Kish Bank 2D Survey and Shallow Borehole Sampling, 2012
Environmental Risk Assessment Support Document to Foreshore Licence Application 19th Nov 2011
Client Providence
Project Title Kish Bank 2D Survey and Shallow Borehole Sampling, 2012
Document Title Environmental Risk Assessment
Document No. MGE0282RP002
DCS TOC Text List of Tables List of Figures No. of This Document Appendices Comprises 1 1 63 1 1 0
Rev. Status Author(s) Reviewed By Approved By Office of Origin Issue Date
F01 Final J Massey Willie Madden Andrew Galway 4th May 2011 Stenson
Client rd A03 Galway 3 Oct 2011 Approval
F02 Final Galway 10th Oct 2011
F03 Final Galway 16th Nov 2011
Confidentiality statement:
The information disclosed in this proposal should be treated as being strictly private and confidential and you are requested to take all reasonable precautions to maintain its status as such. You are requested to use and apply the information solely for the purpose of evaluating this proposal and are asked not at any time to disclose or otherwise make available the information to any third party except for those officers, employees and professional advisers who are required by you in the course of such evaluation to receive and consider the information and who agree to be bound by these non-disclosure terms.
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Table of Contents Executive Summary ...... i Project Description ...... i The Existing Environment...... i Summary of Environmental Hazards, Effects and Control Measures ...... iv Conclusions...... v Habitat Directive Assessment Screening Conclusions ...... v European Protected Species (Habitat Directive Annex IV species) Screening Conclusions...... vi 1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 The Project ...... 1 1.2 Licence Option 08/2...... 2 1.3 The Applicant ...... 2 1.4 Environmental Risk Assessment ...... 3 1.5 Structure of the Document...... 3 2 Project Description...... 4 2.1 Seismic Operations ...... 4 2.2 Proposed Seismic Programme ...... 5 2.3 Seismic Acquisition Method...... 6 2.3.1 Acoustic Source ...... 6 2.3.2 Acoustic Detection...... 6 2.3.3 Other Acoustic Equipment...... 6 2.4 Sampling Methods...... 7 2.4.1 Shallow Boreholes...... 7 2.4.2 Baseline and Habitat Information ...... 7 2.5 Operational Safety...... 7 3 The Existing Environment...... 8 3.1 Introduction...... 8 3.2 The Physical Environment ...... 8 3.3 The Biological Environment ...... 11 3.3.1 Benthic ...... 11 3.3.2 Fish ...... 11 3.3.3 Marine Mammals ...... 14 3.3.4 Marine Reptiles ...... 20 3.3.5 Birds...... 20 3.4 Protected Sites and Coastal Sensitivities ...... 25 3.4.1 Marine Protected Sites ...... 25 3.4.2 Coastal Protected Sites...... 25 3.4.3 OSPAR Marine Protected Areas ...... 28 3.4.4 Cultural Heritage and Protected Areas ...... 29
MGE0282RP002F06 i Kish Bank Survey ERA
3.5 Socio-Economic Activity ...... 30 3.5.1 Shipping ...... 30 3.5.1.1 Navigation Assessment...... 31 3.5.2 Commercial Fishing...... 31 3.5.3 Other Activities ...... 33 4 Hazards, Effects and Mitigation Measures...... 35 4.1 Introduction...... 35 4.2 Environmental Impact Assessment Methodology ...... 35 4.2.1 Routine Operations ...... 35 4.2.2 Non-Routine Events ...... 36 4.3 Hazard Identification, Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Measures...... 37 4.3.1 Identification of Interactions...... 37 4.3.2 Physical Presence...... 37 4.3.3 Acoustic Emissions ...... 38 4.3.4 Atmospheric Emissions ...... 50 4.3.5 Accidental Spills ...... 51 4.3.6 Other Minor Impacts...... 52 4.4 Assessment of Significance of Environmental Effects ...... 53 4.5 Assessment of Significance of Navigational Effects ...... 53 4.6 Habitats Directive Assessment of Significance of Effects (Screening)...... 53 4.7 European Protected Species Assessment of Significance of Effects (Screening) ...... 54 5 Environmental Management Plan...... 55 6 References...... 59
MGE0282RP002F06 ii Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figures Figure 1.1: Location of Seismic Survey Area ...... 1 Figure 2.1: Typical Seismic Operations which shows survey and support vessels ...... 4 Figure 2.2: Map of the Survey showing the site survey lines in green and the extended 2D seismic line in red...... 5 Figure 3.1: Bathymetry of the survey site showing Kish Bank (generated by Providence from Admiralty Chart data)...... 9 Figure 3.2: Distribution of seabed features and sediments in the Irish Sea IOSEA4 area (IOSEA4, in press; Croker et al., 2005; WWF, 2001)...... 10 Figure 3.3: Fish Spawning and Nursery Areas in the Survey Area (from Coul et al, 2000 and IOSEA4 (in press))...... 13 Figure 3.4: Toothed whale, dolphin and porpoise land-based or casual offshore sightings from 2006 – 2010, and offshore ship-based sightings from 2001 – 2009 in the IOSEA4 area (source: IWDG, in press (2011) ...... 17 Figure 3.5: Location of whale and dolphin sanctuary around Ireland (DCENR, 2008) ...... 18 Figure 3.6: Haul-out location of groups of Common (Harbour) Seals recorded along the Irish coast (DCENR, in press; O Cadhla et al, 2008) ...... 19 Figure 3.7: Location of Grey Seal breeding sites (DCENR, 2011; O Cadhla et al, 2008 - based on preliminary results provided by the NPWS from the 2005 population assessment) and Grey Seal grouped population estimates (O Cadhla et al 2008) ...... 20 Figure 3.8: Important seabird areas on the east coast of Ireland (Source: DCENR, in press) ...... 24 Figure 3.9: Natura 2000 Areas in the vicinity of the Proposed Survey Area (NPWS, 2010)...... 26 Figure 3.10: Other Coastal Protected Areas in the vicinity of the Proposed Survey Area (NPWS, 2010) ...... 27 Figure 3.11: Shipwrecks in the vicinity of the Proposed Survey Area (DoEHLG, 2010) ...... 30 Figure 3.12: Average cargo, tanker and ferry distribution and deadweight tonnage in IOSEA 4 area (DCENR, in press; Anatec, 2010) ...... 30 Figure 3.13: Shipping counts in the survey area (Anatec, 2011)...... 31 Figure 3.14: Total effort (hours) in Ireland for otter trawls (OTX), Nephrops trawlers (TBN), demersal seiners (SX) and other non-identified gear (N_A) for Belgium, France, Ireland and United Kingdom...... 32 Figure 3.15: Marine cables in the vicinity of the survey area (UKHO 2010, DCENR, in press) ....34 Figure 4.1: Methodology for Environmental Impact Assessment ...... 35 Figure 4.2: Approximate zones of effect for fish from large air source arrays (after Swan et al, 1994) ...... 41 Figure 4.3:. Sound levels from seismic operations and cetaceans in the IOSEA 2 area (compiled by ERT from data in Richardson et al 1995; NRC, 2004) (taken from DCENR, 2007) ...... 45 Figure 4.4: Audiograms of three phocid seals and two small odontocete cetaceans (Thompson et al, 1998)...... 47 Figure 5.1:. Providences HSEQ Policy Statement ...... 56
MGE0282RP002F06 iii Kish Bank Survey ERA
Tables Table 3.1: Fish Spawning in the Survey Area (Coull et al, 1998) ...... 12 Table 3.2: Cetacean observations in the vicinity of the survey area (Reid et al, 2003; DCENR, in press; O Cadhla et al, 2004 and IDWG, 2011) (red lines denote proposed survey period)...... 16 Table 3.3: Seabirds found in the vicinity of the proposed survey area (UKDMap, 1998; DCENR, in press) (red line denoted proposed survey period)...... 21 Table 3.4: Coastal SPAs in the vicinity of the survey area and their designated species (Source: NPWS, 2010)...... 25 Table 3.5: SACs in the vicinity of the proposed survey (NPWS 2010; DCENR, in press) ...... 27 Table 4.1: Assessment of Significance of Effect or Hazard...... 36 Table 4.2: Assessment of Significance of Hazard – Non-Routine Events ...... 36 Table 4.3: Identification of Environmental Receptors which could be Significantly Impacted by the Proposed Survey ...... 37 Table 4.4: Summary of optimal hearing frequency range and possible effects of seismic surveys on marine mammals (Swan et al., 1994)...... 43 Table 4.5: Estimated atmospheric emission inventories from the survey vessel and support boat50 Table 4.6: Estimated ship emissions in Ireland and the surrounding sea up to 200 nautical miles offshore (Entec, 2005) ...... 51 Table 4.7: Assessment of impacts associated with the seismic operations...... 53 Table 5.1: Environmental Management Plan ...... 57
MGE0282RP002F06 iv Kish Bank Survey ERA
Executive Summary
Project Description
Providence Resources Plc (hereafter referred to as “Providence”), along with its partner Star Energy Oil and Gas Ltd, propose to undertake a site survey and extended 2D seismic programme over the Kish Bank licence area in the Irish Sea (Figure 1.1). Providence is an Irish based exploration and production company with a proven experienced team and over thirty years activity in oil and gas, initially through predecessor companies, Atlantic Resources and Arcon International Resources before incorporation in 1997. Providence is a public company whose shares are traded on ESM in Dublin and AIM in London and is currently predominantly focussed on the Irish Offshore and the UK Onshore. The Group is involved in oil and gas production (onshore UK), Appraisal and Development added to High Impact Exploration (Offshore Ireland) and holds Irish licence interests offshore in the Celtic Sea, the Slyne Basin and the Porcupine Basin, as well as the Kish Bank Basin. The survey will be conducted in 2012. Currently the survey is scheduled to commence in early 2012 and it is not envisaged that operations will continue past the end of May 2012. The duration of the survey is estimated at a total of 10 working days, with the maximum duration of the survey programme anticipated to be 15 days, given the potential for down time. The proposed survey will consist of three separate parts: 1. An intensive high resolution 2D seismic site survey of the potential well area (3 x 3 km); 2. an extended, 2D seismic survey of the surrounding area; and 3. A site survey including acoustic survey, geotechnical sampling with some baseline surface sediment sampling for baseline environmental information. The survey will consist primarily of a site survey examining the area around a potential well location for the positioning of a jack up drilling unit. An extended 2D seismic survey will also be undertaken to provide supplementary information to previous surveys undertaken in the area. The geotechnical sampling will consist of a minimum single borehole of the potential well location with the possibility of additional samples corresponding to the proposed jack up drilling unit leg locations. Dependant on the initial results, additional samples may need to be taken. Some grab sampling will be undertaken for baseline assessment and habitat information. All sampling is perceived to be minimal and there is not anticipated to be any re-suspended sediment risks. Samples for baseline and habitat information will also be collected. The survey will concentrate in the eastern half of Block 33/21 and the extended survey will traverse Block 33/20.
The Existing Environment
The baseline characterisation for this environmental assessment has concentrated on the key sensitive species likely to be impacted upon by the seismic survey, namely fish, marine mammals and seabirds. In addition, shipping and commercial fishing activity within the vicinity of the proposed survey have also been assessed. The site survey area is a shallow sand and muddy sand seabed in approximately 25 – 30m of water, 5km off the Dalkey and Bray Coast, inshore of the Kish Bank. There are no designated areas in the immediate vicinity. The extended 2D survey area extends to a distance of 2.5km from the coast.
MGE0282RP002F06 i Kish Bank Survey ERA
The area has historically been been subject to various 2D seismic surveys between 1970’s and 1990’s. Some of the area has been subject to multibeam and baseline survey under the INFOMAR programme in 2003 - 2008. The area has also been surveyed in 2008 by Saorgus, whose activities include geotechnical investigations, seismic and bathymetric surveys. Borehole drilling has also been completed on the banks. There is therefore a precedence of this type of data gathering having taken place, with no associated issues. Key sensitivities are discussed below and the potential control and mitigation measures are summarised in table below. The nearest Annex 1 communities in the area are seagrass beds in coastal inshore areas to the south of the survey location and seapen and burrowing megafauna beds at a significant distance to the south and east of the sampling locations. As all sampling will be contained within the survey area it is not anticipated that this activity will have any impact. Fish identified as spawning within the proposed seismic survey area include haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus), blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou), horse mackerel (Trachurus trachurus) and cod (Gadus morhua). In addition to spawning, the waters of the survey area also act as a nursery ground for mackerel (Scomber scombrus), Cephalopod species including squids, octopuses and cuttlefish may all be present within the vicinity of the survey area. Irish waters are some of the most important in Europe for a wide range of cetacean species (Berrow, 2001) and background evidence indicates that the Irish Sea is an area of low species richness for cetaceans, but moderate abundance of dolphin and porpoise species (O Cadhla et al, 2004). Surveys conducted by JNCC (Seabirds at Sea Team), UK Mammal Society Cetacean Group, and the Irish Whale and Dolphin Group indicate that the following species have the potential to be found within the survey location area: common dolphin, bottle-nosed dolphin, harbour porpoise, humpback whale and minke whale. Rissos dolphin, orcas and fin whales have been recorded to the south of the survey area. Common (or harbour) Seals (Phoca vitulina) and Grey Seals (Halichoerus grypus) are known to be present in the area and forage offshore, often straying up to 20km from their haul-out sites but have been recorded up to 2,000km. It is therefore likely that they may be found in the vicinity of the survey location (JNCC, 2007; Connell et al. 1999, O’Cadhla et al 2008). There are known haul-outs of grey seals to the south of the survey area (approx 10kms away), and Common Seals are known to be sighted in the ports and harbours of this area of the coast. A survey of seabirds in the Irish Sea showed that Kish Bank had significant numbers of auks (Guillemots, Razorbills etc.) and Terns in the area. Roseate, Common and Arctic Terns were recorded roosting on the Kish Lighthouse in late summer and peaked in numbers during late August and early September (Newton & Crowe, 2000). The presence of these bird species is indicative of feeding resources in the area. Breeding sites for a number of Annex I bird species including Sterna Terns, Storm Petrels and Barnacle Geese have been designated as Special Protection Areas (SPAs). These breeding sites are located on the Dalkey Island SPA (2.5 Km away) or the Dublin Bay SPA (7km away). A number of coastal areas have also been designated as Ramsar sites and Important Bird Areas. The most significant potential impact identified is the generation of subsea noise by the operation of the survey. This can have an adverse effect on seabirds, fish and marine mammals in close proximity (<5m) from the seismic source and can cause avoidance and changes of behaviour at greater distances. By adhering to the proposed guidance (NPWS, 2007) and the provision of Marine Mammal Observers and a support vessel, these impacts can be mitigated. In addition, if the survey can be scheduled outside the periods of marine mammal usage, and avoid sensitive periods of seabird and fish life cycles, then the potential for impact is significantly reduced. The physical presence of the survey and the requirement for exclusions, because of the towed array, has the potential to conflict with the usage of the area with fisheries and
MGE0282RP002F06 ii Kish Bank Survey ERA
shipping. Due to the short duration of the survey, this is not considered to be a significant impact, however, reasonable measures will be taken to consult and warn fisheries, shipping and recreation vessels of the survey presence. Notice to Mariners and a support vessel will be employed to mitigate interactions. The area is adjacent to areas of heavily trafficked waters in the approaches to Dublin Port. The survey avoids the main shipping lane access to the port, with the exception of the furthest extents of the extensive 2D survey lines, which will have low impact due to their short duration.
