North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report

Contract Reference: MB0120 Report Number: 49 Version 3 September 2017

Project Title: Marine Protected Areas Data and Evidence Co-ordination Programme Report No 49. Title: North of Celtic Deep 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]

Paul McIlwaine Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas) [email protected]

Acknowledgements

We thank Julia Rance and Stefan Bolam (Cefas) for creating earlier drafts of this report and Christopher Barrio Froján (Cefas) for reviewing the 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: North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report

Submitted to: Marine Protected Areas Survey Co-ordination & Evidence Delivery Group Date submitted: September 2017 Project Manager: Sue Ware Report compiled by: Louise Brown and Paul McIlwaine Quality control by: Chris Barrio and Peter Mitchell Approved by & date: Silke Kröger, 28.09.2017 Version: V3

Version Control History Author Date Comment Version L Brown & 13/11/2015 First draft submitted to MPAG for review 1 P McIlwaine L Brown & 03/02/2016 Revised following 1st round external review 2 P McIlwaine P McIlwaine 28/09/2017 Revised following 2nd round of review; PSG 3 comments.

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 MCZ 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 habitat map ...... 13 4.2 Updated habitat map based on new survey data ...... 13 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 ...... 19 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

North of Celtic Deep 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 (CEND0312) ...... 31 Appendix 2. Outputs from acoustic surveys ...... 33 Appendix 3. Evidence of human activities within the rMCZ ...... 35 Appendix 4. Species list ...... 36 Appendix 5. Analyses of sediment samples: classification and composition ...... 47 Appendix 6. BSH/EUNIS Level 3 descriptions derived from video and stills ...... 49 Appendix 7. Example images for Broadscale habitats ...... 50 Appendix 8. Example images for habitat FOCI ...... 51

North of Celtic Deep 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...... 18

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report iii List of Figures

Figure 1. Location of the North of Celtic Deep rMCZ. Bathymetry is from the Defra Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011)...... 4 Figure 2. Location of groundtruthing sampling sites in the North of Celtic Deep rMCZ. Bathymetry displayed is from Defra’s Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011)...... 8 Figure 3. Extent of aoucstic data blocks across the North of Celtic Deep rMCZ from the 2012 and 2013 suveys...... 10 Figure 4. Habitat map from the Site Assessment Document...... 13 Figure 5. CI tree output for the 2012 block of data classification process...... 14 Figure 6. Updated map of Broadscale habitats based on newly acquired survey data...... 15 Figure 7. Overall MESH confidence score for the updated broadscale habitat map...... 16 Figure 9. Location of the species FOCI ‘Ocean Quahog (Arctica islandica)’ identified at this rMCZ...... 18

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report iv

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).

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report v 1 Executive Summary: Report Card This report details the findings of a dedicated seabed survey at the North of Celtic Deep 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 (ISCZ, 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 have resulted from a survey of the site conducted by Cefas and the JNCC in February 2012. The comparison covers Broadscale habitats and habitat FOCI.

1.1 Features proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the MCZ designation Extent Extent according Accordance between according to to updated SAD and updated Feature SAD habitat map habitat map Broadscale Habitats Presence Extent A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 2.33 km2 Not observed  -2.33 km2 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment 616.88 km2 N/A* N/A N/A A5.2 Subtidal sand 32.62 km2 3 point records* N/A N/A Habitat FOCI Subtidal sands and gravels** 599.90 km2 N/A N/A N/A Species FOCI None proposed N/A N/A N/A N/A * Although this BSH was identified during the 2012 survey, its extent could not be calculated. ** Removed from list of FOCI in July 2015. See Corrigendum.

North of Celtic Deep 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 Feature SAD habitat map habitat map Broadscale Habitats Presence Extent A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse sediment /mixed sediments N/A 655.63 km2  +655.63 km2 A5.3 Subtidal mud N/A 1 point record*  N/A A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments N/A 27 point records*  N/A Habitat FOCI Peat and Clay Exposures N/A 1 record  1 record Species FOCI Ocean Quahog (Arctica islandica) Present 1 record ✓ 1 record * Although this BSH was identified during the 2012 survey, its extent could not be calculated.

1.3 Evidence of human activities occurring within the rMCZ Several wrecks were observed on the acoustic data record within the boundaries of the rMCZ.

North of Celtic Deep 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). 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 recommended MCZs (rMCZs) and compiled a Site Assessment Document (SAD) for each site, summarising 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 coordinated by Cefas, to collect and interpret new survey data at selected rMCZ sites. This report provides an interpretation of the groundtruthing survey data collected jointly by Cefas and JNCC personnel in 2012, and the acoustic data collected by Gardline Geosurvey Ltd in 2012 and 2013 at the North of Celtic Deep rMCZ site.

2.1 Location of the rMCZ The North of Celtic Deep rMCZ is located in the Irish Sea, between Welsh territorial waters and Republic of Ireland offshore waters. It is the most southerly site in the Irish Seas Conservation Zone project area, approximately 23 km (12 nm) from the Welsh coast (Figure 1).

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 3

Figure 1. Location of the North of Celtic Deep rMCZ. Bathymetry is from the Defra Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011).

2.2 Rationale for site position and designation The North of Celtic Deep rMCZ was included in the proposed network of MPAs because of its contribution to Ecological Network Guidance (ENG) criteria to Broadscale habitats, and its added ecological importance. For a detailed site description see ‘Final recommendations for Marine Conservation Zones in the Irish Sea’ (ISCZ, 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 (BSHs) were included in the recommendations for designation at this site, namely: ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’, ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ and ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ (Table 1). See Annex 1 for a full list of the BSH features listed in the ENG.

Table 1. Broadscale habitats for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. EUNIS code & Broadscale habitat Spatial extent according to the SAD A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 2.33 km2 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment 616.88 km2 A5.2 Subtidal sand 32.62 km2

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 4 2.2.2 Habitat FOCI proposed for designation The habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Sands and Gravels’ was included in the recommendations for designation (Table 2). Annex 2 presents the habitat FOCI listed in the ENG.

Table 2. Habitat FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. Habitat FOCI Spatial extent according to SAD Subtidal Sands and Gravels* 599.90 km2 * Removed from list of FOCI in July 2015. See Corrigendum.

2.2.3 Species FOCI proposed for designation No ‘Low or limited mobility species FOCI’ or ‘Highly mobile species FOCI’ were proposed for designation (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 Records 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 High in terms of the amount and quality of evidence for the presence and extent of Broadscale habitat features 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 broad scale habitats and habitat FOCI reported for the North of Celtic Deep rMCZ was Low/Moderate (ISCZ, 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.

North of Celtic Deep 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 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.

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 6 3 Methods

3.1 Acoustic data acquisition Three separate surveys were undertaken to collect additional data at this site. Two surveys collected acoustic data and one survey collected groundtruthing data. The acoustic data acquisition was carried out by Gardline Geosurvey Ltd. The first acoustic survey was undertaken between March and April 2012 on board the MV Tridens1. The second acoustic survey was undertaken during February 2013 on board the MV Vigilant. The newly acquired multibeam echosounder (MBES) data were supplied as two sections of fully processed and cleaned bathymetry and backscatter data. The bathymetry data were collected and processed in accordance with the International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO) Standards for Hydrographic Surveys - Order 1 (Special Publication 44, Edition 4). The bathymetry and backscatter data were both processed using Caris HIPS and SIPS (version 7.1). Further details on the acquisition and processing of MBES data can be found in the cruise reports for each survey (Lot 1 - North of Celtic Deep Gardline Geosurvey, 2013; Lot 3 - North of Celtic Deep Acquisition Report, 2012).

