search feature (where this information was available through detailed ecological guidance). Replication of features within the network For each feature, consideration was made against the interpretation provided within the guidelines that if there is more than one example of each search feature within the network in Scottish waters, then the criteria for replication will be met. Key linkages between relevant features within the network This guideline is intended to focus on important locations in the life stages of highly mobile species and will only be assessed where there is a good understanding of the relationship between the features within different areas. This guideline has therefore only been considered for a limited number of mobile search features. Range and geographic variation of features within the seas around Scotland Consideration was given to whether the existing protection for each feature approximately reflects the known distribution of each feature. A table was compiled to summarise the number of records for each search feature by region, alongside the number of areas by region which are deemed to afford protection to that search feature. In addition, consideration was given to reflecting any geographic variation within the search feature across Scotland. This was considered at the level of search feature components or, where there was information on known regional differences within a particular species or biotope, at that level. Resilience The guidelines state that in some cases it may be appropriate to include a greater proportion of some particularly threatened and / or declining features within the overall network. For each feature a summary was compiled outlining conservation status, presence on the OSPAR Threatened and / or Declining list, sensitivity and recoverability information in order to help assess relative resilience. Potential additional contribution to the MPA network Where records of a given MPA search feature are present within protected areas or fisheries areas, but not currently protected through the qualifying feature or existing management of these areas, there may be potential to enhance these with a MPA in order to achieve additional contribution to the network. In order to further understand what additional contribution might be possible, those records present within existing areas (but not currently protected through the qualifying feature or current management) have been assessed

against the Stage 5 guideline which relates to ‘representation of features within the network’ (as described above).

Conclusions For each MPA search feature, a table was compiled listing those protected areas and fisheries areas which have potential to contribute to the existing MPA network alongside those with potential to provide additional contribution to the network if enhanced with an MPA. The conclusion was also used to highlight any other key points from the detailed assessment that help interpret the table.

Annex 2 Existing protected areas considered within the analysis

Protected area type Protected area name Area of search for SAC9 Anton Dohrn seamount Area of search for SAC East Rockall Bank Area of search for SAC George Bligh Bank Area of search for SAC Pobie Bank Area of search for SAC Solan Bank dSAC10 East Mingulay dSAC Hatton Bank dSAC Sound of Barra SAC Ascrib, Isay and Dunvegan SAC Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC Braemar Pockmarks SAC Darwin Mounds SAC Dornoch Firth and Morrich More SAC Eileanan agus Sgeiran Lios mor SAC Faray and Holm of Faray SAC Firth of Lorn SAC Firth of Tay and Eden Estuary SAC Isle of May SAC Loch Creran SAC Loch Laxford SAC Loch Moidart and Loch Shiel Woods SAC Loch nam Madadh SAC Loch of Stenness SAC Loch Roag Lagoons SAC Lochs Duich, Long and Alsh Reefs SAC Luce Bay and Sands SAC Moine Mhor SAC Monach Islands SAC Moray Firth SAC Mousa SAC North Rona SAC North West Rockall Bank SAC Obain Loch Euphoirt SAC Papa Stour SAC Sanday SAC Scanner Pockmark SAC Solway Firth SAC Sound of Arisaig (Loch Ailort to Loch Ceann) SAC South Uist Machair SAC South-East Islay Skerries SAC Stanton Banks SAC St Kilda SAC Sullom Voe SAC Sunart

9 Areas of search were not considered to afford protection to MPA search features as these are currently proposed protected areas, however where they occur these areas have been noted. 10 dSACs were not considered to afford protection to MPA search features as these are currently proposed protected areas, however where they occur these areas have been noted.

Protected area type Protected area name SAC The Vadills SAC Treshnish Isles SAC Wyville Thomson Ridge SAC Yell Sound Coast SPA Ailsa Craig SPA Buchan Ness to Collieston Coast SPA Calf of Eday SPA Canna and Sanday SPA Cape Wrath SPA Copinsay SPA East Caithness Cliffs SPA Fair Isle SPA Fetlar SPA Flannan Isles SPA Forth Islands SPA Foula SPA Fowlsheugh SPA Handa SPA Hermaness, Saxa Vord and Valla Field SPA Hoy SPA Marwick Head SPA Mingulay and Berneray SPA North Caithness Cliffs SPA North Rona and Sula Sgeir SPA Noss SPA Rousay SPA Rum SPA Shiant Isles SPA St Abb's Head to Fast Castle SPA St Kilda SPA Sule Skerry and Sule Stack SPA Sumburgh Head SPA Troup, Pennan and Lion's Heads SPA West Westray SSSI Ballochmartin Bay SSSI Balranald Bog and Loch nam Feithean SSSI Berwickshire Coast (Intertidal) SSSI Bogside Flats SSSI Bridgend Flats SSSI Cree Estuary SSSI Cromarty Firth SSSI Dornoch Firth SSSI East Sanday Coast SSSI Eden Estuary SSSI Eynhallow SSSI Faray and Holm of Faray SSSI Firth of Forth SSSI Gruinart Flats SSSI Howmore Estuary, Lochs Roag and Fada SSSI Isle of May SSSI Kames Bay

Protected area type Protected area name SSSI Kentra Bay and Moss SSSI Loch an Duin SSSI Loch Bee SSSI Loch Fleet SSSI Loch Moidart SSSI Loch nam Madadh SSSI Loch Obisary SSSI Loch Siadar SSSI Lochs at Clachan SSSI Lochs of Harray and Stenness SSSI Longman and Castle Stuart Bays SSSI Luskentyre Banks and Saltings SSSI Montrose Basin SSSI Mound Alderwoods SSSI Mousa SSSI Muckle and Little Green Holm SSSI Munlochy Bay SSSI North Fetlar SSSI North Rona and Sula Sgeir SSSI Northton Bay SSSI Obain Loch Euphoirt SSSI Oronsay and South Colonsay SSSI Papa Stour SSSI Pool of Virkie SSSI Rosehearty to Fraserburgh Coast SSSI Sandness Coast SSSI Small Seal Islands SSSI Sunart SSSI Taynish Woods SSSI Tayport - Tentsmuir Coast SSSI The Vadills SSSI Tob Valasay SSSI Tong Saltings SSSI Treshnish Isles SSSI Ulva, Danna and the McCormaig Isles SSSI Upper Solway Flats and Marshes SSSI Whiteness Head Inshore Fishing Order Lamlash Bay Sea Fisheries Order East Coast Scotland Fisheries area for VMEs Darwin mounds Fisheries area for VMEs Hatton Bank Fisheries area for VMEs North West Rockall Fisheries area for VMEs West Rockall Mound

In addition to the protected areas listed above, a further 56 SPA colonies were considered specifically for black guillemot and intertidal MPA search features. The results of the black guillemot analysis are presented in a separate document. No SPA colonies were considered to have potential to address gaps in protection for intertidal MPA search features.