MGE0282RP002F06 iii Kish Bank Survey ERA
Summary of Environmental Hazards, Effects and Control Measures
Hazard Mitigation Residual Impact
Physical Presence A specialist survey contractor has been appointed to Minor undertake the survey using Providences contractor Survey vessel and selection and management procedures. Fishing and shipping will be towed cables could disrupted in the immediate vicinity disrupt local shipping At the detailed planning stage the choice of the seismic of the survey vessel and lines. and fishing activity. survey lines have included consideration of the potential There is, however, sufficient area interference with shipping. for ships to avoid the survey vessel and towed equipment. A shipping and navigation study was commissioned to assess the shipping density in the survey area. Due to the survey lines over the preferred transit route inshore of Details of the work programme will be passed to the the Kish Bank, some vessels may maritime authorities (including the Maritime Safety redirect to the route off shore of Directorate, the MRCC of the Irish Coast Guard and the the Kish bank for the duration of Sea Fisheries Protection Agency of the DCENR) in the survey. advance of the survey to increase awareness amongst shipping traffic where relevant. Of note is that the The survey duration is relatively Maritime Safety Directorate publishes Marine Notices short, with the site survey and advertising such operations. boreholes sampling occurring outside shipping areas. This will either be conducted by rig or Operating criteria for weather conditions (e.g. wind, vessel holding on Dynamic waves and visibility) will be established and operations Positioning. suspended if the criteria are exceeded. A Providence representative will be on-board the survey vessel at all times to ensure compliance with approved operating procedures, including those concerning environmental protection and to also ensure that the survey is conducted safely. A support boat, will monitor shipping and minimise interference by maintaining position near the end of the towed cables, thereby helping to enforce an exclusion zone around the survey vessel and cables. The survey vessel and support boat will meet all national and international regulations for shipping including the appropriate signals and lights to indicate towing the cables and the regulations defined by the International Maritime Organisation for avoiding collisions at sea. State-of-the-art communications and positioning equipment will be on-board the survey vessel to maintain communications with all other shipping and provide accurate information on the position of the survey vessel and the cables. Providence have contracted a Fisheries Liaison Officer, with knowledge of fisheries local to the survey area, to assist with the survey planning. Acoustic Emissions The Code of Practice for the Protection of Marine Minor Mammals during Acoustic Seafloor Surveys in Irish Behavioural Waters Version 1.1 (NPWS, 2007) will be followed. Cetaceans are likely to avoid the disruption affecting area in the immediate vicinity of marine mammal’s Dedicated, trained and qualified Marine Mammal the survey. Toothed whales may ability to find food Observers (MMOs) will be present onboard the survey also be affected by the temporal and communicate at all times during the survey. avoidance reaction of fish during and follow regular seismic survey. The area is mainly movements. Providence have contracted a Fisheries Liaison Officer, frequented by dolphin and with knowledge of fisheries local to the survey area, to porpoise species, and is highly Short-term assist with the survey planning. trafficked. behavioural changes might be observed in The survey is located in inshore fish populations in waters so seals may be present, close proximity to the however it is not located in the seismic source. vicinity of known haul-out sites and occurs outside the most sensitive periods (mating, pupping and moulting). Coull et al (1998) have identified that fish spawning within the
MGE0282RP002F06 iv Kish Bank Survey ERA
Hazard Mitigation Residual Impact vicinity of the proposed survey area, are sensitive to seismic disturbance between March and July. Although the proposed survey is scheduled to start in mid May, it is relatively short in duration and does not cover the entire spawning area of these species. The borehole sampling is of very short duration in relatively shallow water. This will either be conducted by rig or vessel holding on Dynamic Positioning. Atmospheric The emissions generated from the seismic operation Negligible. Emissions will be controlled through fuel efficiency measures. The main source of atmospheric emissions will result from engine exhaust gases. Marine Discharges All discharges from the seismic survey and support Negligible. boats will be treated and discharged in accordance with Discharge of sewage the MARPOL Convention. and grey water.
Solid Wastes Providence will ensure that all wastes generated during Negligible. the survey are adequately segregated in order that an Wastes will include appropriate onshore treatment and/or disposal route domestic refuse, may be selected. scrap metals and packaging. A HSE audit of the vessel has been carried out prior to commencing operations. This includes a review of waste management practices on board. Spill Risk The seismic survey vessel has an externally certified Negligible. Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (SOPEP) as Risk of spill of fuel required under the 1973/1978 MARPOL Convention and from collision or robust offshore refuelling procedures. offshore refuelling.
Conclusions
In conclusion, although there is expected be some temporary environmental impact during the proposed 2D seismic survey and sampling, long term environmental impacts from the survey will be negligible providing that the appropriate mitigation measures are adopted.
Habitat Directive Assessment Screening Conclusions
Seismic Survey: The survey will be undertaken at a significant distance from the nearest Natura 2000 site (2.5km from nearest SPA and 3.5km from nearest SAC). As the survey is primarily acoustic in nature, no significant impacts are anticipated. The nearest SAC sites are designated predominantly seacliffs and the SPA is designated for nesting Sterna Terns, neither of which are affected by acoustic surveying or geotechnical investigations. Geotechnical Sampling: The sediment and geotechnical sampling will occur at a significant distance from Natura 2000 sites (8km from nearest SAC and 7km from nearest SPA) with no impacts expected. The nearest SAC for marine features is Dublin Bay which is over 8km from the site survey area. Therefore the survey does not require further assessment.
MGE0282RP002F06 v Kish Bank Survey ERA
European Protected Species (Habitat Directive Annex IV species) Screening Conclusions
Under the Habitats Directive (and the European Communities (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1997 and Wildlife (Amendment) Act 1976 & 2000), specific species, which includes all marine mammals, are prohibited from deliberate capture, killing, injury or disturbance. The Code of Practice for the Protection of Marine Mammals during Acoustic Seafloor Surveys in Irish waters (NPWS, 2007) identifies that the activities of 2D Acoustic Survey can disturb or harm marine mammals. The survey will be conducted in accordance with the Code of Practice (NPWS, 2007) which was developed to minimise any such disturbance and prevent harm to marine mammals. Marine Mammal Observers (MMOs) will be assigned to the survey and will carry out all recommendations of the Code of Practice. Grey Seals and Common (Harbour) Seals are protected under Annex II of EC Habitats Directive and the Protected Species of Wildlife (Amendment) Act. There are no known breeding sites in the vicinity of the survey and the survey will occur outside the sensitive pupping and moulting seasons. Otter (Lutra lutra) are an Annex IV species and are likely to be present along the coast adjacent to the survey area (Yoxon, 2008). However, they are predominantly found inshore and are highly unlikely to be present within the survey area. Given the short duration of the survey, outside the peak period of cetacean presence in the area and the implementation of the Code of Practice, there will be minimal risk of any impacts to individual animals and no significant risk to marine mammals as a result of the proposed survey, and therefore further assessment is not considered to be required.
MGE0282RP002F06 vi Kish Bank Survey ERA
1 Introduction
1.1 The Project
Providence Resources Plc (hereafter referred to as “Providence”), along with its partners, propose to undertake a site survey and extended 2D seismic programme over the Kish Bank licence area in the Irish Sea (Figure 1.1). The survey will be conducted in 2012. Currently the survey is scheduled to commence in early 2012 and it is not envisaged that operations will continue past the end of May 2012. The duration of the survey is estimated at a total of 10 working days, with the maximum duration of the survey programme anticipated to be 15 days given the potential for down time.
Figure 1.1: Location of Seismic Survey Area
The proposed survey will consist of two separate parts: 1. an extended, high-resolution, 2D seismic survey; and
MGE0282RP002F06 1 Kish Bank Survey ERA
2. geotechnical sampling with some baseline surface sediment sampling for baseline environmental information. The survey will consist primarily of a site survey examining the area around a potential well location and the positioning of a jack up drilling unit. An extended 2D seismic survey will also be undertaken to provide supplementary information to previous surveys undertaken in the area. The geotechnical sampling will consist of a minimum single borehole of the potential well location with the possibility of additional samples corresponding to the proposed jack up drilling unit leg locations. Dependant on the initial results, additional samples may need to be taken. Some grab sampling will be undertaken for baseline assessment and habitat information. All sampling is perceived to be minimal and there is not anticipated to be any resuspended sediment risks. Samples for baseline and habitat information will also be collected. The survey will concentrate in the eastern half of Block 33/21 and the extended survey will traverse Block 33/20.
1.2 Licence Option 08/2
In August 2008, Providence and Star Energy Oil and Gas Ltd (“Star Energy”), a subsidiary of Petronas, the Malaysian National Oil Company, were awarded a three-year Licence Option over eight blocks in the Kish Bank Basin. The Kish Bank area is in shallow water (c. 20-30m) and lies c. 10km offshore from Dublin. Geologically, the Kish Bank Basin is akin to the East Irish Sea Basin, which produces large volumes of oil and gas offshore Liverpool Bay. Four wells have previously been drilled in the basin. The first was drilled by Amoco in 1977 and encountered oil shows as well as gas prone Upper Carboniferous source rocks. Further wells were drilled in 1979 (Shell), 1986 (Charterhouse) and 1997 (Enterprise) which have proven the presence of an excellent quality Sherwood Sandstone reservoir and a Mercia Mudstone caprock. Oil shows were encountered in the Charterhouse 1986 and Amoco 1977 well. The licence was awarded in the hope that a suitable exploration target would be identified for drilling. Such a target has been identified and further work is required prior to determining whether the structure is hydrocarbon bearing or not. Providence intends to carry out a standard site survey of the seabed and sub-seabed to further establish the existing geological conditions in the area. This survey will be conducted by means of a standard 2D seismic vessel with work conducted under Petroleum Prospecting Licence1/10 issued to Providence Resources Plc. by (the Irish Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (DCENR). This survey will comprise a site survey (digital and analogue data collection) and geotechnical shallow borehole sampling. The survey will also include limited habitat and baseline sampling. The area is shown with a blue border in Figure 1.1 and Figure 2.2. The survey also includes an extended, high-resolution 2D survey. This extended survey is designed to collect further geophysical information of the surrounding area to supplement existing information. This area is shown with a red border in Figure 1.1 and Figure 2.2.
1.3 The Applicant Providence Resources Plc is an international upstream oil and gas company currently actively involved in Ireland and UK. Its portfolio is balanced between production, appraisal and exploration assets. Providence was founded in 1997, but has roots going back to 1981 when its predecessor company, Atlantic Resources Plc, was formed. In 1991, Conroy Petroleum & Natural Resources Plc acquired Atlantic Resources Plc, and on completion of the acquisition, the new enlarged entity changed its name to Arcon International Resources Plc. In 1997, Arcon de-merged its hydrocarbon assets into a new company, Providence Resources Plc.
2 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
which was listed on the Exploration Securities Market (ESM) of the Irish Stock Exchange. In 2005, Providence switched from ESM to the Irish Enterprise Exchange (IEX) and was also admitted to the Alternative Investment Market (AIM) in London.
1.4 Environmental Risk Assessment This document is an Environmental Risk Assessment, undertaken to ensure that appropriate control measures designed to minimise the potential environmental impacts from the operation are in place. The Environmental Risk Assessment will follow a process that balances environmental considerations against business needs that affect the design and operation of all exploration activities. The assessment will follow the four main stages associated with Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): • Identify environmental hazards associated with the activity and environmental characterisation; • Assessment of the magnitude and significance of the hazards and effects; • Implementation of control techniques to eliminate/lessen severity of effects and to manage the hazards; and • Development of plans and procedures to manage the consequences of exceptional events. This Environmental Risk Assessment represents the results of the EIA and provides a summary Environmental Management Plan (EMP) outlining potential impacts and actions required to reduce and control the occurrence of those impacts. This document has been drafted to support the Foreshore Licence application requirements (The Foreshore Acts 1933-2005) and fulfil the requirements of Section 2.2 of the “Approval to conduct a geophysical or other exploratory survey, site survey or route survey”, of the Rules and Procedures for Offshore Petroleum Exploration and Appraisal Operations (PAD, 2007, and Draft 2011 edition).
1.5 Structure of the Document
This assessment is presented in six main sections: Section 1: Introduction – provides a background to the project. Section 2: Project Description – provides an outline of the proposed site survey and extended 2D seismic programme. Section 3: Description of the Environment – describes the background environmental and socio-economic characteristics of the area. Section 4: Hazards, Effects and Mitigation Measures – defines the potential impacts from the survey and the control measures to be implemented. Section 5: Environmental Management Plan – provides an outline of how Providence will manage the survey to ensure protection of the environment. Section 6: Conclusions – summarises key hazards and their residual impacts following the implementation of mitigation measures. In addition, the report includes a non-technical summary of the environmental assessment, highlights its main conclusions, and provides a list of references used to obtain data and information to support the assessment. Further information is also included in the appendices.
MGE0282RP002F06 3 Kish Bank Survey ERA
2 Project Description
2.1 Seismic Operations
Seismic operations are conducted to identify sub-surface structures that might trap oil and gas deposits. The geophysical method commonly used in surveying is called ‘seismic- reflection’. The technique involves releasing pulses of acoustic energy along designated lines. The energy penetrates the sub-surface rocks and is reflected back to the surface where it can be detected by acoustic transducers (hydrophones). Analysis of seismic reflections provides a profile of the underlying rock strata and identification of any configurations that are favourable to hydrocarbon accumulations. In some cases, it is possible to record anomalies that may correspond to actual hydrocarbon deposits. Offshore, seismic surveys are usually conducted with ship-borne air source as the acoustic energy. A streamer of hydrophones is towed behind the vessel, usually extending for several kilometres (Figure 2.1). A survey is usually based on a grid pattern of lines, along each of which are ‘shot points’, where the sound is released. Two-dimensional (2D) seismic lines are normally acquired on a 500 metre or greater line spacing whereas three-dimensional (3D) seismic is acquired at a much closer spacing, between 25-50 metres, such that the data can be processed to give a continuous image of the reflections between, as well as along the line. Offshore, survey activities are confined to a self-contained survey vessel together with a ‘support boat (also known as a guard vessel)’, which will service the streamer and warn off other shipping. The survey vessel crew usually consists of a party chief, navigation surveyors, data processor, geophysicist, geophysical engineers, an environmentalist, a fishery liaison officer and marine mammal observer (MMO), as well as a company representative.
Figure 2.1: Typical Seismic Operations which shows survey and support vessels
Survey Vessel Guard vessel(s)
4 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
2.2 Proposed Seismic Programme
The proposed 2D seismic survey programme will be located to the west of Kish Bank in Block 33/21 with the extended survey lines traversing Block 33/25. Figure 2.2 shows the proposed survey lines
Figure 2.2: Map of the Survey showing the site survey lines in green and the extended 2D seismic line in red.
In general the beginnings of lines will require a run-in of about one streamer length, equating to a distance of approximately 1.5 kilometres. At the end of the line a run out of 1.5 kilometres and turn of up to 3 kilometre radius can be made. The survey will be conducted in 2012. Currently the survey is scheduled to commence in early 2012 and it is not envisaged that operations will continue past the end of May 2012. Its timing is dependant on availability of suitable vessel(s). The duration of the survey is estimated at a total of 10 working days including the borehole sampling and baseline sampling, with the maximum duration of the survey programme anticipated to be 15 days given the potential for up to 5 days down time.
MGE0282RP002F06 5 Kish Bank Survey ERA
2.3 Seismic Acquisition Method
2.3.1 Acoustic Source The seismic air source is an impulsive underwater transducer that produces high energy sound at low frequencies, typically in the range 5 - 200 hertz, which is the frequency bandwidth of most interest in seismic surveying (Gulland & Walker, 1998; MacGillivray & Chapman, 2005). Approximately 98 percent of all the acoustic energy in a seismic pulse is within this band (OGP/IAGC, 2004). When generating the sound source, a container of high pressure air is released suddenly into the surrounding water, producing an air filled cavity. The resulting air bubble pulsates rapidly several times and then collapses producing an acoustic signal. Air sources are either used singly or in arrays. The arrays comprise several strings of air sources forming a towed grid and provide several advantages over a single source, including increased sound pressure levels and a more downward focused beam due to the interaction of the sources. For the survey, Providence proposes a single GI source, most likely consisting of two independent air sources within the same casing. The volume for shallow water are small in comparison to offshore surveys and will most likely be 140 - 180 cubic inches made up by two inserts of 50 - 90 cu inches.. The source will operate at approximately 2000 psi +/- 10%. The source array will be towed behind the vessel at a depth of approximately 3.0m (+/- 0.5m) depth at survey speeds. The frequency range of interest for the 2D survey is at the high end of the spectrum at around 180Hz.