3.2 Ground truth sample acquisition Ground truth samples were collected on board RV Cefas Endeavour (Cruise code: CEND0312) in February 2012. Data from the acoustic surveys were unavailable to inform the planning of the groundtruthing survey. In the absence of acoustic data, sampling stations were positioned within the predicted BSHs using a triangular lattice grid overlaid on the SAD habitat map. Benthic grabs were used at 63 stations to collect sediments and infauna. An underwater camera system was deployed at 18 stations to collect video and still images of the seabed (Figure 2; Appendix 1).

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 7

Figure 2. Location of groundtruthing sampling sites in the North of Celtic Deep rMCZ. Bathymetry displayed is from Defra’s Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011). Grab sampling equipment comprised a 0.1 m2 mini Hamon grab fitted with a video camera, the combined gear being known as a HamCam. This allowed an image of the undisturbed seabed surface to be obtained immediately before each grab sample was taken. On recovery, the grab contents were emptied into a large plastic bin and a representative sub-sample of sediment (approx. 0.5 litres) taken for Particle Size Analysis (PSA). The remaining sample was photographed and sieved over a 1 mm mesh sieve to collect the benthic fauna. Fauna were preserved in buffered 4% formaldehyde for later processing ashore. Camera sledge deployments were made at a subset of stations sampled by the grab. The frequency of use of the camera sledge was informed by the type of sediment obtained in the grab sample. Where this was consistent with the BSH predicted in the SAD, the camera was deployed at approximately every third station. Where the grab sample was not consistent with the predicted BSH, the camera was used at every station. The camera images helped to characterise the surficial sediments and associated epifaunal communities. The total number of camera deployments for each BSH varied depending on the uniformity of the habitat and its spatial extent. The towed camera sledge was able to collect both video and still images. A four- point laser scaling 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 and a computer hard drive. A video overlay was used to provide station metadata, time and GPS position (of the vessel) in the recorded video image.

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 8 Camera sledge tows lasted a minimum of 10 minutes, with the sledge being towed at c. 0.5 knots (c. 0.25 ms-1) across a 50 m ‘bullring’ centred on the sampling station. Still images were captured at regular one minute intervals and opportunistically if specific features of interest were encountered. Video and still images were analysed following an established protocol developed and used by Cefas (Coggan and Howell, 2005; JNCC, in prep.; see Annex 5). A drop-camera system was available for the sampling of stations where hard substrate was predicted by the SAD. The system, was similar to that of the camera sledge (described above), but was mounted on a rectangular drop-frame and was deployed from the side gantry. For further detail on ground truth sample collection see the ‘North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Survey Report’ (Whomersley et al., 2012).

3.3 Production of the updated habitat map An updated habitat map was produced by 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 image analysis and statistical modelling, as described below. Object-based image analysis (OBIA) is a two-step procedure 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 representing sections of the image which possess homogeneous characteristics across all data layers used within the segmentation process. For each of these objects, mean and standard deviation values of primary acoustic data layers and their derivatives were calculated. These values were extracted at PSA point sample locations 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 data were re-sampled onto a common grid at 2 m resolution. This data preparation results in a spatial grid with a single value for bathymetry (depth) and a single value for backscatter (acoustic reflectance) in each 2 m x 2 m grid cell, and it is these data values that are used in the rest of the process. It was not possible to colour correct and join the two blocks of backscatter coverage into a single mosaic image, due to the homogeneity of values in the area of overlap by both data blocks. Therefore, each block of data (Figure 3) was analysed separately.

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 9

Figure 3. Extent of aoucstic data blocks across the North of Celtic Deep rMCZ from the 2012 and 2013 suveys.

Stage 2. Derivatives calculated Using bathymetry data, a range of derivatives representing various topographic attributes of the seafloor were calculated (Table 4). Not all of these derivatives were used in later processes.

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 Curvature parallel to the direction of slope (profile) and perpendicular to the and planar) direction of slope (planar) BPI Bathymetric Position Index (Lundblad et al., 2006); radii of 3, 5, 10, 25 Standard Deviation Standard deviation statistic calculated within a moving window of 3 x 3 cells

Stage 3. Segmentation 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, amongst many others. The segmentation process was undertaken using the multiresolution segmentation algorithm in eCognition. Multiresolution segmentation commences with a single pixel and consecutively merges it with neighbouring pixels, based on the relative homogeneity

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 10 criterion. The homogeneity criterion is based on both the 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. For both blocks of data, bathymetry and backscatter strength were used in the segmentation process, with a weighting of 2 and 1 respectively. The final segmentations were undertaken at the pixel level with a scale parameter of 50. For each of the objects created in the segmentation process, the mean and standard deviation values of the primary acoustic data layers (e.g., mean bathymetry value for the grid cells lying within the object) and their derivatives outlined in Table 4 (roughness, slope and BPI25) were calculated. Grey level co-occurrence matrix (GLCM) texture values of entropy and homogeneity were also calculated for backscatter. These object-feature mean values were exported as GIS shapefiles and extracted for each location of the ground truth samples to provide an analysis dataset for classification. These values were used to help the Broadscale habitat classification in the next stage of the process.

Stage 4. Classification The distribution of values for bathymetry, its derivatives and backscatter 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 groundtruthing 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. The resulting classified objects were exported into GIS and dissolved into continuous polygons.

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 it was used to make an auditable judgement of the confidence that could be placed in a range of existing, local biotope maps that had been developed using different techniques and data inputs, but were to be used in compiling a full coverage map for north-west Europe. Where two of the original maps overlapped, that with the highest MESH confidence score would take precedence in the compiled map.

1 http://emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/confidence/confidenceAssessment.html [Accessed 28/09/2015]

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 11 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 rMCZ 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 purely physical map 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.

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 12 4 Results The list of benthic taxa found in the grab and video samples is presented in Appendix 4; a total of 486 infaunal and 81 epifaunal taxa were recorded. A summary of the particle size analysis of the grab samples is given in Appendix 5. Of the 61 stations where a sediment sample was obtained, subtidal coarse sediment was recorded at 30 stations, subtidal sand at three stations, subtidal mud at one station, and subtidal mixed sediments at 27 stations. Results from the analysis of the seabed video and stills are summarised in Appendix 6. Example images of the BSHs and habitat FOCI recorded in the video analysis are given in Appendix 7 and 8 respectively.

4.1 Site Assessment Document habitat map The SAD habitat map (Figure 4) was produced using modelled data from the UKSeaMap (McBreen et al, 2011). For further detail see Irish Sea Conservation Zones (2011).