2.3.2 Acoustic Detection Providence propose to use a solid or SEAL streamer during the seismic survey (a full specification of the equipment is included in Appendix C of the Application of Approval to Conduct Geophysical Surveys). The 2D survey will use a single streamer approximately 1.2km in active length and with a total length in the region of 1.5km. The streamer will either be solid or sectioned and fluid filled with ISOPAR or equivalent. The fluid filled sectioned cable is designed to reduce the risk of a hydrocarbon spill in the unlikely event that a cable would break. The solid cable poses no spill risk. Recording of the acoustic energy by the hydrophones spaced approximately 6 – 6.5 meters apart along the streamer is conducted over numerous channels, with a typical sampling interval of 1 or 2 milliseconds and a recording length of between 2 and 8 seconds.
2.3.3 Other Acoustic Equipment In addition to the seismic survey, other acoustic sources will be used to obtain information on the potential jack up rig site. These sources will include side-scan sonar (operating at 410 - 550hz) and may include the use of a sub-bottom profiler. These will provide additional information on the seabed around the proposed jack up rig and well location. The purpose of these surveys is to provide detailed information on this area and identify any obstructions or material that may influence the exact positioning of the well and jack up rig. A magnetometer will also be deployed with the sidescan sonar to assist in the locating of any man made objects or obstructions including debris, waste or wrecks at the potential jack up sites. In the event such items are located, they will be avoided in the siting of the well, jackup and boreholes. As a result, should these identified items have any archaeological significance they will not be disturbed. A licence for geophysical survey of archaeological interest will be approved by the Underwater Archaeology Unit prior to survey commencement.
6 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
2.4 Sampling Methods
2.4.1 Shallow Boreholes A single geotechnical borehole will be drilled to ~30m at the proposed drilling location. Based on the results and dependant on the rig that is contracted, additional boreholes may be drilled including at the proposed site of the jack-up drilling unit legs. This will be carried out by either a separate drilling vessel or a survey vessel capable of seismic survey and borehole drilling operations. Which vessel is used is dependant on vessel availability. There are not many vessels which can do both the seismic and borehole. It is therefore more likely that two separate vessels will have to be contracted. The vessel will most likely be fitted with a wire-line rotary drilling system that can alternate down-the-hole Cone Penetration Testing (CPTU) with core sampling. A full specification of the equipment and method will be included in Appendix C of the Application of Approval to Conduct Geophysical Surveys submitted to the PAD as part of the survey applications. Should it be required, additional cores may be taken to provide further information on the jack up siting. It is not anticipated that more than 10 bores will be sampled.
2.4.2 Baseline and Habitat Information Samples will be taken within the site survey area to confirm the baseline environment and obtain information on habitats. The samples will be taken as indicated by the seismic and acoustic surveys where further information is required. Samples will be taken using a suitable grab (day, van veen, hammon) dependant on the prevalent conditions. Samples will be stored or processed on board using an autosiever. The samples will be assessed for baseline sediment type, chemistry and infaunal characterising species for biotope assessment.
2.5 Operational Safety
The survey will be undertaken by a carefully selected specialist seismic survey contractor in compliance with all national and international shipping guidelines and approved by Providence and relevant government organisations (via the PAD application process). Copies of the contractor’s Quality and Health, Safety, Environmental and Quality Management System (HSEQ MS) will be submitted to the relevant organisations. A survey specific project HSEQ plan will be produced and approved prior to the commencement of the survey. A support vessel will be used during the site survey and extended 2D seismic programme. The support vessel utilised by the contractor will also be subject to a detailed audit of both the vessel and the Company HSEQ MS. The support vessel, where possible, will be an Irish registered vessel. Radio communications will be maintained among the vessels taking part in the survey, with other maritime traffic and with the appropriate maritime authorities. Lights and other internationally recognised identification/ warning signals will be in place in line with international shipping regulations. On completion of the survey the vessels and equipment will leave the area and there will be no evidence of the survey having been undertaken. Crew change will be undertaken using a small boat transfer or port-call. A detailed risk matrix will be conducted for each option. A single crew change is anticipated for the survey duration.
MGE0282RP002F06 7 Kish Bank Survey ERA
3 The Existing Environment
3.1 Introduction
Knowledge of the characteristics of the local environment allows an understanding of the potential for the site survey and extended 2D seismic survey to interact with the environment so that appropriate controls can be adopted to mitigate negative impacts. Scientific studies have shown that site surveys and seismic surveys have the potential to impact on fish, marine mammals and seabirds depending on local biological characteristics; therefore this baseline characterisation has concentrated on these sensitivities. In addition, the socio-economic environment, namely shipping and commercial fishing activity within the vicinity of the proposed survey have also been assessed. The boundaries of the study area in which environmental baseline data has been collected are defined as those blocks in whole or in part under which the survey is being conducted: i.e. Block 33/21 with the extended survey lines traversing Block 33/25. This baseline assessment is largely based on the information available in the draft Fourth Strategic Environmental Assessment for Oil and Gas Activity in Ireland’s Offshore Atlantic Waters (DCENR, in press).
3.2 The Physical Environment
The site survey area is located within the Kish Bank Basin, which is located offshore Dublin in the western Irish Sea, in water depths of up to 100 m. Some 30 by 40 km in extent, it is one of a series of basins thought to be the remnants of a larger Permo- Triassic basin system, termed the Greater Irish Sea Basin which is assumed to have extended across the whole of the Irish Sea. The basin forms a northwest-dipping half graben bisected by a fault zone and separated from the Central Irish Sea Basin by an area of outcropping Carboniferous strata. The basin is bounded to the northwest by northeast - southwest trending faults. Four wells have been drilled in the basin with oil shows in two wells. The oil shows are minor amounts of oil which indicate that oil has been generated in the basin, however these are not classed as discoveries. Natural hydrocarbon seeps along the Codling fault zone have been recorded in airborne surveys which detects hydrocarbon flourscence on the sea surface. Figure 3.1 shows the bathymetry of the survey site and the proposed survey areas. The Kish Bank Basin (Codling Fault Zone) is an area of sandy sediments with a high density of seep mounds with Methane-Derived Authigenic Carbonate MDAC (Croker et al., 2005; Figure 3.2). In the Codling Fault Zone, there are 23 methane derived authigenic carbonate mounds (composed of quartz grains bound by carbonate cement) each occupying an area of >20,000m2 and standing 5–10 m above the normal seabed (Judd et al., 2007), often with associated MDAC slab formations (Croker et al., 2005). However, these are located to the North and East of the survey area as shown in Figure 3.2. These features are formed by leaking gas.
8 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 3.1: Bathymetry of the survey site showing Kish Bank (generated by Providence from Admiralty Chart data)
KISH BANK
MGE0282RP002F06 9 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 3.2: Distribution of seabed features and sediments in the Irish Sea IOSEA4 area (IOSEA4, in press; Croker et al., 2005; WWF, 2001)
Repeat biological and geological surveys of Dublin Bay, west of the study area, have been performed mainly for assessing the fate and impact of dredge and sewage spoil (e.g. Naylor, 1965; Max et al., 1976; Harris, 1980; Keegan et al., 1983; Wilson, 1984; Keegan, 1989). These studies document the presence of rippled fine sand covering most of the bay. A dredge spoil site exists c.5 km due west of the Burford Bank which is mainly used for maintenance dredge spoil for Dublin Port and Dun Laoghaire Harbour, though has also been used by Dublin City Council from deposition of other upstream and bedrock material. Samples from historical surveys subjected to particle size analysis classified most of the sediments as ‘medium sand’ with a mean particle-size of 2 phi (0.25mm) to 1 phi (0.5mm). (Wheeler et al, 2001). Three dominant particle size modes are revealed whose variable representation dictates overall sediment type: a gravel mode (<-3 phi or <8mm), a sand mode (centred on 1 phi or 0.5 mm) and a silt mode (centred on 6.5 phi or 0.012mm). Wheeler et al (2001) concluded that there is a dominance of sandy sediment both on the bank and in the intervening areas. Gravelly sediments are concentrated on the bank crest and silty sediments are restricted to deeper waters away from the banks. However, Wheeler et al note that they used a Van Essen Grab where large clasts may get caught in the jaws of the grab and cause fine sediments to be under-sampled. This may result in an apparent exaggeration of the degree to which samples coarsen on bank crests and towards the south. However, a coarsening of sediments to the south of Kish Bank (and increase in sediment lag) is still implied (Wheeler et al, 2001).
10 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
3.3 The Biological Environment
3.3.1 Benthic The Kish Bank area is a sand bank of medium and muddy sands with coarser material on the bank crest. It is one of a number of banks in the Dublin Bay area. The bank itself has not been used for dredge spoil disposal, however a number of sites in the region have, and a number of surveys have detected evidence of historic spoil across the area. Two grab surveys were undertaken on behalf of National Parks & Wildlife Service (NPWS) on the Blackwater and Kish Banks in the Irish Sea during May and June 2005. A series of 12 stations with five replicates per station was sampled at each location and analysed for sediment, faunal composition and organic carbon content. The Kish Bank survey revealed a sandy substratum, ranging from medium to very-fine sand with relatively low organic carbon. A total of 101 species, ascribed to 12 phyla, were delineated into four distinct faunal assemblages by classification/cluster analysis. These comprised the marine habitat biotopes: Glycera lapidum in impoverished infralittoral mobile gravel and sand (SS.SCS.ICS.Glap); Abra prismatica, Bathyporeia elegans and polychaetes in circalittoral fine sand (SS.SSA.CFiSa.ApriBatPo); Nephtys cirrosa and Bathyporeia spp. In infralittoral sand biotope (SS.SSA.IFiSa.NcirBat) and Abra alba and Nucula nitidosa in circalittoral muddy sand or slightly mixed sediment (SS.SSA.CMuSa.AalbNuc) although in some cases the species composition varied (Roche et al, 2007). An attempt was made at linking the faunal and environmental characteristics by the NPWS. The four environmental variables, which best matched the faunal data were medium sand, fine sand, very fine sand and silt-clay. These related to the sides of the bank, with sand material occurring inside the bank and muddier material offshore. The NPWS report concluded the crest of the bank is generally coarser materials and gravels. The survey area is therefore predominantly sands dominated by Abra spp, with mobile impoverished gravels on the crest of the bank. Grab samples will be taken as part of the survey and infaunal analysis will be conducted to confirm community type of the jack up site area.
3.3.2 Fish Shelf and coastal waters in Ireland are very productive and they support a diverse community of fish and shellfish species (Hartley Anderson, 2005). Distribution is generally governed by sediment types in the Irish Sea, coarse sediments favoured by elasmobranches, Cod, Haddock, Larger Whiting and Gurnards and areas of Scallops, whereas sands support Flatfish, Anglerfish, Smaller Gadoids, Hake, Plaice and Dabs and mud sediments provide habitats for burrowing crustaceans, such as Nephrops. The seasonal distribution of pelagic species such as Mackerel, Horse Mackerel and Herring are associated generally with the distribution and properties of the relatively warm surface waters in the Irish Sea and north east Atlantic (ACFM, 2004). These species are present within Irish waters largely on a seasonal basis, migrating between spawning and feeding grounds. The effect of seismic surveys on fish is strongly related to their life cycle stage. Fish eggs and larvae of many fish species drift in, or close to, the upper sea surface and thus their spatial movements are determined by ocean and tidal currents. Therefore, they are potentially at risk of injury from seismic operations as their habitat coincides with the depth at which air sources are towed, and they cannot actively avoid sound sources. Research indicates that larval fish and eggs can be killed within 2 metres of a detonating air source (Coull et al, 1998). Fish identified as spawning within the proposed seismic survey area include Mackerel (Scomber scombrus), Blue Whiting (Micromesistius poutassou) (Table 3.1 and Figure 3.3) as well as the Norwegian Lobster Nephrops norwegicus. In addition to spawning, the waters of the survey area may also act as a nursery ground for Nephrops.
MGE0282RP002F06 11 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Table 3.1: Fish Spawning in the Survey Area (Coull et al, 1998)
Species Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Cod
Mackerel
Haddock Horse Mackerel Whiting N N N N N N N N N
Peak Spawning Spawning N Nursery
Basking Sharks Little is known about the distribution and abundance of the Basking Shark, or their biology, due to their elusive nature of this species. Individuals take 12 to 20 years to reach maturity, with young produced roughly every 4 years. This leaves the population vulnerable to exploitation. In 1993, Berrow and Heardman (1994) made 142 sightings of 425 individuals around the entire Irish coast. Concentrations were evident off the east, south-west and northern coastlines, and sightings were made between April and November with peaks in June and September. Surface sightings appear to correlate with a critical sea surface temperature of 11.5°C. The Irish Whale and Dolphin Group (IWDG) and Marine Conservation Society (MCS) archives show sightings from 1987 to 2007 in the Irish Sea. Tagging studies (Berrow and Johnstone, 2009) show Basking Sharks moving up the Irish Sea in late season (August to September) to northern Scotland. It is assumed, however, that Basking Sharks do occur in the Irish Sea, and could therefore be found in the survey area.
Atlantic Salmon Tagging for monitoring purposes has been carried out on a number of important wild salmon rivers along the west and northwest coast of Ireland since 1980 (White et al, 2002). Salmon migrate from the estuaries all around Ireland and Western England and Scotland. Research has revealed that Salmon migrate northwards into waters off west Greenland and in particular the Norwegian Sea (White et al, 2002; Hansen & Quinn, 1998). When ready, Salmon return to the same freshwater rivers to spawn. As a result of salmonid rivers in the Irish Sea area, they are likely to occur during migratory seasons Salmon run timing is dependant on seasonal factors. In 2011, the run occurred in December to January with hatching occurring in March or April. As the survey occurs outside this period, occurring after spawning and before smolting, it is not anticipated there will be significant number of Salmon in the area.
12 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 3.3: Fish Spawning and Nursery Areas in the Survey Area (from Coul et al, 2000 and IOSEA4 (in press))
Cod Haddock
Horse mackerel Mackerel
Whiting
MGE0282RP002F06 13 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Cephalopods Cephalopod species include Squids, Octopuses and Cuttlefish. They are characterized by rapid growth rates, and range in size from 1.5 centimetres (pygmy squid) to 20 metres (giant squid). Cephalopods are highly mobile as adults and occupy similar ecological niches to predatory fish. Their habitat ranges from shallow waters to a depth of 3,000 metres or more. In ecological terms, this means that the majority of the Irish Sea area is unsuitable habitat for cephalopods. Information regarding the distribution and abundance of cephalopod species to the Irish Sea is limited (Hartley Anderson, 2005). The main source comes from fisheries records, both direct target fishing and by-catch. Distribution and abundance of these species is important, however, as they form an essential part of many marine mammal diets. Squid abundance and species distribution is estimated for the Celtic Sea (Lordan et al, 2001). The Veined Squid (Loligo forbesi) was the most numerous in both numbers and weight, followed closely by the Lesser Flying Squid (Todaropsis eblanae). Highest numbers of both species were caught in shallower inshore regions. Distribution was concentrated around the north and north-west coastlines of Ireland, with highest densities seen in winter, there is limited data and fisheries records for the Irish Sea The Elegant Cuttlefish (Sepia elegans) is seen to be common and widespread off the west and southwest coasts of Ireland, with an estimated 174 individuals caught (Lordan et al, 2001). It is less common though recorded in the Irish Sea. Other species are present, such as the Common Cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis), Common Bobtail (Sepitta oweniana) and Little Cuttlefish (Sepiola atlantica). The Curled Octopus (Eledone cirrhosa) is fairly common off the coasts of Ireland, though more common in the south and west, at depths ranging from 100 – 500 metres (Lordan et al, 2001). It is therefore unlikely to occur in significant numbers in the survey area.
3.3.3 Marine Mammals
Cetaceans Distribution and Abundance Irish waters are some of the most important in Europe for a wide range of cetacean species (Berrow, 2001) and background evidence indicates that the Irish Sea is an area of low species richness for cetaceans, but moderate abundance of dolphin and porpoise species (O Cadhla et al, 2004). Parturition (giving birth) in Irish waters has been confirmed for a number of cetacean species, including the Harbour Porpoise, Common Dolphin, Bottlenose Dolphin, Risso’s Dolphin, White Sided Dolphin, White-Beaked Dolphin and Pilot Whale. Other species, such as the Northern Bottlenosed Whale and Minke Whale are also suspected of breeding in the region, although there is no conclusive evidence to confirm this (DCENR, 2008). Many species are not known to breed in Irish waters, but migrate annually into Irish waters, though are more common in the west (Charif & Clark, 2000). Data suggests that some of these species (e.g. Fin Whale and Humpback Whale) feed year-round in the waters along the south coast and occur occasionally on the south east coast in late season (August to October), (DCENR, 2008), whereas others may over-winter in waters south of Ireland e.g. Blue Whale (Charif & Clark, 2000). The most important factor governing cetacean distribution and abundance is the availability of prey (Evans, 1990). Physical factors such as sea temperature and salinity also have a profound impact on cetacean distribution and in this region are often controlled by the north Atlantic Drift. In addition, complex bathymetry is also an important factor, particularly to deep diving species such as beaked whales, which are restricted to distinct areas of suitable habitat (Macleod, 2005).
14 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
There are two suborders of cetacean: the toothed whales or Odontoceti and the baleen whale or Mysticeti, characterized by having baleen plates for filtering food from water, rather than having teeth. Baleen whales, such as Minke Whales and Fin Whales, are not historically common in the Irish Sea, preferring feeding grounds in deeper waters particularly along the continental shelf edge (Evans, 1990; Mackey et al, 2004b). Typically they feed on plankton, krill, and other small pelagic prey, and their distribution is often related to oceanographic features such as fronts, upwellings and association areas where prey availability is high. In the summer months, Minke Whale feed mainly on fish in the inshore waters (Pollock et al, 1997). In contrast, the diet of toothed cetaceans, such as dolphins and porpoises, Killer Whales, Sperm Whales, and Beaked Whales, consists mainly of fish and squid, and is an important factor in determining their distribution. Many dolphins show seasonal movements into shallow coastal waters, which may coincide with calving or inshore feeding (Boelens et al, 1999). Table 3.2 shows the seasonal presence/ absence of cetaceans in the IOSEA 4 region (DCENR, in press). The information presented in Table 3.2 is taken from surveys conducted by JNCC (Seabirds at Sea Team), UK Mammal Society Cetacean Group and the Sea Mammal Research Unit and sightings and stranding information from the Irish Whale and Dolphin Group. All of the species listed in the table have the potential to be found within the survey location area. Figure 3.4 shows sightings of toothed whales in the area.
MGE0282RP002F06 15 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Table 3.2: Cetacean observations in the vicinity of the survey area (Reid et al, 2003; DCENR, in press; O Cadhla et al, 2004 and IDWG, 2011) (red lines denote proposed survey period)
Species Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Common Dolphin The most frequently recorded dolphin species in Irish waters. Present in the Irish Sea, predominantly in the summer and early autumn (Reid et al., 2003). Most abundant and breeding along the south and south west coasts of Ireland.
Bottle-nosed Dolphin Found in all Irish coastal waters and are the second most frequently recorded dolphin species in Irish waters. They occur inshore around all Irish coasts with a semi resident group present at the mouth of Cork Harbour. They also occur offshore in the Celtic Sea and in the Irish Sea. They are present year round and breed in Irish waters. Inshore and offshore ecotypes may exist.
Risso’s dolphin Continental shelf species. Recorded throughout the year in Irish waters with a wide distribution (Aecom & Metoc, 2010). Some seasonal movements apparent (Baines & Evans 2009). Regularly observed inshore and in bays along the southwest and southeast coasts (NPWS, 2008). Regularly occurring in the southern and central Irish Sea (Baines & Evans 2009). Breeds in Irish waters.
Harbour Porpoise Ireland’s only porpoise species. Abundant in the Irish Sea throughout the year and is abundant inshore along the south and southwest coasts. Breeds in Irish waters. Occurs throughout the Irish and Celtic Sea with some large aggregations noted off the south coast in the Autumn months. Some evidence for an offshore movement in spring between March and June (IWDG, 2010b) which may be linked to calving.
Killer whale Observed off all coasts and in the Irish Sea. Inshore sightings tend to increase during late summer and autumn (Berrow et al., 2010).
Minke Whale Smallest and most frequently sighted baleen whale in Irish waters (Berrow et al., 2010). Most abundant off the south and southwest coasts during autumn and winter. Occurs off all other coasts and in the Irish Sea. They are seasonally abundant in the western Irish Sea in Spring and early Summer (Wall & Murray, 2009). There is an inshore movement in April and May with peak sightings in August.
Humpback whale This species occurs in the IOSEA4 area mainly over the period June - February, predominantly off the south and southeast coasts (Berrow et al., 2010). It has also been recorded in St. George’s Channel and the Irish Sea (IWDG, 2010c). Observed in all months of the year.
Fin whale The majority of inshore sightings come from counties Cork, Waterford and Wexford (Berrow et al., 2010). These species move inshore in early summer between May and June with a regular peak in sightings during November in west Cork. There has only been one recorded sighting in the area from 2000-2009 (IWDG,2011) .
Key Absent Present
*indicates absence from survey results due either to lack of survey effort (in which case it is stated in the text) or a genuine absence from the area during a sampling period.
16 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 3.4: Toothed whale, dolphin and porpoise land-based or casual offshore sightings from 2006 – 2010, and offshore ship-based sightings from 2001 – 2009 in the IOSEA4 area (source: IWDG, in press (2011)
Cetacean Conservation Ireland is a signatory to conservation-orientated agreements under: • the Berne Convention on Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (1982); • the Bonn Convention on Migratory Species (1983); • the OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the northeast Atlantic (1992); and • the EC Habitats Directive on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Fauna and Flora (92/43/EEC, 1992). All cetacean species occurring in European waters are now afforded protection as Annex IV species under the EC Habitats Directive. Two common species: Bottlenose Dolphin and Harbour Porpoise; are Annex II species (i.e. animal species of Community interest, whose conservation requires the designation of Special Areas of Conservation) (refer to Section 3.3.1). In 1991, the Irish government declared all Irish waters extending to the outer Continental shelf a whale and dolphin sanctuary, claiming that this was a “clear indication of Ireland’s commitment to contribute to the preservation and protection of these magnificent creatures in their natural environment, and to do everything possible to ensure they should not be put in danger of extinction but should be preserved for future generations” (Rogan & Berrow, 1995). According to the declaration, the sanctuary was empowered under the legal framework already in place, which suggested that the Irish government considered the present legislation to be sufficient to provide full habitat protection to cetaceans within the continental shelf area. Figure 3.5 shows the area of the whale and dolphin sanctuary.
MGE0282RP002F06 17 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 3.5: Location of whale and dolphin sanctuary around Ireland (DCENR, 2008)
Pinnipeds Common (or Harbour) Seals (Phoca vitulina) and Grey Seals (Halichoerus grypus) are common in Irish waters, and are mainly concentrated inshore (DCENR, in press). Both the Common Seal and the Grey Seal are listed under Annex II of the EC Habitats and Species Directive as species whose conservation requires the designation of Special Areas of Conservation. In addition Common Seals and Grey Seals are protected under the Conservation of Seals Act 1970. Seals are known to forage offshore, often straying up to 2,000 kilometres from their haul- out site (JNCC, 2007; Connell et al. 1999). There are no haul-out sites in the immediate vicinity of the survey area, the nearest is Lambay Island (O Cadhla et al, 2008). Common Seals The Common Seal is the smaller of the two species of pinniped that breed in Ireland and is also an important predator in this area of the north Atlantic. The main prey of Common Seals is considered to be Sandeels, Lesser Octopus, Whiting, Flounder and Cod (Tollit & Thompson, 1996). During the pupping (June) and moulting seasons (late July/August) they spend more time ashore than at other times of the year. Figure 3.6 shows the locations of groups of Common Seals recorded along the Irish coast. These haul-out groups have tended historically to be found among inshore bays and islands, coves and estuaries (Lockley, 1966; Summers et al, 1980), particularly around the hours of lowest tide.
18 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 3.6: Haul-out location of groups of Common (Harbour) Seals recorded along the Irish coast (DCENR, in press; O Cadhla et al, 2008)
Grey Seals Grey Seals are widespread in Ireland, with the greatest concentrations found on the exposed south-western, western and northern coasts (Lyons, 2004). The largest populations of Grey Seal on the east coast of Ireland are found on Lambay Island. Figure 3.7 illustrates the Grey Seal breeding sites on the east coast of Ireland. Grey Seals are gregarious at these haul-outs, sometimes forming large groups of several hundred animals, especially when they are moulting their fur in spring following the winter pupping season. Tagging surveys by Hammond .et al (2005) showed very low usage of the survey area by seals tagged in Wales, either indicating a separate population or lower area density of ‘at sea’ seals.
MGE0282RP002F06 19 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 3.7: Location of Grey Seal breeding sites (DCENR, 2011; O Cadhla et al, 2008 - based on preliminary results provided by the NPWS from the 2005 population assessment) and Grey Seal grouped population estimates (O Cadhla et al 2008)
3.3.4 Marine Reptiles Five species of marine turtle have been recorded in UK and Irish waters (Brongersma, 1972; Penhallurick, 1990; Langton et al, 1996; Gaywood, 1997; Pierpoint & Penrose, 1999). Only one species, the Leatherback Turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) is reported annually and is considered a regular and normal member of Irish marine fauna (Godley et al, 1998). Data on marine reptiles is largely generated from sightings, strandings and by- catch. The Leatherback Turtle is the largest marine turtle occurring in warm waters. They breed circum-globally in tropical regions south of the survey area, but range widely to forage in temperate and boreal waters. Long-distance migration has been documented from tag returns and satellite telemetry. Seasonal peaks are seen in northern waters, with most turtle sightings occurring in the West of Ireland reported between August and October (Gaywood, 1997; Godley et al, 1998). Sightings in the east are less common, though Leatherback Turtles are recorded in this area of the Irish Sea. A single Kemps Ridleys Turtle record is present in the area, however this is based on a single stranding near Howth in 1972 (Brongersma, 1972). Although distribution and abundance of turtles in the area is mainly based on strandings data, it has been shown that most turtles enter the Irish waters from the south and south west, moving northwards to the west of Ireland or through the Irish Sea (Pierpoint, 2000). It is therefore possible that turtles may be present within the proposed survey area.
3.3.5 Birds
Offshore Distribution Islands in the Irish Sea and seacliffs near productive waters provide a perfect breeding habitat for some species of seabirds. Shearwaters, gannets, gulls, terns and auks are common in the Irish Sea. The majority of these birds breed in colonies located on the southwest, south and east coasts of Ireland while others overwinter in Irish waters. Other species such as some species of shearwater and skua are passage migrants that use the area as a migratory corridor. Other important biological factors affecting species distribution are available nesting sites and social interactions.
20 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Human fishing can have an effect on the way bird species are distributed as many species obtain a high percentage of their food from fishing vessels, mostly at the shelf edge (Stone et al., 1995). Physical factors including water depth, wind and weather, water movement, sea temperature and salinity also directly and indirectly influence seabird distribution, often through prey distribution. Higher densities of certain seabird species such as Little Auk, Manx Shearwaters, Guillemots and Razorbills are associated with frontal and upwelling systems (Pollock et al., 1997). Table 3.3 shows the species likely to be found in the vicinity of the proposed Providence site survey and extended 2D seismic survey area (UKDMap, 1998, DCENR, in press). A presence/absence scale has been used as low to high scales often do not give an accurate indication of population size.
Table 3.3: Seabirds found in the vicinity of the proposed survey area (UKDMap, 1998; DCENR, in press) (red line denoted proposed survey period)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Northern Fulmar Northern Fulmars are a common and widespread seabird species along the British and Irish coasts, preferring offshore waters on both the shelf and continental slope. They are recorded throughout the year. From April to May most birds are feeding over the shelf break, building up reserves for the breeding season and are not present in the survey area.
European Storm Petrel The European Storm Petrel is a summer visitor to Ireland, nesting in burrows and crevices on remote islands. Highest densities are recorded during spring and summer over the shelf, to the south in the Celtic Sea with only infrequent presence in the Survey area.
Manx Shearwater Manx Shearwaters are local breeders and are regularly recorded between March and October. Highest densities occur during spring and summer, in close proximity to the breeding colonies. Highest densities to the south of Ireland. Occasional winter records in the Irish and Celtic Seas.
Sooty Shearwater The Sooty Shearwater is a passage migrant that breeds on islands in the southern Pacific and Atlantic Oceans. Recorded in breeding season in the Irish sea during the summer months.
Cory’s Shearwater Cory’s Shearwaters are annual visitors to the Irish southwest coast, wintering in the south Atlantic. Very occasional records in during July and August.
Northern Gannet Widely distributed throughout the area and in all seasons. Breeding colonies in summer at Irelands Eye north of Howth Head.
Great Skua Most widely recorded skua species off the west of Ireland. Large numbers recorded over the Celtic Sea and shelf waters east and north east of the Goban Spur. Also frequently recorded during winter months, mainly over the continental shelf. Rare in Irish Sea.
Pomarine Skua
MGE0282RP002F06 21 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Spring and autumn migrants in Irish waters. The two main migratory routes being the Irish Sea and off the west of Ireland. Recorded over the IOSEA4 area from April to December. Most birds seem to loosely follow the shelf break on their migration route. Abundance peaks occur in May, October and November.
Arctic Skua Frequently recorded in coastal and inshore habitats during periods of migration, particularly from July to September. High densities recorded over coastal areas of the Celtic Sea.
Long Tailed Skua The smallest and most pelagic of the skua species, it rarely approaches coastal areas during migration. This is the least numerous seabird species recorded in the area. Sporadic sightings have occurred over the Irish Sea and east of the Goban Spur
Herring Gull Commonest and the most widespread of the three large breeding gulls in Britain and Ireland. Frequently recorded along the coast in all seasons. Offshore encounters are sporadic and limited to post-breeding and winter months over the continental slope in the northeastern region of the IOSEA4 area.
Lesser Black- Backed Gull One of the largest and most aggressive gull species breeding in Ireland. Coastal resident only found in the north Atlantic. Spread their range over the Irish Shelf during winter months and the breeding season. Records over the IOSEA4 area have been reported all year round
Great Black- Backed Gull The largest and most aggressive gull species breeding in Ireland is a coastal resident found in the north Atlantic. Great black-backed gulls are more marine than other gull species, spreading their range over the Irish Shelf during winter months and the breeding season. Records of great black-backed gull over Blocks 35/8 and 35/9 occur from January to September.
Kittiwake One of the most pelagic species and also one of the most numerous breeding seabirds in Ireland. Highest densities are associated during the winter with the Irish Shelf and continental shelf. Uncommon in the Irish Sea area, though recorded all year round
Common Guillemot Largest of the four auk species breeding in Ireland. Prefer inshore waters during breeding season, becoming more widespread during autumn and winter. Low guillemot concentrations recorded in the northeastern section of the Irish Sea area in winter and spring
Black Guillemot Least pelagic of the auk species in Britain and Ireland. Feeds mainly on the bottom and prefers sheltered and inshore waters throughout the year.
Razorbill Medium-sized auk species restricted to the north Atlantic. Commonly recorded in inshore waters close to their colonies. Highest densities were recorded over the Irish Sea and low to moderate densities were consistently recorded over St. George’s Channel throughout the year
Atlantic Puffin Most pelagic of the four auk species breeding in Ireland. This species is widespread over the continental shelf, west of Britain, where it was recorded in low to moderate densities throughout the Irish Sea between April and September. Atlantic puffin were sparsely distributed during the winter and autumn
KEY Presence Absence *
*indicates absence from survey results due either to lack of survey effort (in which case it is stated in the text) or a genuine absence from the area during a sampling period.