Figure 4. 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 2013 survey data is presented in Figure 6. The results from the PSA of grab samples suggest that the majority of the site consists of ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’. However, it is has not been possible in this

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 13 instance to define the extent of these two Broadscale habitats individually from the acoustic data, as they exhibit similar acoustic signatures. Therefore, they have been defined as a mosaic of both BSHs, and labelled as ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’. The Broadscale habitat classification for a small proportion (0.02 km2) of this site has been visually interpolated. This was possible for this specific site as the areas where good quality acoustic data were non-existent were extremely small and were surrounded by a uniform substrate type (i.e., the predominant BSH hybrid ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse sediment/mixed sediments’). However, the confidence in this small area of the resulting map will be lower than for the rest of the rMCZ. An attempt was made to predict the distribution of the BSH class ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ within the eastern block (Block 1) of this site where three PSA samples were classified as sand. The outputs from the Conditional Inference tree identified the Mean backscatter as the only important variable in distinguishing between ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ and ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’ (Figure 5). Based on the available samples, mean backscatter values less than or equal to -16.356 dB have a 50:50 chance of being either ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’ or ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ (‘Node 2’ in Figure 5). Given this equivocal result, it was decided that it was not possible to confidently predict the distribution of sand within this block of data. It was also not possible to predict the distribution of sand within the western block (Block 2) of this site, despite lower backscatter values being observed in the backscatter data layer. This is due to the independent analysis of the two blocks of data and because there were no observations of ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ BSH within the western block of data. Therefore, although ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ has been observed within the North of Celtic Deep rMCZ the entire site has been classed as ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’. If the distribution of sand is to be predicted for this site a survey targeting this BSH will be required.

Figure 5. CI tree output for the 2012 block of data classification process.

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 14

Figure 6. Updated map of Broadscale habitats based on newly acquired survey data.

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 15 4.3 Quality of the updated habitat map The majority of this map where good quality acoustic data was available attained a score of 80 from the MESH Confidence Assessment Tool (Figure 7). This score is considered good, given that the maximum possible score for a purely physical map is 88. The small proportion of the site where good quality acoustic data was not available attained a score of 22. The overall quality of the updated habitat map can be classed as medium/high.

Figure 7. Overall MESH confidence score for the updated broadscale habitat map.

4.4 Broadscale habitats identified Grab and video groundtruthing samples were classified as the BSHs ‘A 5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’, ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’, ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’. However, the results from the conditional inference trees undertaken on each block of data stated that there was no statistical difference in acoustic signature (backscatter, bathymetry and its derivatives) and the observed substrate. It was therefore decided that the seabed at the North of Celtic Deep rMCZ should be classified as the BSH hybrid ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’. This is because groundtruthing data suggest that these are the predominant Broadscale habitat types within the site. However, as previously mentioned, it has not been possible to calculate the extent of each Broadscale habitat type individually due to the similarity in their acoustic signatures. The BSH ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ was identified from the ground truth samples. However, it was not possible to define its extent across the North of Celtic Deep

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 16 rMCZ due to the limited number of observations across the site. Similarly, there was just one observation of the BSH ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’ within the rMCZ, therefore it was not possible to determine its extent within the rMCZ (Table 5).

Table 5. Broadscale habitats identified in this rMCZ. Broadscale Habitat Type Spatial extent Spatial extent according to (EUNIS Level 3) according to the SAD the updated habitat map A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 2.33 km2 Not observed A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments N/A 655.63 km2 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment 616.88 km2 N/A* A5.2 Subtidal sand 32.62 km2 3 point records* A5.3 Subtidal mud N/A 1 point record* A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments N/A N/A* * Although this BSH was identified during the 2012 survey, its extent could not be calculated.

4.5 Habitat FOCI identified The habitat FOCI in Table 6 were identified from analysis of survey data . The habitat FOCI ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’ was identified from stills taken during a single video tow. However, the presence of this habitat FOCI is difficult to confirm with any confidence from seabed imagery alone and is best evidenced using physical substratum samples. Therefore, the presence and extent of this habitat FOCI within this site remains unknown.

Table 6. Habitat FOCI identified in this rMCZ. Spatial extent according Presence according to Habitat FOCI to the SAD the updated habitat map Subtidal Sands and Gravels* 599.90 km2 N/A Peat and Clay Exposures Not reported 4 point records * Removed from list of FOCI in July 2015. See Corrigendum.

4.6 Species FOCI identified The species FOCI 'Ocean Quahog (Arctica islandica)', listed in the SAD as a feature within the site but not part of the proposals for its designation, was recorded during the survey (Figure 8; Table 7). One juvenile individual of A. islandica was recorded. No other species FOCI were found.

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 17

Figure 8. Location of the species FOCI ‘Ocean Quahog (Arctica islandica)’ identified at this rMCZ.

Table 7. Species FOCI identified in this rMCZ. Presence according to the Identified during evidence Species FOCI SAD gathering survey Low or limited mobility species Ocean quahog (Arctica islandica) Present* 1 point record Highly mobile species None observed N/A N/A * Mentioned in SAD but not included in recommendations for designation of this MCZ.

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 processed 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 was carried out by Cefas following standard laboratory practice and the results checked following the recommendations of the National Marine Biological Analytical Quality Control (NMBAQC) scheme (Mason, 2011).

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 18 4.7.3 Infaunal samples from grabs Infaunal samples were processed by Thomson Unicomarine Ltd following standard laboratory practices and results checked following the recommendations of the NMBAQC scheme (Worsfold et al., 2010).

4.7.4 Video and still images and analysis Video and photographic stills were processed by Thomson Unicomarine Ltd in accordance with the guidance documents developed by Cefas and the 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 survey has provided substantial, robust evidence for the presence of the mapped habitats. The quality of the derived habitat map, in which a hybrid BSH class has been mapped, is assessed to be Medium/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 Broadscale habitats ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ and ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’ were observed within the groundtruthing samples, it was not possible to predict the extent of these BSHs across the whole site due to the insufficient number of observations of each. The observations are also not representative of the whole site as they are all clustered within a small area. The groundtruthing survey was undertaken before acoustic data was available to inform the positioning of ground truth sample locations. Instead, the sampling strategy was based on the SAD map, consequently, some areas of the seafloor with elevated heterogeneity were not targeted for video and grab sampling. Since it is impractical (and undesirable) to sample the entire area of the site with grabs and video, there is a chance that a BSH or FOCI may exist within the site but has not been recorded, especially if it is limited in extent.

4.9 Observations of human impacts on the seabed There is no evidence from the multibeam bathymetry or backscatter imagery of any human activity other than the presence of 16 previously charted wrecks (Appendix 3).

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 19 5 Conclusions

5.1 Presence and extent of Broadscale habitats

5.1.1 Presence • The 2012 dedicated groundtruthing survey has confirmed the presence of the BSHs ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ and ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ that were included in the recommendations made by the SAD for designating this site as an MCZ.

• The 2012 dedicated groundtruthing survey has confirmed the presence of BSHs ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’. These BSHs were not included in the recommendations made by the SAD for designating this site as an MCZ.

• 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’, representing a mosaic of the BSHs in question.

• The 2012 dedicated groundtruthing survey has not confirmed the presence of the BSH ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’ that was included in the recommendations made by the SAD for designating this site as an MCZ.

5.1.2 Extent • The spatial extent of the BSH hybrid ‘A5.1/5.4 Subtidal coarse/mixed sediments’ is 655.63 km2. This was not identified in the SAD habitat map.

• The spatial extent of the BSHs ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’, ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’, ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ could not be determined during the mapping process.

5.2 Presence and extent of habitat FOCI

5.2.1 Presence • The 2012 dedicated groundtruthing survey has confirmed the presence of the habitat FOCI ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’ at this site. This habitat FOCI was not included in the recommendations made by the SAD for designating this site as an MCZ.

5.2.2 Extent and distribution • The spatial extent of the habitat FOCI ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’ on the updated habitat map could not be determined, owing to the limited number of observations of this habitat FOCI (four point records).

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 20 5.3 Presence and distribution of species FOCI

5.3.1 Low or limited mobility species • The species FOCI ‘Ocean Quahog (Arctica islandica)’ was recorded at a single station during the 2012 dedicated groundtruthing survey.

5.3.2 Highly mobile species FOCI • No highly mobile species FOCI were recorded at this site by the 2012 dedicated groundtruthing survey. This observation is consistent with the evidence presented in the SAD.

5.4 Evidence of human activities impacting the seabed There is no evidence on the multibeam bathymetry or backscatter imagery of any human activity, other than the presence of 16 previously charted wrecks.

North of Celtic Deep 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. 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. 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 28/09/2017] Hothorn, T., Hornik, K., Zeileis, A. (2006). Unbiased Recursive Partitioning: A Conditional Inference Framework. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, Volume 15(3): 651-674. Irish Sea Conservation Zones (ISCZ). (2011). Final recommendations for Marine Conservation Zones in the Irish Sea www.irishseaconservation.org.uk [Accessed 04/08/2015]. 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. Lot 1 - North of Celtic Deep Gardline Geosurvey (2013). 587 pp. Lot 3 - North of Celtic Deep Acquisition Report (2012). Gardline Report Ref 9059, 189 pp. 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: Predictive mapping of seabed habitats in UK waters. JNCC Report, No. 446. http://jncc.defra.gov.uk/ukseamapNatural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2010). The Marine Conservation Zone Project: Ecological Network Guidance. Sheffield and Peterborough, UK.

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 22 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) 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 28/09/2017] Whomersley, P., Ware, S., and Vanstaen, K. (2012). North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Survey Report. 39 pp. 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 28/09/2017]

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 23 Data sources

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

North of Celtic Deep 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 b Broadscale habitat should seek to protect the variety of sub-types known to occur in the region.

North of Celtic Deep 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. *** Cold-Water 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.

North of Celtic Deep 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. *** Fan mussel should be correctly described as Atrina fragilis. **** 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. ***** 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. .

North of Celtic Deep 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.

North of Celtic Deep 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 what 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 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.

North of Celtic Deep 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.

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 30 Appendices Appendix 1. Survey metadata (CEND0312) Date Stn No. Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 07/02/2012 209 NCD-C47 HC 52.25043 -5.58527 07/02/2012 211 NCD-C46 HC 52.24266 -5.64265 07/02/2012 213 NCD-C44 HC 52.21624 -5.60288 07/02/2012 214 NCD-C44 DC 52.21615 -5.60340 07/02/2012 216 NCD-C41 HC 52.18987 -5.56387 07/02/2012 218 NCD-C45 HC 52.22406 -5.54596 07/02/2012 220 NCD-C42 HC 52.19749 -5.50664 07/02/2012 222 NCD-C43 HC 52.20506 -5.44896 07/02/2012 223 NCD-C43 DC 52.20620 -5.44753 07/02/2012 225 NCD-S18 HC 52.18813 -5.39804 07/02/2012 227 NCD-C39 HC 52.17871 -5.40963 07/02/2012 228 C39-S15 DC 52.16245 -5.41143 07/02/2012 229 NCD-S15 HC 52.16248 -5.41156 07/02/2012 230 NCD-S15 DC 52.16311 -5.41117 07/02/2012 232 NCD-C35 HC 0.00000 0.00000 07/02/2012 234 NCD-C27 HC 52.11766 -5.38815 07/02/2012 235 NCD-C27 DC 52.11706 -5.38831 07/02/2012 237 NCD-S10 HC 52.13669 -5.42485 07/02/2012 238 NCD-C33 HC 52.14442 -5.42773 07/02/2012 239 NCD-S13 HC 52.14959 -5.41817 07/02/2012 240 NCD-S13 DC 52.14903 -5.21490 07/02/2012 242 NCD-S17 HC 52.17945 -5.46217 07/02/2012 243 NCD-S17 DC 52.17897 -5.46298 07/02/2012 245 NCD-S16 HC 52.16648 -5.46898 07/02/2012 246 NCD-S14 HC 52.15391 -5.47564 07/02/2012 247 NCD-S12 HC 52.14397 -5.46138 07/02/2012 248 NCD-S12 DC 52.14433 -5.46065 07/02/2012 249 NCD-S11 HC 52.14110 -5.48318 07/02/2012 250 NCD-C31 HC 52.13675 -5.48524 07/02/2012 251 NCD-S8 HC 52.13158 -5.46779 07/02/2012 253 NCD-C25 HC 52.11036 -5.44531 07/02/2012 254 NCD-C25 DC 52.10943 -5.44530 07/02/2012 255 NCD-S4 HC 52.10840 -5.46004 07/02/2012 256 NCD-S6 HC 52.11843 -5.47447 07/02/2012 257 NCD-CS3 HC 52.10574 -5.48145 08/02/2012 258 NCD-C23 HC 52.10242 -5.50262 08/02/2012 259 NCD-C23 DC 52.10240 -5.50314 08/02/2012 261 NCD-S2 HC 52.08954 -5.50951 08/02/2012 262 NCD-S1 HC 52.08786 -5.52959 08/02/2012 264 NCD-C22 HC 52.09454 -5.55948 08/02/2012 266 NCD-C29 HC 52.12924 -5.54389 08/02/2012 267 NCD-C29 DC 52.12931 -5.54230 08/02/2012 269 NCD-C37 HC 52.16413 -5.52339 08/02/2012 272 NCD-C36 HC 52.15559 -5.58152