22 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Vulnerability Vulnerability of seabirds varies greatly between species. Due to heavy boat traffic in the area associated with the shipping lanes nearby, it is not thought that the presence of the survey and vulnerability of physical disturbance will have a significant effect, however the vulnerability of seabirds to oil pollution differs greatly dependant on the species behaviour. The most vulnerable group of seabirds is the auks. The Common Guillemot, Razorbill and Atlantic Puffin spend a lot of time sitting on the sea surface forming big aggregations while preening and moulting, making them very vulnerable to oil pollution. The majority of dead oiled seabirds found on beaches are guillemots and razorbills. Fulmar and Manx Shearwater are considered very vulnerable to oil pollution, due to the large amount of time they spend rafting on the sea surface. In addition to high tendency for rafting in large groups, 94% of the world population of Manx Shearwater breed in Britain and Ireland. Approximately 70% of the world’s Northern Gannet population breed in Britain and Ireland. As there are relatively few colonies compared to other seabird species, an oil spill close to these colonies during breeding season could have serious consequences for gannets. Like fulmars, gannets spend more time at sea then other species and need to run along the sea surface with the headwinds to become airborne. Northern Gannets are therefore considered to be vulnerable to oil pollution. Great Skua and Kittiwakes are also regarded as being vulnerable to oil pollution as they are present in high densities in the vicinity, and spend a large amount of time on the sea surface. Lesser Black-backed Gull is a common and widespread species, which, although it spends a considerable amount of time in the marine environment, has a high population in the area and a pollution event would therefore not be regarded as having a major impact on the population as a whole. Species, including Shearwaters, Skuas and Great Black-backed Gulls are highly aerial, widespread species that occur in low numbers within the proposed Providence 2D seismic survey area. They are therefore regarded as not threatened by oil pollution.
Seabird Breeding Colonies There are a number of important sea bird breeding colonies within the IOSEA4 area and these include Rockabill, Lambay Island, Ireland’s Eye, Howth Head, and Saltee Islands, There are smaller breeding sites all along the south east and south coast where suitable habitats occur. Figure 3.8 shows the locations of important breeding colonies and bird areas within the Irish Sea area. Highest concentrations of breeding seabirds in the Irish coast are located in the southwest and southeast regions (Mackey et al, 2004a). There are 13 seabird species of European conservation concern breeding in Ireland, nine of which have an unfavourable conservation status in Europe. Nine Important Bird Areas (IBAs) (refer to Figure 3.8) on the Irish coast hold at least 1 percent of the global population of a seabird species for the following species: Atlantic Puffin, European Storm Petrel, Northern Gannet, Shag Phalacrocorax aristotelis and Roseate Tern Sterna dougallii.
Waders and Waterfowl A common marine habitat on the east coast of Ireland is the estuary with examples occurring at Carlingford Lough, Dundalk Bay, the mouth of the Boyne, Rodgerstown, Malahide, and inner Dublin Bay. These habitats provide feeding and rooting grounds for a long list of all native and visiting waders. These include Heron, Egret, Moorhen, Coot, Rail species, Oyster Catcher, Plover species, Lapwing, Sanderling, Knot Sandpiper species, Turnstone, Dunlin, Stint species, Shank species, Godwit species, Curlew, Whimbrel, Snipe species and Ruff. A number of rare visitors species have been recorded in the Irish Sea coastal area and these include for example, Yellow Leg species and Dowitcher species.
MGE0282RP002F06 23 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Ireland lies on the main migratory routes of the east Atlantic with many of the birds that winter in southern Europe and Africa passing through and staging along the coast. The estuaries, mudflats and sand flats listed above are of major importance for migrant waterfowl in spring and autumn. Waterfowl include divers, grebes, duck, geese, swans, Moorhen and coot. A number of sites are designated as Ramsar and SPA due to these species. Table 3.4 lists the SPAs in the vicinity of the survey and their Annex 1 species. Figure 3.8: Important seabird areas on the east coast of Ireland (Source: DCENR, in press)
24 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Table 3.4: Coastal SPAs in the vicinity of the survey area and their designated species (Source: NPWS, 2010) SPA County Distance Annex I Birds from site survey Dalkey Islands (004172) Dublin 6kms Roseate Tern, Common Tern , Arctic Tern Howth Head Coast Dublin 11kms Peregrine Falcon (004113) North Bull Island Dublin 12.5kms Golden Plover, Bar‐tailed Godwit, Ruff, (004006) Short‐eared Owl (also a UNESCO Heritage site) Murrough SPA (004186) Wicklow 14kms Red‐throated Diver, Little Egret, Whooper Swan, Greenland White‐fronted Goose, Golden Plover, Little Tern, Sandwich Tern, Short‐eared Owl, Kingfisher Skerries Island SPA Dublin 15kms Golden Plover, Short‐eared Owl (004122) Baldoyle Bay (004016) Dublin 16kms Golden Plover, Bar‐tailed Godwit South Dublin Bay and Dublin 16kms Bartailed Godwit, Mediterranean Gull, River Tolka Estuary Common Tern, Arctic Tern (004024) Broadmeadow/Swords Dublin 21kms Golden Plover, Bar‐tailed Godwit, Ruff Estuary (004025) Ireland's Eye (004117) Dublin 22kms Peregrine Falcon Lambay Island (004069) Dublin 23.5kms Peregrine Falcon Rogerstown Estuary Dublin 27kms Golden Plover (004015) Wicklow Head (004127) Wicklow 28kms Peregrine Falcon Rockabill (004014) Dublin 36kms Roseate Tern, Common Tern, Arctic Tern
3.4 Protected Sites and Coastal Sensitivities
3.4.1 Marine Protected Sites In Ireland key legislation governing nature conservation includes the Wildlife (Amendment) Act 2000, the European Community (Conservation of Wild Birds) Regulations 1985 and the European Union (Natural Habitats) Regulations 1997. To date, offshore the west coast of Ireland, four candidate Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) have been designated. There are no offshore SACs proposed in the vicinity of the survey area in Ireland or UK waters. There are Annex 1 habitats located in the Irish Sea, however none of these occur at the survey area. The nearest coastal SAC with marine habitats is Dublin Bay where the intertidal mud and sandflats are listed as a designated feature (see Section 3.4.2). Harbour Porpoise, Bottlenose Dolphin, Grey Seal and Common Seal are all classified under Annex II of the Habitats Directive as a marine species whose conservation requires the designation of SACs. It is unlikely that any of the species will meet the criteria for site designation within, or adjacent to the proposed seismic survey area.
3.4.2 Coastal Protected Sites The east coast of Ireland, including highly indented complex of headlands, embayments and estuaries with a diverse range of shore types and exposures, supports a rich variety of habitats and species of international and national conservation importance. Breeding sites for a number Annex I bird species including Arctic terns, storm petrels and barnacle geese have been designated as Special Protection Areas (SPAs). A number of wetland areas are also designated as Ramsar sites and numerous Important Bird Areas
MGE0282RP002F06 25 Kish Bank Survey ERA
are dotted along the coastline (refer to Figure 3.8, Figure 3.10 and Table 3.4). Few SPAs in the area close to the survey area are designated for marine birds. National areas of importance, or areas where boundary issue would make it difficult to designate SACs and SPAs, are protected as Natural Heritage Areas (NHAs) under the Wildlife (Amendment) Act 2000. Figure 3.9 and Figure 3.10 illustrates the protected sites on the coast adjacent to the proposed seismic survey area, the closest of which are located around 3km to the east of the survey and 8km from the borehole sampling. Table 3.5 lists those SACs nearest to the proposed survey area and their qualifying features. SACs with marine species (Annex II) listed as qualifying features are also highlighted in Table 3.4.
Figure 3.9: Natura 2000 Areas in the vicinity of the Proposed Survey Area (NPWS, 2010)
26 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 3.10: Other Coastal Protected Areas in the vicinity of the Proposed Survey Area (NPWS, 2010)
The survey will be undertaken at a distance from the nearest Natura 2000 site (2.5km from nearest SPA and 3.5km from nearest SAC). As the survey is primarily acoustic in nature, no significant impacts are anticipated. The nearest SAC site (Bray SAC) is designated predominantly for seacliffs and the SPA is designated for Sterna Terns. The nearest SAC for marine features is Dublin Bay, 8km from the site survey area. The sampling will occur at a significant distance from Natura 2000 sites (8km from the nearest SAC and 7km from nearest SPA). Therefore the survey does not require further assessment as any impacts will be highly localised and of short duration.
Table 3.5: SACs in the vicinity of the proposed survey (NPWS 2010; DCENR, in press) SAC name County Distance Qualifying Habitats Marine from site Qualifying survey species Baldoyle Bay Dublin 15kms Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide, Salicornia and other annuals colonizing mud and sand, Spartina swards, Atlantic salt meadows, Mediterranean salt meadows Howth Head Dublin 11kms Vegetated sea cliffs Lambay Dublin 23.5kms Vegetated sea cliffs Grey seal Island Halichoerus grypus Malahide Dublin 21kms Mudflats and sandflats not covered by Estuary seawater at low tide, Salicornia and other annuals colonizing mud and sand, Spartina swards, Atlantic salt meadows, Mediterranean salt meadows, Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation, Shifting dunes
MGE0282RP002F06 27 Kish Bank Survey ERA
SAC name County Distance Qualifying Habitats Marine from site Qualifying survey species along the shoreline North Dublin Dublin 14kms Annual vegetation of drift lines, Bay Salicornia and other annuals colonizing mud and sand, Spartina swards, Atlantic salt meadows, Mediterranean salt meadows, Embryonic shifting dunes, Shifting dunes along the shoreline, Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation Rogerstown Dublin 27kms Estuaries, Mudflats and sandflats not Estuary covered by seawater at low tide, Salicornia and other annuals colonizing mud and sand, Spartina swards, Atlantic salt meadows, Mediterranean salt meadows, Shifting dunes along the shoreline, Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation
South Dublin Dublin 11kms Mudflats and sandflats not covered by Bay seawater at low tide Ireland's Eye Dublin 22kms Perennial vegetation of stony banks, Vegetated sea cliffs Bray Head Wicklow 8kms Vegetated sea cliffs Magherabeg Wicklow 30kms Annual vegetation of drift lines, Dunes Embryonic shifting dunes, Shifting dunes along the shoreline, Fixed coastal dunes with herbaceous vegetation, Atlantic decalcified fixed dunes Wicklow Reef Wicklow 27kms Reefs; biogenic reef Sabellaria alveolata Phaeostachys spinifera Eulalia ornata Unciola crenatipalma
3.4.3 OSPAR Marine Protected Areas OSPAR Annex V ‘On the Protection and Conservation of the Ecosystems and Biological Diversity of the Maritime Area’ includes the development of an ecologically coherent network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). OSPAR has set the aim for this to be established by 2010. The network is intended to make a significant contribution to the sustainable use, protection and conservation of marine biodiversity including in areas beyond national jurisdiction (OSPAR, 2010). Those offshore habitats which have been specified as in decline and or threatened in OSPAR Region III (Celtic Seas) (OSPAR, 2008) and may be of potential relevance to the Irish Sea area are: • Seapen and burrowing megafauna communities; and • Modiolus modiolus beds; Neither of these occur within the survey area, the nearest is over 10kms from the survey area on the offshore side of the Kish Bank.
28 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
3.4.4 Cultural Heritage and Protected Areas Legislation acting to protect submarine archaeological remains in Ireland is based on provisions of the United Nations Convention on Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) 1982 and of the European Convention on the Protection of the Archaeological Heritage (Revised) 1992 (the Valletta convention), both of which oblige signatories to protect submerged archaeological remains. Wrecks more than 100 years old and underwater archaeological objects in Irish territorial and continental shelf waters are protected under the provisions of The National Monuments Acts 1930 to 1994. The Act also allows the imposition of an Underwater Heritage Order, in order to protect sites of historical, archaeological or artistic importance. These can include wrecks less than 100 years old (e.g. RMS Lusitania, sunk May 1915, was placed under such an order in 1995). Current proposals (National Monuments Service 2009) are likely to extend protection to later wrecks (e.g. World War II) if required. They will also allow Ireland to ratify the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) Convention on the Protection of Underwater Heritage 2001. The present Irish coastline may contain a rich variety of archaeological remains; the understanding of this marine archaeological heritage is being continually expanded by the work of a number of national research institutes as well as the Underwater Archaeology Unit (UAU) and the National Monuments Service (NMS) which is part of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The Irish Sea has been the focus of marine travel since the Mesolithic era (Bell et al 2006) and maritime history has shaped much of the east coast of Ireland, most notably Dublin Port and its history from the first Viking ships through medieval times, with sites, old ships’ timbers and a medieval shipwreck across Dublin Bay (NMS, 2010). The Vesper was lost on Kish Bank in January 1876 and more recent wrecks of the MV Bolivar ran aground on the Kish Bank during a snow storm on 4th March 1947. The RMS Leinster, was torpedoed and sunk by a German submarine on 10th October 1918. It went down four miles east of the Kish Lighthouse with over 500 lives lost, the greatest single loss of life in the Irish Sea. Fifty-five wrecks are listed for the Kish Bank area at Irish Wrecks Online, although none are located in the site survey area. The stormy and shifting conditions of the Irish Sea are attributed to the break up of wreck sites in the area. In addition, many have been removed for safety due to the shipping activity. Known wrecks are shown in Figure 3.11. National monuments occur along the coast of this area and include marine features such as the structures and lighthouses of Dublin Port and coastal towns. None occur in the survey area.
MGE0282RP002F06 29 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 3.11: Shipwrecks in the vicinity of the Proposed Survey Area (DoEHLG, 2010)
3.5 Socio-Economic Activity
3.5.1 Shipping Major trade routes between Europe, UK and Ireland and transatlantic connection routes all pass through the Irish Sea. The majority of traffic is shorthaul routes between Ireland, the UK and northern European ports. Average weight classes and different types of ship are shown in Figure 3.12. Figure 3.12: Average cargo, tanker and ferry distribution and deadweight tonnage in IOSEA 4 area (DCENR, in press; Anatec, 2010)
Due to the shipping activity a separate navigation assessment has been undertaken to assess the shipping density within the survey area.
30 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
3.5.1.1 Navigation Assessment Figure 3.13 shows the vessel density assessment undertaken by ANATEC in the vicinity of the survey site. The assessment is based on commercial shipping data from AIS records. The majority of ships routing through the study area have Dublin as either a destination or departure port. Dublin is the largest port in Ireland as well as the Irish Sea region as a whole, and accounts for 50% of all Ireland’s imports and exports as well as being a major passenger port. Rosslare, Cork and Waterford are the next most active ports, east and south of the country. These ports all have regular ferry services, for example Dublin to Liverpool and Dublin to Holyhead. The area of the site survey is in relatively shallow water. As a result it falls outside the main shipping lanes and transit routes. Due to the location of the Kish Bank lighthouse and the bank, few vessels use the area covered by the site survey. The recorded shipping density at the well site location is <5 vessels per year. The vessel density assessment report prepared for this area is included in this application.
Figure 3.13: Shipping counts in the survey area (Anatec, 2011)
3.5.2 Commercial Fishing The waters around Ireland make up some of the most productive fishing grounds in the world. Fisheries in the area are important both nationally and internationally, with a wide range of fish and shellfish species targeted. A number of commercial fishing ports are located on the east coast, the major fishing ports being Kilmore Quay, Howth and Clogherhead (Irish Sea Fisheries Board, 2010). In addition, numerous small ports are located along the coast; these are used by small boat fisherman employing static fishery techniques close to the shore including potting and creeling. Vessel sightings in the region are high. Irish, British, French and Spanish vessels are seen to dominate the fishing in and around the IOSEA2 area. In the survey location, Spanish and Irish vessels were recorded with highest numbers, with 2.3 Irish vessels per
MGE0282RP002F06 31 Kish Bank Survey ERA
square kilometre and 2.7 Spanish vessels per square kilometre (average over year 2006) (Irish Naval Services, 2007). Demersal fishing dominates in Irish waters, particularly in the west of Ireland, and fleets predominantly originate from Belgium, France, Spain, Ireland and UK. The main gear used is the otter trawl (Figure 3.14), which logs over double the number of effort hours when compared with other gear choices. Figure 3.14: Total effort (hours) in Ireland for otter trawls (OTX), Nephrops trawlers (TBN), demersal seiners (SX) and other non-identified gear (N_A) for Belgium, France, Ireland and United Kingdom.