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 31 Date Stn No. Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 08/02/2012 274 NCD-C40 HC 52.18222 -5.62131 08/02/2012 276 NCD-C38 HC 52.17453 -5.67843 08/02/2012 277 NCD-C38 DC 52.17548 -5.67921 08/02/2012 279 NCD-C32 HC 52.1416 -5.6960 08/02/2012 281 NCD-C34 HC 52.14816 -5.63950 08/02/2012 283 NCD-59 HC 52.1372 -5.6045 08/02/2012 284 NCD59 CS 52.1370 -5.6043 08/02/2012 286 NCD-S7 HC 52.12947 -5.56881 08/02/2012 287 NCD-S7 CS 52.12947 -5.56881 08/02/2012 290 NCD-S5 HC 52.11077 -5.61836 08/02/2012 292 NCD-C21 HC 52.08671 -5.61805 08/02/2012 294 NCD-C26 HC 52.11376 -5.65668 08/02/2012 294 NCD-C26 HC 52.11380 -5.65632 08/02/2012 295 NCD-C26 CS 52.11336 -5.65739 08/02/2012 297 NCD-C24 HC 52.10614 -5.71411 08/02/2012 298 NCD-C30 HC 52.13260 -5.75359 08/02/2012 299 NCD-C30 CS 52.13275 -5.75366 08/02/2012 301 NCD-C19 HC 52.07223 -5.73177 08/02/2012 303 NCD-C20 HC 52.0797 -5.6746 08/02/2012 303 NCD-C20 HC 52.0802 -5.6741 08/02/2012 303 NCD-C20 HC 52.0802 -5.6743 08/02/2012 305 NCD-C17 HC 52.0535 -5.6351 08/02/2012 306 NCD-C17 CS 52.0542 -5.6345 08/02/2012 308 NCD-C13 HC 52.0189 -5.6530 08/02/2012 310 NCD-C13 HC 52.0456 -5.6922 09/02/2012 312 NCD-C12 HC 52.0115 -5.7099 09/02/2012 312 NCD-C12 HC 52.0116 -5.7098 09/02/2012 313 NCD-C12 CS 52.0116 -5.7103 09/02/2012 315 NCD-C15 HC 52.0378 -5.7493 09/02/2012 317 NCD-C18 HC 52.0642 -5.7886 09/02/2012 320 NCD-C14 HC 52.0301 -5.8065 09/02/2012 322 NCD-C11 HC 52.0039 -5.7670 09/02/2012 324 NCD-C8 HC 51.9774 -5.7276 09/02/2012 326 NCD-C4 HC 51.94334 -5.74525 09/02/2012 327 NCD-C4 CS 51.94254 -5.74592 09/02/2012 329 NCD-C7 HC 51.96959 -5.78497 09/02/2012 331 NCS-C10 HC 51.98822 -5.88119 09/02/2012 333 NCD-C9 HC 51.98822 -5.88119 09/02/2012 334 NCD-C9 CS 51.98987 -5.87963 09/02/2012 336 NCD-C6 HC 51.96214 -5.84138 09/02/2012 338 NCD-C3 HC 51.93536 -5.80237 07/02/2012 230 NCD-S15 DC 52.16311 -5.41117 07/02/2012 232 NCD-C35 HC 52.15193 -5.37023 07/02/2012 234 NCD-C27 HC 52.11766 -5.38815 07/02/2012 235 NCD-C27 DC 52.11706 -5.38831 07/02/2012 237 NCD-S10 HC 52.13669 -5.42485 Key: HC - Mini Hamon Grab, DC - Drop camera, CS – Camera sledge.

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 32 Appendix 2. Outputs from acoustic surveys

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 33

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 34 Appendix 3. Evidence of human activities within the rMCZ

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 35 Appendix 4. Species list Species list for grab samples (Species FOCI indicated by grey shading). Percentage occurrence was calculated as the ‘Number of samples where the species occurs/total number of samples x 100’.

Taxa % Occurrence SPONGES Porifera 57 Sycon ciliata 10 Cliona 23 Dysidea fragilis 20 HYDROIDS, CORALS, JELLYFISH, ANEMONES Aglaophenia tubulifera 56 Hydrallmania falcata 34 Tridentata distans 33 Sertularia 31 Eudendrium 28 Halecium 20 Tubulariidae 20 Sarcodictyon roseum 20 Actiniaria 18 Anthoathecata 16 Halopteris catharina 13 Sertularella 13 Alcyonium digitatum 13 Epizoanthus couchii 13 Diphasia 10 Calycella syringa 8 Nemertesia 8 Cerianthus lloydii 8 Abietinaria abietina 7 Tamarisca tamarisca 7 Clytia gracilis 7 Lafoea dumosa 3 Plumularia setacea 3 Campanulariidae 3 Clytia paulensis 3 FLATWORMS Turbellaria 3 Fecampia erythrocephala 3 RIBBON WORMS Nemertea 87 HORSESHOE WORMS Phoronis 20 PEANUT WORMS Golfingia elongata 36 Aspidosiphon muelleri 25 Golfingia vulgaris 8 Nephasoma minutum 7 Nephasoma 5 Golfingia margaritacea 2 Phascolion strombus 2 SEGMENTED WORMS Glycera lapidum (agg) 82 Notomastus 80 Laonice bahusiensis 75 Sabellaria spinulosa 70

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 36 Taxa % Occurrence Mediomastus fragilis 69 Lysidice unicornis 67 Syllis "species D" 64 Aonides paucibranchiata 64 Polycirrus 64 Hydroides norvegicus 62 Caulleriella alata 57 Syllis cornuta (agg) 54 Lumbrineris gracilis 54 Dipolydora coeca (agg) 52 Ampharete lindstroemi 52 Serpulidae 51 Harmothoe impar (agg) 49 Pseudopotamilla reniformis 49 Pholoe baltica (sensu Petersen) 46 Eulalia mustela 46 Syllis variegata 43 Spirobranchus triqueter 39 Sclerocheilus minutus 38 Autolytus 36 Eumida sanguinea 34 Nereis zonata 33 Spirobranchus lamarcki 33 Pholoe inornata (sensu Petersen) 30 Minuspio (Type A) 30 Paradoneis (Type B) 28 Phisidia aurea 28 Chone 28 Eunereis longissima 26 Spiophanes kroyeri 26 Grania 26 Lepidonotus squamatus 25 Dipolydora caulleryi 25 Pseudomystides limbata 23 Protodorvillea kefersteini 23 Schistomeringos rudolphi 23 Diplocirrus stopbowitzi 21 Clymenura 21 Nicolea venustula 21 Serpula vermicularis 21 Aphelochaeta "species A" 20 Thelepus cincinnatus 20 Terebellides stroemi 20 Psamathe fusca 18 Orbinia sertulata 18 Notoproctus 18 Sabellides octocirrata 18 Lanassa venusta 18 Loimia medusa 18 Sphaerosyllis bulbosa 16 Monticellina 16 Peresiella clymenoides 16 Galathowenia oculata 16 Owenia fusiformis 16 Eupolymnia nesidensis 16 Goniadella gracilis 15 Nephtys kersivalensis 15 Syllis 15 Aricidea cerrutii 15

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 37 Taxa % Occurrence Praxillella affinis 15 Asclerocheilus intermedius 15 Harmothoe extenuata 13 Ophelia borealis 13 Pista elongata 13 Trichobranchus glacialis 13 Eulalia bilineata 11 Odontosyllis fulgurans 11 Notocirrus scoticus 11 Tharyx killariensis 11 Nephtys cirrosa 10 Eusyllis blomstrandi 10 Cirrophorus branchiatus 10 Chaetozone zetlandica 10 Spio armata 10 Glycera fallax 8 Glycinde nordmanni 8 Malmgrenia arenicolae 8 Sphaerodorum gracilis 8 Trypanosyllis coeliaca 8 Chaetopterus 8 Aurospio banyulensis 8 Spiophanes bombyx 8 Scalibregma inflatum 8 Nicolea zostericola 8 Jasmineira elegans 8 Sabella pavonina 8 Ophiodromus pallidus 7 Eteone longa (agg) 7 Notophyllum foliosum 7 Malmgrenia mcintoshi 7 Sthenelais boa 7 Exogone verugera 7 Chaetozone christiei (Type B) 7 Dodecaceria 7 Polygordius 7 Euchone 7 Circeis spirillum 7 Nereimyra punctata 5 Nephtys caeca 5 Websterinereis glauca 5 Pisione remota 5 Harmothoe fragilis 5 Malmgrenia ljungmani 5 Exogone naidina 5 Proceraea 5 Syllides 5 Syllis "species G" 5 Syllis parapari 5 Aricidea catherinae 5 Phyllochaetopterus 5 Pseudopolydora paucibranchiata 5 Maldanidae 5 Nicomache 5 Travisia forbesii 5 Scalibregma celticum 5 Eupolymnia nebulosa 5 Sabellidae 5 Glycera oxycephala 3

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 38 Taxa % Occurrence Goniada maculata 3 Podarkeopsis capensis 3 Anaitides rosea 3 Eulalia viridis 3 Eumida bahusiensis 3 Eumida ockelmanni 3 Hesionura elongata 3 Mysta picta 3 Gattyana cirrhosa 3 Harmothoe aspera 3 Procerastea 3 Sphaerosyllis pirifera 3 Sphaerosyllis taylori 3 Streptodonta exsulis 3 Syllis armillaris 3 Paradoneis lyra 3 Cirriformia 3 Scolelepis korsuni 3 Macrochaeta 3 Flabelligera affinis 3 Arenicolidae 3 Euclymene 3 Praxillura longissima 3 Scalibregma celticum (Type A) 3 Melinna elisabethae 3 Terebellidae 3 Pistella lornensis 3 Branchiomma bombyx 3 Filograna implexa 3 Metavermilia multicristata 3 Salmacina dysteri 3 Nephtys 2 Anaitides lineata 2 Eulalia aurea 2 Eulalia expusilla 2 Adyte hyalina 2 Harmothoe clavigera 2 Harmothoe glabra 2 Harmothoe imbricata 2 Lepidonotus clava 2 Malmgrenia castanea 2 Subadyte pellucida 2 Sthenelais 2 Sthenelais limicola 2 Amblyosyllis formosa 2 Eurysyllis tuberculata 2 Odontosyllis gibba 2 Sphaerosyllis tetralix 2 Marphysa bellii 2 Marphysa sanguinea 2 Lumbrineris futilis 2 Scoletoma magnidentata 2 Arabella iricolor 2 Scoloplos armiger 2 Paraonidae 2 Chaetozone "species D" 2 Magelona alleni 2 Poecilochaetus serpens 2 Malacoceros jirkovi 2

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 39 Taxa % Occurrence Scolelepis korsuni (Type A) 2 Heteroclymene robusta 2 Petaloproctus 2 Amaeana trilobata 2 Thelepus setosus 2 Fabriciola baltica 2 Jasmineira caudata 2 Spirorbidae 2 CRUSTACEANS Monodaeus couchii 52 Pisidia longicornis 49 Verruca stroemia 46 Achelia echinata (agg) 38 Balanus crenatus 31 Ampelisca spinipes 28 Gammaropsis maculata 26 Maerella tenuimana 25 Galathea intermedia 25 Leptocheirus hirsutimanus 18 Janira maculosa 15 Callipallene 13 Othomaera othonis 13 Urothoe elegans 11 Thoracica 10 Jassa 10 Ebalia tuberosa 10 Cheirocratus 8 Unciola crenatipalma 8 Eurynome 8 Hyas coarctatus 8 Iphimedia spatula 7 Dyopedos monacantha 7 Eualus pusiolus 7 Nototropis vedlomensis 5 Ericthonius 5 Hippomedon denticulatus 5 Animoceradocus semiserratus 5 Parapleustes bicuspis 5 Munna 5 Pagurus bernhardus 5 Upogebia deltaura 5 Anoplodactylus petiolatus 3 Heteromysis microps 3 Amphipoda 3 Iphimedia minuta 3 Iphimedia obesa 3 Amphilochus manudens 3 Caprella linearis 3 Unciola planipes 3 Gammaropsis cornuta 3 Leucothoe incisa 3 Lysianassa plumosa 3 Perrierella audouiniana 3 Phtisica marina 3 Dyopedos porrectus 3 Eurydice truncata 3 Atelecyclus rotundatus 3 Callianassa subterranea 3 Galathea dispersa 3

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 40 Taxa % Occurrence Galathea strigosa 3 Munida rugosa 3 Hyas araneus 3 Inachus 3 Pinnotheres pisum 3 Endeis spinosa 2 Nymphon brevirostre 2 Nymphon hirtum 2 Pycnogonum littorale 2 Lernaeodiscus 2 Copepoda 2 Nebalia 2 Iphimedia eblanae 2 Ampelisca diadema 2 Aoridae 2 Aora gracilis 2 Autonoe longipes 2 Leptocheirus pectinatus 2 Bathyporeia elegans 2 Bathyporeia gracilis 2 Bathyporeia guilliamsoniana 2 Cheirocratus intermedius 2 Photis longicaudata 2 Ericthonius punctatus 2 Jassa pusilla 2 Leucothoe procera 2 Stenula rubrovittata 2 Eurydice inermis 2 Bodotria scorpioides 2 Eudorella truncatula 2 Alpheus macrocheles 2 Ebalia 2 Eurynome aspera 2 Eurynome spinosa 2 Anapagurus laevis 2 Pandalina brevirostris 2 Pasiphaea sivado 2 Pilumnus hirtellus 2 Liocarcinus pusillus 2 Upogebia pusilla 2 Akessonia occulta 2 MOLLUSCS Leptochiton asellus 77 Modiolus 77 Glycymeris glycymeris 51 Timoclea ovata 48 Anomiidae 44 Nucula nucleus 38 Sphenia binghami 31 Astarte sulcata 30 Hiatella arctica 28 Kellia suborbicularis 25 Gouldia minima 25 Abra alba 16 Thracia 16 Emarginula fissura 15 Spisula 15 Abra prismatica 15 Circomphalus casina 15

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 41 Taxa % Occurrence Eleutheromenia sierra 13 Palliolum tigerinum 13 Parvicardium ovale 13 Clausinella fasciata 10 Gibbula tumida 8 Onchidoris 8 Modiolus modiolus 8 Pectinidae 8 Astartidae 8 Eulima bilineata 7 Musculus subpictus 7 Pododesmus patelliformis 7 Kurtiella bidentata 7 Gari tellinella 7 Moerella pygmaea 7 Diplodonta rotundata 7 Lyonsia norwegica 7 Acanthochitona crinitus 5 Hanleya hanleyi 5 Calliostoma zizyphinum 5 Clelandella miliaris 5 Doto 5 Flabellinidae 5 Palliolum furtivum 5 Goodallia triangularis 5 Diodora graeca 3 Neogastropoda 3 Hinia incrassata 3 Montacuta substriata 3 Tellimya ferruginosa 3 Gari costulata 3 Polititapes rhomboides 3 Scutopus ventrolineatus 2 Neomenia carinata 2 Trochidae 2 Capulus ungaricus 2 Polygireulima polita 2 Hyala vitrea 2 Euspira nitida 2 Alvania punctura 2 Velutina velutina 2 Buccinum undatum 2 Aegires punctilucens 2 Limacia clavigera 2 Polycera faeroensis 2 Nucula hanleyi 2 Limaria loscombi 2 Heteranomia squamula 2 Aequipecten opercularis 2 Arctica islandica 2 Hemilepton nitidum 2 Spisula elliptica 2 Gari 2 Chamelea striatula 2 Tapes 2 Venerupis senegalensis 2 Mya truncata 2 BRYOZOANS Escharella ventricosa 64