Total effort is seen to be relatively stable over the last 10 years. The main trend seems to be a decline in French otter trawlers fishing in the area. Demersal fisheries in Ireland are predominately mixed fisheries, with many stocks exploited together in various types of fisheries. Interactions between fisheries are common and management of fisheries stocks is proving difficult (Stockbook, 2008). ICES division VIIa (Irish Sea) supports important fisheries for demersal and pelagic finfish and shellfish, and the main fisheries involve otter, beam and Nephrops trawlers. Otter trawlers target Cod, Haddock, Whiting and Plaice, although important by-catch species include Anglerfish, Hake, Sole and Skates and Rays. Since the early 1980s there has been a development of semi-pelagic gear, which again targets Cod, Whiting and Haddock. The beam trawl fishery in the Irish Sea involves vessels from Belgium, UK (England, Wales and Northern Ireland), Ireland, Holland and France. It commenced in the early 1960s to target Sole and fishing effort peaked in the late 1980s, following a period of strong year classes of Sole. The effort is currently about 60% of that peak value, and the fishery also lands Plaice, Rays, Brill, Turbot and Anglerfish. There is also an important Nephrops fishery on the muddy grounds in the north-western Irish Sea, and this is one of the most valuable fisheries in the area. Other fisheries that operate in the Irish Sea deploy gillnets and tangle nets, often by inshore boats targeting Cod, Bass, Grey Mullet, Sole, Plaice and Rays. Longline fisheries targeting Spurdog expanded in the 1980s, although this fishery has subsequently declined. There are also important fisheries for shellfish, notably scallop fisheries off the Isle of Man and pot fisheries for edible crab and lobster. Pelagic fisheries in the Irish Sea target Herring. The fisheries of the area were described by Pawson et al (2002).
32 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Demersal Fishery Within the survey area (ICES area Viia) the majority of demersal fisheries are aimed at crustacean landings (Nephrops, Crab, Velvet Crab etc). These species predominantly prefer the muddier sediments in the offshore side of the Kish Bank and north central Irish Sea and as a result are less likely to be affected by the survey. Transit of these vessels may be temporarily affected as they traverse to their fisheries grounds. Advisory notes are in place for the demersal elasmobranch catch in this area (2011-2012). It is likely that effort may be reduced on previous years. The majority of this fishery does not occur in the survey area. Similarly, juvenile cod (codling) fisheries are now rare in the area due to limit and regulatory changes.
Pelagic Fishery Pelagic species are found in mid-water in large shoals, and typically undergo extensive migrations between feeding, spawning and over-wintering grounds. The principal species are Mackerel, Horse Mackerel, Herring and Blue Whiting, which are fished using gear such as pelagic trawled, trolled lures and surface long-lines. The normal annual season for pelagic fishing commences in early September and lasts until March. The very shallow waters of the bank make it unlikely that this area is actively fished, however, effort is likely to occur on the offshore side of the banks where such fish may congregate. This is outside the survey area.
Shellfish Fishery This fishery includes crustacean (crabs, lobsters and shrimps), bivalve molluscs (mussels, oysters and scallops) and cephalopods (squids and octopuses). Peak landings are seen in May through to August. There is an active whelk fishery in the region. This is a static gear fishery potting for whelks. Some of this fishing occurs on the Kish Bank, mainly by smaller vessels from local ports along the east coast. The main season is from February to July.
3.5.3 Other Activities
Military The survey location is identified as a generic military exercise or transit area. Due to the heavy volume of shipping in the area and the shallow conditions of Kish Bank it is not thought that any exercise operations are carried out in the area, however military ships and submarines do use the area to transit. The nearest active firing range (marine) is 35km away. The nearest munitions dumping site (DCENR, 2007) is over 100 kilometres away.
Oil and Gas Oil and gas exploration and development surveying and drilling has been operational in Ireland since 1970, with over 200 wells drilled in Irish waters to date (DCENR, 2007). The Kish Bank Basin area, offshore Dublin has seen little exploratory drilling in Irish waters, with only four wells drilled across the basin (see Figure 1.1). Similar geological areas in UK waters are heavily explored with significant oil and gas production. Recent (2009) seismic and shallow drilling operations were conducted close to the 33/22- 1 well drilled in 1977 by Amoco, to investigate the feasibility of an underground coal degasification project.
Cables Submarine telecommunication cables represent an important use of the offshore area, with development rights being protected under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). Submarine cables are safeguarded against natural and man made hazards by the International Cable Protection Committee (ICPC) who work closely with offshore industries to reduce the number of incidents of damage to cables (ICPC, 2010). An extensive network of telecommunication cables is present on the seafloor ensuring
MGE0282RP002F06 33 Kish Bank Survey ERA
reliable telephone, electronic and telegraphic communication between countries and continents. Hibernia Atlantic (proposed 360 route), CONCERTO, and ESAT cables are significant cable operators in the Irish Sea and survey area (see Figure 3.15) (Kingfisher, 2010a,b). There are no cables in the vicinity of the sampling and coring operations.
Windfarms There is currently one offshore wind development, the Arklow Offshore Wind Power Plant, located on the Arklow Banks off the coast of County Wicklow, east of Ireland and south of the survey area. The plant is connected to the Arklow National Grid Substation via a submarine cable to the shore and an underground cable on land. The project has the capacity to produce in excess of 3 megawatts (SEAI, 2010). Eco Wind has full consent for a project at Codling Bank, although construction has not yet commenced. This will be connected to the onshore grid via a submarine cable and then a sub station at Caernarfon (National Offshore Wind Association of Ireland, 2010). Other offshore wind projects being actively developed in the Irish Sea area are the Saorgus Dublin Array and Oriel Windfarm offshore at Dundalk. If these projects progress they will be connected to the shore via submarine cables (National Offshore Wind Association of Ireland, 2010). The Saorgus Dublin Array is located nearby the Kish Bank survey area, although on the offshore side of the area. There are currently no developments or proposed surveys expected in relation to this windfarm in 2011-2012. Preliminary investigation was undertaken in 2008. Figure 3.15: Marine cables in the vicinity of the survey area (UKHO 2010, DCENR, in press)
Recreation and recreational angling There is no significant recreational or amenity activity anticipated in the survey area. There are some recreational sailing and angling activities in the area, however, the majority of the leisure activity will be confined to the Bullock Harbour and Killiney Bay areas and would be generally close to shore during the summer months particularly at weekends. Some recreational angling does occur in inshore areas at the western extent of the survey area (sport fishing for shark, bass and other species), however, these activities are predominately confined to summer weekends and are unlikely to interact with the survey.
34 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
4 Hazards, Effects and Mitigation Measures
4.1 Introduction
The methodology used for environmental impact assessment follows the sequence summarised in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1: Methodology for Environmental Impact Assessment
Survey Programme Environmental Design Description
Hazard Identification Hazard Environmental Characterisation Sensitivities
Identification of Project/Environment Interactions
Environmental Impact Assessment
Mitigation/Control Identification
The main supporting information required for an assessment includes a description of both the project (Section 2) and the environment in which it will take place (Section 3). In this section, the interactions between the seismic programme and the environment are identified for routine events and an environmental impact assessment undertaken by establishing a matrix of hazard against environmental sensitivity.
4.2 Environmental Impact Assessment Methodology
4.2.1 Routine Operations For routine (planned) operations, the process of environmental impact assessment considers each interaction qualitatively on the basis of the criteria of expected consequence provided in Table 4.1. This qualitative scale helps to rank hazards on a relative basis and identify areas where additional control measures may be required.
MGE0282RP002F06 35 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Table 4.1: Assessment of Significance of Effect or Hazard
1 Major May affect the whole population or species in sufficient magnitude to cause a change in abundance, distribution, or size of genetic pool such that natural recruitment would not return that population or species, or any population or species dependent on it. Has a measurable effect on the livelihood of those using the resource over a period of months/years. 2 Moderate May affect a portion of the population or species resulting in a change of abundance and/or distribution, or size of genetic pool but does not change the integrity of any population as a whole. Has a measurable effect on the livelihood of those using the resource over a period of weeks/months.
3 Minor May affect a specific group of individuals of a population in a localised area but does not affect other tropic levels or the integrity of the population itself. May be noticed but does not affect the livelihood of those utilising the resource. 4 Negligible May affect a specific group of individuals of a population in a localised area in a way similar in effect to small random changes in the population due to ambient environmental conditions. Has no discernible effect on the environmental resource as a whole and is likely to go unnoticed by those who already use it. None No interaction and hence no change expected.
4.2.2 Non-Routine Events Hazards associated with non-routine (unplanned) events, such as accidental fuel spills, have been assessed with reference to the expected frequency of occurrence as well as the consequence of an adverse impact on the environment (Table 4.2).
Table 4.2: Assessment of Significance of Hazard – Non-Routine Events
Consequence of Impact (see Table 4.1) Frequency of Occurrence 4 3 2 1
1 per 100-1000 or less (unit yrs) VL VL L M
1 per 10-100 (unit yrs) VL L M H
1 per 1-10 (unit yrs) VL L M H
>1 per (unit yr) L M H H
Risks: VL=Very Low, L=Low, M= Medium, H = High This classification assists in identifying the greatest risks to the environment from unplanned events. Those hazards resulting in negligible or minor consequence to the environment with a negligible to low expected frequency of occurrence are generally acceptable, whereas those resulting in severe consequences which have a high likelihood of occurring are not. Medium and high risk hazards need to be reduced as far as reasonably practicable and procedures set in place to minimise impacts should an incident occur.
36 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
4.3 Hazard Identification, Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Measures
4.3.1 Identification of Interactions Table 4.3 identifies the key activities involved in the proposed site survey and extended 2D seismic programme against the various environment receptors that could be significantly affected by the survey.
Table 4.3: Identification of Environmental Receptors which could be Significantly Impacted by the Proposed Survey
Receptor Physical Biological Socio-Economic
Key Activity Seabed Quality Quality Seabed Water Quality Air Quality Plankton Benthos Fish Seabirds Marine Mammals Turtles Marine Sites Protected Commercial Fishing Shipping Marine Infrastructure / Leisure Tourism Land Use Onshore
Physical Presence X X X (survey vessel, towed equipment & support boats) Noise and Vibration X X X X X X X X X (air sourcess, normal vessel operations, drilling) Atmospheric Emission X (engines/generators on the vessel) Accidental Events X X X X X X X X X X X (e.g. fuel spill) The following sections discuss the environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures for each of the identified key activities. The resulting residual impacts are then determined using the significance scale outlined in Section 4.2.
4.3.2 Physical Presence The survey vessel, its acoustic sources and streamer and the associated support boat can represent a temporary obstacle to other marine users (notably fishing and shipping) in the area during the duration of the survey. The survey will be conducted in 2012. Currently the survey is scheduled to commence in early 2012 and it is not envisaged that operations will continue past the end of May 2012. During this period the amount of time spent surveying is expected to be a maximum of 10 days, although the maximum duration of the survey programme may be around 15 days, given the potential for down time. The additional shipping associated with the survey is considered to be insignificant when compared to existing levels of shipping in this region (refer to Section 3.5.1). Similarly, the displacement of fishing effort from intensive site survey area of 9 square kilometres and a total survey area of approximately 135 square kilometres for the duration of the seismic survey is unlikely to significantly affect fishing revenue. Of note is that the survey vessel will operate in a similar way to any other ship at sea, although it will travel at a low speed (2 to 3 metres per second) towing a streamer, approximately 1500m in length, resulting in limited manoeuvrability. The survey will, however, be undertaken following a strict plan and interference with shipping and fishing activity will be minimised by discussions with appropriate organisations (including the Maritime Safety Directorate, the MRCC of the Irish Coast Guard and the Sea Fisheries Protection Agency of the DCENR) during the planning stage. In addition, good communications with the relevant authorities, as well as with any shipping entering the survey area, will be maintained throughout the survey. During drilling operations the
MGE0282RP002F06 37 Kish Bank Survey ERA
vessel will be stationary over the drill site. As it is intended to drill only one borehole, the impact of this operation will be minimal. In the event that additional boreholes are required, it is anticipated that the vessel will maintain positions in close proximity to the original borehole for a maximum of three days. The number of boreholes required is dependent on which rig is contracted. The area is within the lowest shipping density area and in an area likely to have the least impact on other sea users. Overall, experience shows that interference with other sea users can be avoided over the survey period by introducing good management practices. Specific mitigation measures that will be undertaken by Providence to ensure minimal interference include: • A specialist survey contractor has been appointed to undertake the survey. • A Fisheries Liaison Officer, with a knowledge of fisheries local to the survey area, will be appointed during the survey works and a Pre-Survey Fisheries support will be prepared. • Details of the work programme will be passed to the maritime authorities (including the Maritime Safety Directorate, the MRCC of the Irish Coast Guard and the Sea Fisheries Protection Agency of the DCENR and Dublin Port Harbour Master) in advance of the survey to increase awareness amongst shipping traffic where relevant. Of note is that the Maritime Safety Directorate publishes Marine Notices advertising such operations. • The survey will maintain communications with the Dublin Port Harbour Master and inform other relevant Harbour masters (Dun Laoghaire, Bray, Greystones etc.) of progress. • Operating criteria for weather conditions (e.g. wind, waves and visibility) will be established and operations suspended if the criteria are exceeded. • A Providence representative will be on-board the survey vessel at all times to ensure compliance with approved operating procedures, including those concerning environmental protection and to also ensure that the survey is conducted safely. • A support (guard) boat, will monitor shipping and minimise interference by maintaining position near the end of the towed cables, thereby helping to enforce an exclusion zone around the survey vessel and cables. • A shipping intensity assessment has been undertaken.
• The survey vessel and support boat will meet all national and international regulations for shipping including the appropriate signals and lights to indicate towing the cables and the regulations defined by the International Maritime Organisation for avoiding collisions at sea. State-of-the-art communications and positioning equipment will be on-board the survey vessel to maintain communications with all other shipping and provide accurate information on the position of the survey vessel and the cables.
Residual impacts to other sea users (fishing and shipping) resulting from the physical presence of the seismic vessel, streams and support boat are considered to be minor, particularly given the relatively short duration of the survey.
4.3.3 Acoustic Emissions
General There have been reports (e.g. Swan et al, 1994) that the repeated noise emissions generated by the seismic energy source can result in environmental effects such as: • Physical damage to animals close to the source; • Direct behavioural effects through avoidance; and • Indirect behavioural effects by impairing/masking the ability to navigate, find food or communicate or through affecting the presence of food sources.
38 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
The main concerns associated with acoustic emissions from seismic surveys are potential impacts on plankton, fish and fisheries, and marine mammals. Available data indicate that offshore seabirds are neither attracted nor repelled by acoustic emissions generated by seismic operations, although some observations have suggested that certain species are attracted to the seismic vessel to scavenge for food (Turnpenny & Nedwell, 1994). These observations indicate that no significant impacts on birds would be anticipated from normal operation of the survey. In general, potential effects of intense acoustic signals occur close to the source array. The potential for effects on fauna is dependent on the magnitude of the sound and the frequency. The magnitude of the sound manifests itself as pressure, i.e. force acting over a given area. It is expressed in terms of ‘sound levels’, which use a logarithmic scale of the ratio of the measured pressure to a reference pressure (Decibels (dB)). The logarithmic nature of the scale means that a reduction of 3 dB is equivalent to the halving of the energy received. Various models have been identified which best fit the attenuation of sound with distance from its source for different conditions. Spherical spreading loss, close to the array (within several hundred metres to kilometres) results in sound intensities dropping quickly. Depending on the propagation conditions, the attenuation is between 3-6 Db per doubling of distance from the source (Swan et al. 1994). However, lower intensities at longer ranges decrease more slowly and the signal may be above background levels for several tens of kilometres or more (Swan et al., 1994). The complex seabed topography and current systems found in the Kish Bank area within the vicinity of the proposed survey location mean that sounds propagation from a seismic survey will also be complex. Noise may be reflected and refracted off the slopes as it radiates away from the sound source. Sound is therefore not likely to be propagated as far in shallow waters (<50 metres) where there is more interference from reflecting surfaces (Turnpenny & Nedwell, 1994; Richardson et al, 1995).