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 42 Taxa % Occurrence Electra pilosa 56 Chorizopora brongniarti 54 Pyripora catenularia 46 Tubulipora 43 Schizomavella linearis 43 Flustra foliacea 43 Microporella ciliata 41 Cauloramphus spiniferum 38 Schizomavella auriculata 36 Amphiblestrum auritum 36 Callopora dumerilii 36 Plagioecia sarniensis 33 Alcyonidioides mytili 33 Penetrantia concharum 31 Turbicellepora avicularis 31 Escharella immersa 31 Hippothoa flagellum 31 Crisia 30 Disporella hispida 30 Neolagenipora collaris 30 Fenestrulina malusii 30 Scrupocellaria scruposa 28 Phaeostachys spinifera 28 Porella concinna 26 Escharella variolosa 25 Plagioecia patina 23 Alcyonidium diaphanum 23 Cellepora pumicosa 23 Escharoides mamillata 23 Amathia lendigera 21 Hippothoa divaricata 21 Escharina vulgaris 21 Crisidia cornuta 20 Alcyonidium parasiticum 18 Cryptosula pallasiana 18 Schizotheca 18 Vesicularia spinosa 15 Cellaria 15 Escharina johnstoni 15 Schizoporella 15 Reptadeonella violacea 13 Conopeum reticulum 13 Pentapora fascialis 11 Entalophoroecia deflexa 8 Eurystrotos compacta 8 Membraniporella nitida 8 Escharella labiosa 8 Parasmittina trispinosa 8 Aetea 7 Amphiblestrum flemingii 7 Puellina innominata 7 Smittoidea reticulata 7 Omalosecosa ramulosa 5 Reptadeonella insidiosa 3 Cribrilina punctata 3 Eucratea loricata 3 Smittina crystallina 3 Schizomavella discoidea 2

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 43 Taxa % Occurrence SEA STARS, URCHINS, SEA CUCUMBERS Echinocyamus pusillus 64 Ophiactis balli 62 Amphipholis squamata 44 Amphiuridae 30 Ophiothrix fragilis 18 Psammechinus miliaris 10 Ophiuridae 7 Cucumariidae 7 Crossaster papposus 3 Amphiura filiformis 3 Echinoida 3 Amphiura securigera 2 Echinocardium flavescens 2 Spatangus purpureus 2 FISH Ammodytes tobianus 7 Lebetus scorpioides 2 ACORN WORMS Enteropneusta 2 SEA SQUIRTS Pyura tessellata 51 Dendrodoa grossularia 49 Ascidiacea 11 Microcosmus claudicans 7 Ascidiella aspersa 5 Ascidiella scabra 5 Molgula 3 Polycarpa fibrosa 2 Polycarpa pomaria 2 NEMATODA Nematoda 56 ALGAE Plocamium cartilagineum 2 PROTOZOA Lagotia viridis 23 ENTOPROCTA Loxosomella atkinsae 2 Pedicellina 2

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 44 Species list for video samples (Species FOCI indicated by grey shading). ‘Number of video samples where the species occurs/total number of video samples x 100’.

Taxa % Occurrence SPONGES Porifera 10 Raspailia 1 HYDROIDS, CORALS, JELLYFISH, ANEMONES Hydroides 16 CONICA 13 Spirobranchus 9 Halecium 7 Alcyonium digitatum 6 Cellaria 3 Nemertesia 3 Tubulariidae 3 Abietinaria abietina 2 Nemertesia antennina 2 Sagartia troglodytes 2 Sertularella 2 Urticina 2 Actiniaria 1 Capnea sanguinea 1 Caryophyllia smithii 1 Cerianthus lloydii 1 Hydrallmania falcata 1 Metridium senile 1 Nemertesia ramosa 1 Sagartiogeton undatus 1 SEGMENTED WORMS Sabellidae 9 Sabellaria spinulosa 6 Sabella pavonina 5 Polychaeta 2 Chaetopterus 1 Lanice conchilega 1 Salmacina 1 Serpula vermicularis 1 Serpulidae 1 CRUSTACEANS Paguridae 11 Balanus crenatus 6 Inachus 5 Pagurus bernhardus 5 Ebalia 2 Hyas 2 Munida 2 Cancer pagurus 1 Decapoda 1 Isopoda 1 Mysidae 1

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 45 Taxa % Occurrence Processa 1 MOLLUSCS Colus gracilis 6 Clelandella miliaris 6 Aequipecten opercularis 3 Buccinum undatum 3 Hinia incrassata 3 Ocenebra erinaceus 3 Neptunea antiqua 2 Calliostoma zizyphinum 1 Chlamys varia 1 Emarginula fissura 1 Gibbula cineraria 1 Palliolum tigerinum 1 Trivia 1 Trophonopsis muricata 1 Turridae 1 BRYOZOANS Bryozoa 11 Pentapora fascialis 4 Flustra foliacea 3 SEA STARS, URCHINS, SEA CUCUMBERS Asterias rubens 13 Crossaster papposus 6 Ophiura 4 Echinus esculentus 3 Antedon bifida 2 Luidia ciliaris 2 Luidia sarsi 2 Psammechinus miliaris 2 Antedon bifida 2 Henricia 1 Ophiothrix fragilis 1 FISH Osteichthyes 4 Scyliorhinus canicula 2 Ammodytes 1 Buglossidium luteum 1 Leucoraja naevus 1 Lophius piscatorius 1 Zoarces viviparus 1 ALGAE Corallinaceae 1 SEA SQUIRTS Ascidiacea 6

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 46 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 (%) 344 NCD_C1 51.91988 -5.91631 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 34.87 59.71 5.42 340 NCD_C2 51.92774 -5.85935 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 35.61 60.33 4.06 338 NCD_C3 51.93536 -5.80237 gravelly muddy sand A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 13.16 71.36 15.49 326 NCD_C4 51.94346 -5.74517 gravelly muddy sand A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 26.39 56.35 17.26 342 NCD_C5 51.95416 -5.89933 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 44.65 42.97 12.38 336 NCD_C6 51.96214 -5.84138 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 31.33 61.70 6.97 329 NCD_C7 51.96959 -5.78497 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 36.62 44.13 19.25 324 NCD_C8 51.97740 -5.72757 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 41.23 55.99 2.78 333 NCD_C9 51.98822 -5.88119 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 42.26 53.75 3.99 331 NCD_C10 51.99595 -5.82420 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 33.90 45.09 21.01 322 NCD_C11 52.00388 -5.76703 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 59.90 23.64 16.46 312 NCD_C12 52.01150 -5.70990 gravelly muddy sand A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 23.26 58.51 18.23 308 NCD_C13 52.01887 -5.65301 gravelly muddy sand A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 24.14 61.54 14.31 310 NCD_C16 52.04555 -5.69224 gravelly muddy sand A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 28.31 53.27 18.42 320 NCD_C14 52.03010 -5.80654 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 34.23 56.35 9.42 315 NCD_C15 52.03776 -5.74931 gravelly muddy sand A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 14.14 74.98 10.88 305 NCD_C17 52.05352 -5.63511 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 45.67 47.67 6.66 317 NCD_C18 52.06418 -5.78860 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 35.78 53.26 10.96 301 NCD_C19 52.07223 -5.73177 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 37.12 38.57 24.31 303 NCD_C20 52.07965 -5.67455 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 36.29 52.11 11.60 292 NCD_C21 52.08747 -5.61695 gravelly muddy sand A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 24.01 64.21 11.78 264 NCD_C22 52.09454 -5.55948 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 55.87 43.12 1.01 258 NCD_C23 52.10242 -5.50262 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 25.43 73.99 0.58 297 NCD_C24 52.10614 -5.71411 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 47.97 48.89 3.13 253 NCD_C25 52.11000 -5.44531 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 18.11 81.89 0.00 294 NCD_C26 52.11376 -5.65668 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 36.60 58.44 4.96 289 NCD_C28 52.12140 -5.59934 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 41.25 53.75 5.00 298 NCD_C30 52.13266 -5.75362 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 38.98 46.62 14.40 250 NCD_C31 52.13705 -5.48497 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 15.58 84.42 0.00 279 NCD_C32 52.14159 -5.69596 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 30.19 54.44 15.37

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 47 Stn No. Stn Code Latitude Longitude Sediment Description EUNIS Level 3/BSH Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt/clay (%) 238 NCD_C33 52.14425 -5.42793 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 55.82 41.31 2.87 281 NCD_C34 52.14816 -5.63950 gravelly muddy sand A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 24.87 57.60 17.53 232 NCD_C35 52.15193 -5.37023 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 21.64 73.07 5.29 269 NCD_C37 52.16323 -5.52424 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 20.06 73.14 6.80 276 NCD_C38 52.17453 -5.67849 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 5.05 90.59 4.35 227 NCD_C39 52.17871 -5.40963 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 30.86 69.14 0.00 274 NCD_C40 52.18222 -5.62131 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 32.19 48.00 19.81 216 NCD_C41 52.18987 -5.56387 slightly gravelly muddy A5.3 – Subtidal Mud 1.05 74.11 24.84 sand 220 NCD_C42 52.19749 -5.50664 gravelly muddy sand A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 15.83 58.36 25.81 222 NCD_C43 52.20506 -5.44896 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 27.05 68.90 4.05 218 NCD_C45 52.22406 -5.54596 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 18.92 77.93 3.14 211 NCD_C46 52.24266 -5.64265 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 38.12 58.49 3.38 209 NCD_C47 52.25043 -5.58527 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 32.53 62.56 4.91 262 NCD_S1 52.08786 -5.52959 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 5.97 91.56 2.47 261 NCD_S2 52.08860 -5.51103 slightly gravelly sand A5.2 – Sublittoral Sand 4.38 91.31 4.31 257 NCD_S3 52.10574 -5.48145 slightly gravelly sand A5.2 – Sublittoral Sand 2.08 97.92 0.00 255 NCD_S4 52.10844 -5.45995 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 31.87 68.13 0.00 290 NCD_S5 52.11077 -5.61836 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 64.61 21.65 13.74 256 NCD_S6 52.11843 -5.47447 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 20.96 79.04 0.00 286 NCD_S7 52.12947 -5.56881 muddy sandy gravel A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 49.01 45.37 5.62 251 NCD_S8 52.13115 -5.46795 slightly gravelly sand A5.2 – Sublittoral Sand 3.71 96.29 0.00 283 NCD_S9 52.13724 -5.60450 gravelly muddy sand A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 21.73 63.58 14.69 237 NCD_S10 52.13662 -5.42494 gravelly muddy sand A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 23.67 59.57 16.75 249 NCD_S11 54.14122 -5.48308. gravelly mud A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments 5.19 18.15 76.66 247 NCD_S12 52.14396 -5.46124 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 16.74 83.26 0.00 239 NCD_S13 52.14983 -5.41786 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 8.48 88.00 3.52 246 NCD_S14 52.15391 -5.47564 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 14.78 85.22 0.00 229 NCD_S15 52.16248 -5.41156 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 11.80 84.57 3.63 245 NCD_S16 52.16648 -5.46898 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 8.13 91.87 0.00 242 NCD_S17 52.17957 -5.46199 gravelly sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 27.38 72.22 0.40 225 NCD_S18 52.18813 -5.39804 sandy gravel A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment 41.02 55.97 3.01

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 48 Appendix 6. BSH/EUNIS Level 3 descriptions derived from video and stills Station Station No. of No. Code Latitude Longitude stills Sediment Description EUNIS Level 3/BSH MNCR Code 214 C44 52.21615 -5.6034 21 Mixture of medium to course sand, gravel, A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS cobbles, pebbles and empty shells 223 C43 52.20506 -5.44896 3 Pebbles with varying coverage of gravel, sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS and cobbles 230 S15 52.16307 -5.41118 3 Sand with cobbles, pebbles, empty shell and A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS gravel 235 C27 52.11706 -5.3883 8 Sand with some gravel and cobbles. A few A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS infrequent boulders were also present 240 S13 52.14903 -5.41913 3 Medium to course sand with small amounts of A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS cobbles and pebbles 243 S17 52.17897 -5.46298 19 Sand and gravel with empty shells A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS 248 S12 52.14433 -5.46065 7 Sandy with sparse boulders and cobbles A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS 254 C25 52.11052 -5.44499 16 Medium to course sand, with varying amounts of A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS boulders, cobbles and pebbles 259 C23 52.1024 -5.50313 6 Sand, gravel, and empty shells A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS 267 C29 52.12931 -5.54229 3 Pebbly gravel with empty shells A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS 277 C38 52.17548 -5.67921 3 Gravelly sand with empty shells and pebbles A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS 295 C26 52.11255 -5.65815 3 Pebbles with some empty shells and a few A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS cobbles 299 C30 52.13424 -5.75273 3 Empty shells with gravelly, muddy sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS 306 C17 52.05532 -5.63382 3 Gravel, with smaller amounts of pebbles and sand A5.1 - Subtidal Coarse Sediment SS.SCS.OCS 327 C4 51.94176 -5.74635 3 Mud and sand with cobbles and empty shells A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx.OMx 334 C9 51.99071 -5.87907 3 Gravelly mud with empty shells and pebbles A5.4 - Subtidal Mixed Sediments SS.SMx.OMx

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 49 Appendix 7. Example images for Broadscale habitats Broadscale habitats Description Example Image (from CEND0312) 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.

A5.2 Subtidal sand Sandy substrate close inshore and in open coasts often disturbed by waves and tides

A5.3 Subtidal mud Muds and sandy muds found in extremely [no underwater image sheltered areas with available – grab very weak tidal sample station only] currents, such as sea lochs and some estuaries and harbours

A5.4 Subtidal mixed Substrates with a range sediments of different types of sediment from muddy, gravely sands to mosaics of cobbles and pebbles in or on a sand, gravel or mud seabed

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 50 Appendix 8. Example images for habitat FOCI Habitat FOCI Description Example Image (from CEND0312) Peat and Clay Peat and clay Exposures exposures which have been or have the potential to be colonised by various piddock species

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 51 This page intentionally left blank

North of Celtic Deep rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 52

© Crown Copyright 2017