Impacts on Plankton Potential effects on plankton can occur from the sound energy emitted by the air sources used in seismic surveys. Although Kostyuchenko (1971) found that air sources injured plankton (including fish eggs) out to a range of five metres it has been estimated that the wake from passing ships propellers and bow waves will cause a similar if not greater volumetric effect to that of an air source array (Swan et al., 1994). Effects on plankton are therefore limited.
Impact to Benthos It is not anticipated that there will be any impacts to benthos from the seismic survey. Benthic macrofauna may exhibit predator avoidance behaviour as vessels and acoustic arrays pass over however, there is no recorded evidence of significant changes or physical impacts from seismic survey. During the borehole operation a small amount of cuttings will be generated through drilling the boreholes. The cuttings generated from the drilling may smother the benthos in the immediate surrounding area and affect it for a short period of time. However, recolonisation is anticipated to be rapid as the benthic communities in the vicinity of the proposed survey area are likely to be characteristic of wider areas of the West Irish Sea (IOSEA4, in press), especially given the exceptionally small area affected by the operations. Prior to drilling, the seismic survey over the proposed borehole area will accurately confirm the water depths and seabed material and to identify seabed and shallow sub- seabed features and obstructions. In addition, an environmental baseline survey and habitat assessment was also undertaken. From the available information and the 2005 NPWS survey information (Roche et al, 2007) no species or habitats of conservation significance under the EC Habitat Directive (92/43/EEC) were observed in the surveyed area.
MGE0282RP002F06 39 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Impacts on Fish
Physical Effects Overall, the available data indicate that there is a very low risk of injury to any fish life stage (e.g. adult, juvenile, larval and embryonic (egg)), during or after exposure to air sources or air source arrays in normal operational use, such as is proposed for the survey (Swan et al., 1994). Several features of a fish’s anatomy, lifecycle and habits will determine the potential effects of loud noise sources on the fish. Of primary importance in determining the potential for any damage is the presence of a swimbladder – a gas filled chamber in the body cavity located just under the spine used for buoyancy or an aid to hearing. Fish with large, thin walled swimbladders connected to their inner ear with a resonant frequency near to 100 hertz will be most susceptible to physical damage or trauma from seismic shots (e.g. the cod and herring family and catfish). Many species of fish do not however have swim bladders (e.g. sharks, rays, pelagic Scombridae (mackerel), many flatfish and flounder) and cannot therefore be affected in this way. Direct injuries occur only when the fish, at whatever life stage, comes within a few metres distance of the sound source, where ‘sound pressure levels’ (SPLs) are most extreme (Swan et al., 1994; Turnpenny & Nedwell, 1994). Research indicates that larval fish and eggs can be killed within 2 metres of a detonating air source (Coull et al, 1998). However, where injury effects have been demonstrated, these have been under experimental conditions which are either unrepresentative of normal operational use, or which would arise only in special circumstances. There is no recorded evidence that air sources have killed fish or caused injuries during seismic survey operations (Turnpenny & Nedwell, 1994).
Behavioural Effects There is conflicting evidence on the behavioural effects of seismic surveys on fish. Numerous studies have reported no significant effect on the behaviour of various fish species, even in very close proximity (1.5 metres) to the seismic source (Pickett et al. 1994, Wardle et al 1998). In contrast, a number of studies have concluded that fish leave the immediate area around the survey vessel for the period when the acoustic source is active (Lokkeborg & Soldal 1993). Turnpenny & Nedwell (1994) have concluded that during seismic survey operations, fish tend to avoid the area out to 200-2,000 metres of the source. In some cases, this appears to be due to a movement of fish towards the seabed during the survey and fish possibly remaining immobile (Chapman & Hawkins 1969, Lokkeborg & Soldal 1993). Behavioural avoidance by fish has been observed to occur at the lower levels of 160 to 180 dB (Evans & Nice, 1996). Figure 4.2 summarises the overall impacts on fish from the use of air sources in relation to distance from the source.
40 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 4.2: Approximate zones of effect for fish from large air source arrays (after Swan et al, 1994)
Audible
Response
Subtle
Alarm
Startle
Avoidance
Pathological
10 100 1K 10K metres from source array Behavioural effects might impair reproductive effort of species which form concentrated breeding aggregates, if the survey was conducted over an entire spawning period across such an area (Swan et al., 1994). The Providence seismic survey area lies within or close to spawning and nursery grounds for several fish species (refer to Section 3.3.1). The possible effects of seismic surveys on these areas could lead to a cessation of fish spawning, spawning occurring in a less suitable location, or fish temporarily or permanently moving to a more suitable spawning ground. Nursery areas will be affected to a lesser extent as juvenile fish are able to swim away from sound sources. However, if they move away to another area the conditions may not be suitable enough to sustain them and these small fish may not be able to swim the long distances required to avoid the sound source (DCENR, 2007). Coull et al (1998) have identified that fish spawning within the vicinity of the proposed survey area, is sensitive to seismic disturbance between March and July, which corresponds to the spawning periods for blue whiting and mackerel. Although the proposed survey is scheduled to be completed prior to the end of May 2012, it should be noted that the survey period is relatively short in duration (estimated at a maximum of 15 working days) and does not cover the entire spawning area of these species. As such, it is considered unlikely to result in significant disturbance. With regard to Cephalopods, tests with the squid species Sepioteuthis australis showed a noticeable increase in alarm response once the air source level exceeded 156 to 161 dB. No consistent avoidance responses were seen, but there was a general trend for the squid to increase their swimming speed on approach of the air source, but then to slow down at the closest approach and for them to remain close to the water surface during air source operations. Squid were the only animals observed during these tests to make use of the sound shadow measured near the water. The common fish response to the air source was the opposite, to go towards the bottom which would take them into the part of the water column with the highest sound levels of air source (McCauley et al, 2000).
Summary of Seismic Effects on Fish In summary, direct mortality of fish from seismic survey operations is unlikely to be significant (Brand & Wilson, 1996). Short-term behavioural changes might be observed in fish populations in close proximity to the seismic source. This can potentially lead to localised changes in fish-catch in the survey area during and immediately after the survey although recovery occurs relatively rapidly (within days) after the survey ends. Given the mobile nature of the survey, any impacts are likely to be minor.
MGE0282RP002F06 41 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Commercial Fishing There is a concern that any behavioural changes might alter the distribution of commercially exploited species (Brand & Wilson, 1996). Available data suggests that the radiating sound fields from seismic operations may result in behavioural changes in fish such as changes in depth distribution and observed startle responses as highlighted in rockfish (Greene, 1985). Feeding behaviour may also be affected (Turnpenny & Nedwell, 1994). A series of studies have been undertaken to determine the effects of air source seismic survey operations on commercial fishing activities, primarily in the United States and Europe (e.g. California: Greene, 1985; Parsons et al., 1992, Norway: Dalen & Raknes, 1985; Dalen & Knutsen, 1987;Lokkeborg & Soldal, 1993; Engas et al., 1993. UK: Chapman & Hawkins, 1969; Pickett et al., 1994). The conclusions of these studies are again ambiguous. Some studies suggest an increase in demersal catch as fish avoid an approaching sound source by diving towards the seabed and remaining motionless. However, pelagic species appear to disperse to a greater extent resulting in a decrease in catch (e.g. Dalen & Knutsen, 1987). Other studies have suggested behavioural changes in feeding patterns (e.g. Skalski et al., 1992). Various studies have suggested that after a seismic survey the variation in time required for the recovery of fish populations and fishing catch rates will be influenced by several factors (Lokkeborg & Soldal, 1993 and Engas et al., 1993 in Brand & Wilson, 1996). These include: • The mobility of the species and the minimum time required to physically return to an area; • The rate of attenuation of the seismic impulses; • The duration and intensity of the seismic survey; • Seasonal variations in feeding behaviour and migrations; and • Availability of food source within and outside the surveyed area. Gausland (2003) looked at six studies of seismic impacts on fish and concluded that fish avoidance behaviour generally occurred within 2 kilometres of the sound source. The effects on the fish themselves appear to be short-lived, possibly only for the actual duration of the exposure, but where fish are displaced over long distances, re-invasion may rely on a diffusion-like process. This would inevitably take longer than the initial directed movement of fish out of the affected area (Turnpenny & Nedwell, 1994). However, such movement is expected to have insignificant effects on stock distribution when natural variability in abundance and distribution are taken into account In summary, direct mortality of fish from geophysical surveys undertaken with air sources is unlikely to be significant (Brand & Wilson, 1996). Short-term behavioural changes might be observed in fish populations in close proximity to the seismic source. Evidence of impacts on fish catch is inconclusive. Effects on commercial fisheries in the vicinity of the proposed Providence survey area are however, considered unlikely to be of long term significance. Any behavioural changes that may be observed in fish populations will be short term and over a very limited area, close to the seismic source.
Mitigation of Potential Impact of Seismic survey on Fish and Fisheries Survey scheduling is the principal effective mitigation measure available with respect to seismic impacts on fish spawning within the proposed survey area. As discussed above, fish spawning within the region in the vicinity of the proposed survey area is sensitive to seismic disturbance between late March and July, which corresponds to the spawning periods for blue whiting and mackerel. Although the proposed 2D seismic survey is scheduled to be completed prior to the end of May 2012, it should be noted that the operational survey period is relatively short in duration (estimated at around 10 working days) and covers a small area in relation to the entire spawning area of these species. As such, it is considered unlikely to result in significant disturbance. The survey includes the
42 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
sampling periods in which the vessel with be stationary in relatively shallow waters. This will have a further reduced impact. Providence has appointed a Fisheries Liaison Officer (FLO) with a knowledge of fisheries local to the survey area. The FLO will monitor activities on board the vessel for the duration of the survey works. A Pre-Survey Fisheries Risk Assessment Report will be submitted to the PAD.
A Notice to Mariners and other methods will be used to ensure fishermen are informed of the survey. It should be noted that the site survey is focused in an area not known for fisheries usage. The FLO will also assess the prevalence of static gear fisheries in the area.
Residual impacts to other fish and fisheries from acoustic emissions generated during the seismic survey are considered to be minor.
Cetaceans There are essentially three ways in which seismic acoustic emissions may affect cetaceans and these are outlined below: • Physical damage to hearing as a result of the intense acoustic signals; • Interference with daily activities by impairing the ability to navigate, find food, or communicate; • Indirectly by affecting behavioural patterns in food source e.g. by scaring, scattering or physically causing damage to prey species. Seismic acoustic signals are generally low frequency. Swan et al., 1994 report on a general array of 10-300 Hz. Frequencies of interest for the proposed seismic survey are 5 - 90 Hz. Table 4.4 provides an overview of the likely responses to seismic signals and possible adverse effects.
Table 4.4: Summary of optimal hearing frequency range and possible effects of seismic surveys on marine mammals (Swan et al., 1994)
Sub Order / Example Species that Optimal Hearing Possible effects of seismic arrays Species may be present within Frequency Range (array energy at 10-300 Hz) the survey area
Odontoceti Harbour porpoise, 10 to 100 kHz Most have poor hearing at low (toothed whales) common dolphin, frequencies, implying that adverse bottlenose dolphin, effects from seismic sources will be Risso’s dolphin, Atlantic limited. No odontocete has been white-sided dolphin, shown audiometrically to have acute false killer whale, killer hearing (<80 dB re 1 µPa) below 500 whale, long finned pilot Hz (NRC, 2003). whale, Curvier’s beaked whale, True’s beaked There may be small overlap with whale. higher frequency component of airsources and hearing threshold, making sound audible out to 10’s of kms. Small possibility of behavioural responses but no field data available to confirm or retort this.
MGE0282RP002F06 43 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Sub Order / Example Species that Optimal Hearing Possible effects of seismic arrays Species may be present within Frequency Range (array energy at 10-300 Hz) the survey area
Mysticeti Minke whale, fin whale, Estimated at 20 Hz Hearing range overlaps with the low (baleen whales) humpbacked whale, and 1000 Hz frequency sounds produced by Northern right whale, Sei seismic surveys, which may mask whale, blue whale. long distance communication between whales and prevent the detection of other faint sounds (Evans & Nice, 1996). Evidence of subtle shifts in respiratory and diving patterns have been recorded out to 75 km from seismic source but whales are not disrupted from normal activities until vessel moves within a few kms. Avoidance of operating arrays begins when intensities reach 160 dB, with complete avoidance at >180 dB. Avoidance usually consists of movement away from vessel by a few kms and then resumption of normal activities
Figure 4.3 shows where sounds from seismic operations overlap with those produced by cetaceans likely to be present within the vicinity of the proposed 2D survey area, and therefore indicates where potential masking might be expected.
Injury Thresholds Physical auditory impact may occur from exposure to intense noise and may be divided into temporary threshold shifts (TTS), i.e. a temporary hearing loss subsequently recovered after exposure, and permanent threshold shifts (PTS), i.e. a hearing loss that is not recovered. Studies on exposure to noise of dolphin and Beluga Whales have shown that no TTS occurred in a Beluga Whale (respectively dolphin) until the exposure level reached 226 dB re 1 μPa, a sound level only reached in proximity to an air-source. Southall et al (2007) developed a set of injury criteria for individual marine mammals exposed to discrete noise events, such as seismic surveys. These criteria aim to set threshold values above which the continual exposure to significant sound levels, or brief sound pulses with extremely high noise levels, could create PTS in marine mammals. The sound thresholds for pulse sounds, when adjusted for the main low frequencies (<200 Hz) produced by air sources, are 198, 202 and 204 dB re 1 μPa2·s for low, mid, and high frequency cetaceans, respectively. Low, mid and high frequency cetaceans are grouped as follows: • Low frequency cetaceans (Mysticeti like Minke Whale, Fin Whale etc) - estimated auditory bandwidth 7 Hz to 22 kHz; • Mid-frequency cetaceans (Odontocet like Common Dolphin, Bottlenose Dolphin etc) – estimated auditory bandwidth 150 Hz to 160 kHz; • High frequency cetaceans (Harbour Porpoise) – estimated auditory bandwidth 200 Hz to 180 kHz.
44 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 4.3:. Sound levels from seismic operations and cetaceans in the IOSEA 2 area (compiled by ERT from data in Richardson et al 1995; NRC, 2004) (taken from DCENR, 2007)
Estimated Frequency range of survey
Considering the seismic array as a point source, these sound exposure levels would be limited to the immediate vicinity (<20m) of the air source array, but at such close range sound levels are expected to be much lower due to interference of the individual air source signals which each other. This is in line with current understanding, and the fact that there is no evidence to date that seismic pulses cause acute physical damage to marine mammals (Gordon et al, 2004). Furthermore, it is generally considered unlikely that marine mammals would remain for any length of time close to any noise source that causes discomfort (Richardson et al, 1995). Given this information, PTS are not thought to be likely at the source-sound levels created by air sources (OCP/IAGC, 2004).
Behavioural Effects Specific behavioural responses to shooting air-source arrays are not precisely known since normal behaviour is not well established for cetaceans. However, existing studies show a decrease of positive interactions (bow riding, approaching close to a vessel, following or swimming alongside a vessel) during shooting for all species excluding Pilot Whale (Stone, 2003). More frequently recorded are negative interactions including
MGE0282RP002F06 45 Kish Bank Survey ERA
obvious avoidance and alteration of course away from the vessel. Baleen whales whose typical sound emission frequency is estimated between 20 Hz and 1000 Hz are thought to be more sensitive to seismic noise than smaller toothed whales whose optimum hearing frequencies lies between 10 kHz and 100 kHz (see Table 4.4). Most studies on baleen whales report behavioural responses at received sound levels around 140 to 160 dB re 1 μPa, (e.g. Southall et al, 2007; Richardson et al, 1995), although Malme et al (1988) described subtle behavioural changes in Bowhead Whales at received sound levels of between 125 and 133 dB re 1 μPa. Some studies suggest that there may be changes in respiration rhythms of baleen whales expressed by an increased frequency of blows when air sources are shooting, which may indicate some level of stress. Baleen whales and toothed whales show an increased tendency of surfacing (breach, jump, somersault) during shooting which may illustrate a tendency to escape the high sound pressure levels at depth by remaining near the surface. Finally, small toothed whales usually show an increased swimming speed when the sources are firing (Stone, 2003). Avoidance of operating arrays by baleen whales begins when intensities reach 160 dB, with complete avoidance at >180 dB (Swan et al., 1994). Richardson et al (1999), however has reported migrating bowhead whales avoiding an area where seismic sound levels typically measured between 120-130 dB re 1 μPa rms (Gordon et al 2004). The sound propagation modelling undertaken by the Centre for Marine Science and Technology for the IOSEA (DCENR, 2007) noted that cumulative SELs of 160 dB re 1μPa2·s and above were restricted to the immediate vicinity of the 2D survey area (up to 2.5 km from the survey boundary) (DCENR, 2008). This suggests that during the proposed Providence survey baleen whales are likely to avoid the area in the immediate vicinity of the survey however, their occurrence is highly unlikely based on known distributions. Compared to larger cetaceans, smaller toothed whales show a greater mobility (higher swimming speed), and a greater tendency and ability to avoid the seismic noise source by moving away from it. They also exhibit a hearing frequency range globally higher than the sound emission frequency of air sources, which renders them less vulnerable to a disturbance of communication and echolocation functions by parasitic signals, although the possibility that air source arrays also produces higher frequency sounds leads to the consideration of smaller cetaceans in the area as sensitive. As with baleen whales, toothed whales also show an increased tendency of surfacing (breach, jump, somersault) during shooting which may illustrate a tendency to escape the high sound pressure levels at depth by remaining near the surface. Small toothed whales usually show an increased swimming speed when the sources are firing (Stone, 2003). Goold (1996) for example, reported general avoidance behaviour of common dolphins to air source sound up to one kilometre during a 2D seismic survey off the coast of Pembrokeshire in the Irish Sea. Another study, looking at the effects of seismic surveys around the UK, showed that small cetaceans remained significantly further from the seismic vessel during periods of shooting (Stone & Tasker, 2006). Comparable behaviour was observed for Atlantic Spotted Dolphins by Weir (2008) during seismic exploration offshore Angola. These studies appear to indicate that the avoidance behaviour of small toothed whales is limited to within a few kilometres from the seismic air source array. Toothed whales may also be affected by the temporal avoidance reaction of fish during seismic surveys. If fish are forced to move away from their habitats over a period of a few days or more, it is likely that the toothed whales preying on them will also move away. (DCENR, 2008). Detailed mitigation measures will be put in place to minimise the disturbance to cetaceans as a result of the seismic survey. These are discussed below. In relation to the acoustic survey the borehole survey noise impacts are relatively small. However, the vessel ‘fixed’ location during the operation can cause avoidance behaviours
46 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
or temporary exclusion of marine mammals. Given the short duration and limited number of sites for the borehole sampling programme (a single borehole to a maximum of ten), impacts are unlikely. Incidental reports from the IODP Expeditions (Mountain et al 2009) and other sources indicate that dolphin, porpoise and seals which are most likely to be present in the area are relatively unaffected by drilling noise and may investigate the ship moving into close proximity to the operations. Mitigation during borehole operations will include MMO observations and presence of the support vessel (see below).
Pinnipeds The audiograms of the Common (Harbour) Seal, Ringed Seal, Harp Seal and Grey Seal are very similar (Figure 4.4). All have a fairly flat frequency response between 1 kHz and 40-50 kHz. Sensitivity decreases at frequencies above 50 kHz. It can also be seen from Figure 4.4 that at 100 Hz Harbour Seal hearing threshold is estimated to be around 34 dB better than that of Bottlenose Dolphins (Thompson et al, 1998).
Figure 4.4: Audiograms of three phocid seals and two small odontocete cetaceans (Thompson et al, 1998)
harp seal harbour seal ringed seal bottlenose dolphin harbour por
160
120
80 threshold (dB re.1uPa@1m) (dB threshold 40 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 frequency (Hz)
There are few studies on the reactions of pinnipeds to noise in water as they are difficult to see and rarely swim at the surface except at haul-out sites. However, reactions to sonar have been observed in Harp Seals (Terhune & Ronald 1976). Grey, Common (Harbour), Ringed and Weddell Seals do not appear to react to acoustic pingers or continuous tone transmitters above 60 kHz (Thompson et al, 1998). There are no documented studies of the underwater reactions of pinnipeds to large explosions, although it is known that charges of 1 kg plus can and do kill them (Richardson et al. 1995). There is little information on non-lethal damage caused by explosions. There have also been few studies of the reactions of seals to seismic survey noise. Common (Harbour) Seals showed short term startle reactions, evidenced by a sudden profound drop in heart rate (bradycardia) and, in six out of eight trials, showed avoidance reactions to simulated seismic surveys, using a 3x30 cubic inch air source array and a single 20 cubic inch source at ranges of 2 kilometres. In four cases, the seal reverted to the undisturbed foraging pattern within minutes of the end of firing. In two cases the animal swam to a haul-out site apparently in response to the sources (Thompson et al. 1998; SMRU unpublished data). Grey Seals also showed avoidance reactions, moving away from the source and increasing their swim speed. All the test
MGE0282RP002F06 47 Kish Bank Survey ERA
animals continued to or returned to forage in the areas where they were exposed to air source sounds (Thompson et al. 1998; SMRU unpublished data). Thompson suggests that, if seals will move away from these areas of low source simulated seismic surveys, it is likely that full scale high energy surveys would clear seals from large sections of their feeding areas. In the case of central place foragers such as Common (Harbour) Seals during the breeding season this may effectively prevent feeding at least for the duration of the surveys. Given the offshore location of the survey area, however, it is unlikely that Grey and Common Seals will be present in any great numbers (refer to Section 3.3.2).
Mitigation of Potential Impact of Seismic Survey on Marine Mammals Providence will ensure that the Code of Practice for the Protection of Marine Mammals during Acoustic Seafloor Surveys in Irish Waters Version 1.1 (NPWS, 2007) is followed for the proposed site survey and extended 2D survey using the guidance for waters under 200m depth. The shooting power of the air source array will be maintained to a minimum necessary level. No shooting will be realised unless necessary for survey purposes. The mitigation measures, as discussed within this section, are based upon the NPWS Code of Practice.
Marine Mammal Observers Dedicated, trained and qualified Marine Mammal Observers (MMOs) will be present onboard the survey at all times during the survey. As the survey is being undertaken in water depths less than 200 metres, Providence will ensure that any marine mammals are at a ‘safe’ distance of at least 1,000 metres from the centre of the array/sound source before any activity commences. MMOs will survey the area for the presence of cetaceans 30 minutes before the onset of the start. A minimum distance of 1000 metres will be ensured between the centre of the array/sound source and the nearest cetacean before start can commence. If marine mammals are seen within 1000 metres of the centre of the sound source, the start of the sound source(s) should be delayed until they have moved away, allowing adequate time after the last sighting for the animals to leave the area (30 minutes). If the cetaceans do not leave the area it is recommended that the survey vessel alters course to ensure that the animals are outside the 1000 metre exclusion zone when soft start commences. Start will commence after a 1000 metre area around the vessel has been confirmed clear of cetaceans for 30 minutes. With these precautions, impacts on cetaceans from the survey are likely to be reduced to a low, transient level.
Soft Start Procedure The aim of the soft start is to achieve maximum (or desired) output after 30 to 40 minutes. Providence shall ensure that they follow the soft start procedure outlined in the NPWS Code of Practice. With a single source it is not possible to initiate a full soft start procedure; however, Providence will adhere to the Code of Practice by implementing the following steps: • Power will be built up slowly to give adequate time for marine mammals to leave the vicinity where possible. • If a low intensity start can be undertaken it will be included before test firing of the sound source, even if no marine mammals have been seen. • Starts will occur when MMO’s can carry out the required pre-soft start scan (as per the Code of Practice).
48 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
• To minimise additional noise in the marine environment, a start (from commencement of start to commencement of the line) will be minimised as far as possible. • If, for any reason, firing of the sound source has stopped and not restarted for at least 5 minutes a low intensity start will be carried out. • After a break in firing of any duration a visual check will be made for marine mammals within the ‘exclusion zone’. If a marine mammal is present then recommencement of shooting should be delayed as per the instructions above. Once the sound source has achieved its maximum output it is not necessary to stop the survey should cetaceans approach the vessel. With regard to line breakages, the below procedure will be followed: • If a break in output greater than 5 minutes occurs at any time whilst sampling then a full start (including pre start scan) for the appropriate water depth will be used prior to recommencing use of the sound source. • With the sound source running, if turn-around time between sample lines or stations is greater than the time required to conduct a start (including pre start scan) for the appropriate water depth, then the sound source will be stopped and a start used prior to commencing the new line. • For line changes which take less time than that required to undertake a restart, the sound source (e.g. air source) will continue firing during the line turn (e.g. for a site survey line turn of 5 minutes continue firing).
Borehole Operations In relation to borehole operations, a 5 minute scan will be undertaken prior to operations commencing to ensure there are no marine mammals within 50m, and observations of any marine mammals in the area will be recorded. Prior to commencement or restart of drilling operations, MMOs will ensure that there are no marine mammals within 50m of the drilling vessel.
Reporting Post Survey The MMOs must submit a report within 30 days of completion of the survey to PAD and copy the report to the National Parks & Wildlife Service (NPWS). The survey team will use standard forms to record marine mammal sightings, marine mammal sighting efforts, and technical details of operations as recommended in the NPWS Code of Practice. Providence will ensure that a report (including a daily log) is maintained on the operation of the seismic equipment that will indicate the soft starts and their duration to the MMO. This information will be forwarded to the NPWS.
Given the proposed mitigation measure, residual impacts to marine mammals from acoustic emissions generated during the seismic survey are considered to be minor.
Marine Turtles It is likely that turtles may be present within the proposed survey area (refer to Section 3.3.3). Results from electrophysiological studies of hearing capabilities of marine turtles show that they hear low frequency sounds within the range of 100 to 1000 Hz with greatest sensitivity at 200 to 400 Hz (Ridgway et al, 1969; Southwood et al, 2008). The available evidence from literature suggests that marine turtles may begin to show behavioural responses to an approaching air source array at a received level around 166 dB re 1 μPa rms and avoidance around 175 dB re 1 μPa rms. (McCauley et al, 2000). Given the results from the sound propagation modelling in this region offshore Ireland (as detailed above), it is likely that marine turtles will show avoidance responses within 2 km from the sound source, with some behavioural responses expected up to 5.5 km from the sound source (DCENR, 2008).
MGE0282RP002F06 49 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Mitigation measures put in place to minimise the disturbance to turtles as a result of the seismic survey will follow those as listed above for marine mammals.
Given the proposed mitigation measure, residual impacts to marine turtles from acoustic emissions generated during the seismic survey are considered to be minor.
Other Marine Megafauna Mitigation measures put in place to minimise the disturbance to marine mammals as a result of the seismic survey will apply to other megafauna (such as Basking Sharks).
Given the proposed mitigation measure, residual impacts to other marine megafauna from acoustic emissions generated during the seismic survey are considered to be minor.
Seabed Features The sandbank and inshore waters are relatively stable due to the exposed nature of the shore to storm events etc. As a result the potential added effect of loud underwater noise from seismic survey to trigger a geo-instability or submarine landslides in this region is highly unlikely there are no recorded instances of such events in relation to seismic survey activity that have occurred in the area since 1965. The sandbank has previously been subjected to 2D and multibeam surveys as well as borehole sampling associated with the potential for windfarm development. No adverse effects have been recorded associated with these activities on this or any other sandbanks in the region. There are no geohazards reported in this area (including shallow gas or pockmarks; the nearest site is a significant distance offshore from the bank) Given the above, the impacts of seismic noise on seabed features, and on associated benthic communities and protected sites, are likely to be negligible.
4.3.4 Atmospheric Emissions The main source of atmospheric emissions during the seismic acquisition programme will result from engine exhaust gases. The estimated quantities of atmospheric emissions which will be produced during the proposed 2D seismic survey are detailed in Table 4.5. These are based on the estimated daily maximum estimated fuel consumption for the survey vessel and support boat, assuming the maximum duration of the survey programme is 15 days.
Table 4.5: Estimated atmospheric emission inventories from the survey vessel and support boat Source Estimated Quantity (tonnes)1
Total Fuel Use 382.52
Atmospheric Emissions2
Carbon Dioxide (CO ) 2 1,234 Carbon Monoxide (CO) 6.05 Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) 22.19 Sulphur Dioxide (SO ) 2 1.54 Methane (CH ) 4 0.069 Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 0.77 Notes: 1. Emission factors used from UKOOA 2002a based on methodology proposed by OGP 2. Calculations made for worst case survey duration of 15 days with diesel consumption @ 25.5 tonnes per day (18 tonnes for the Survey Vessel and 7.5 tonnes for the support boat).
50 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Entec (2005) have estimated emissions from shipping in all waters surrounding EU countries, including Ireland. Table 4.6 summarises the estimated shipping emissions within a 200 nautical mile (nm) zone from Ireland at open sea and up to its transboundary line where this was closer than 200 nm.
Table 4.6: Estimated ship emissions in Ireland and the surrounding sea up to 200 nautical miles offshore (Entec, 2005)
Emissions per year 2000 2010 2015 (tonnes per year)
6 6 6 C02 1.89 x 10 2.43 x 10 2.77 x 10 NOx 46.38 x 103 55.72 x 103 61.00 x 103
3 3 3 SO2 31.78 x 10 38.89 x 10 44.21x 10 When compared with the 2010 estimations for ship emissions offshore Ireland, the predicted emissions of CO2, NOx and SO2 from the proposed Providence seismic survey would make up 0.05%, 0.04% and 0.004% of the total shipping emissions, respectively over the maximum 15 day period of the survey. As such, the predicted atmospheric emissions from the proposed seismic survey activity are considered to be negligible/ minor. Although all such emissions will contribute in a small way to the overall pool of greenhouse and acidic gases in the atmosphere, due to rapid dilution and dispersion into the atmosphere, local environmental effects will be negligible and there will be no transboundary effects. The emissions generated from the seismic operation will be controlled through fuel efficiency measures.
Given the rapid dilution and dispersion into the atmosphere the impact from atmospheric emissions generated during the seismic survey can therefore be considered as negligible.
4.3.5 Accidental Spills Pollution emergencies can occur at any time in the marine environment. There is a very low possibility of a major accidental spill of hydrocarbons occurring from the planned seismic operations (frequency classified as 1 per 100-1,000 or less unit yrs). The main potential source of an accidental spill would be from diesel oil contained in the storage tanks, released through accidental collision between the seismic survey vessel and ‘other’ boats. Small volume spills may also occur as a result of leaks from generators and other machinery. It should be noted that the risk of an operational spill occurring from the survey programme is no greater than that occurring from any other ship in the area over the period of the survey. The streamers which will be used for the Providence seismic survey are sectioned ISOPAR filled streamers and, as such, there is minimal risk of hydrocarbon spill in the unlikely event that a cable was to break, and any volume released would be relatively small. Historical data suggests that small diesel spills of less than one tonne will represent the most likely oil spill scenario. Given the relatively low volumes of oil, coupled with the light nature of the oils likely to be spilled in any seismic survey accident, evaporation and dispersion of the spill would be rapid. This in turn means that impacts on water quality and on plankton communities will be limited due to the mobile and transient nature of water masses and their associated plankton mixing through the affected locality, in addition to the high reproductive rates of plankton during peak growth periods. There may potentially be some impacts on seabirds present on the surface of the water or on fish or marine mammals in the immediate vicinity of the spill. However, the numbers affected would be very small and the overall impacts likely to be minimal. Given the inshore location of the survey, an accidental hydrocarbon spill from the seismic activity is likely to impact the coast. However, given the exposed nature of the coasts in the area and the likelihood of
MGE0282RP002F06 51 Kish Bank Survey ERA
mixing and dispersal due to the prevalent conditions, it is unlikely that any significant quantities of the light oil would be detected in coastal habitats. In order to minimise the risk of a spill the seismic survey vessel has an externally certified Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (SOPEP) as required under the 1973/1978 MARPOL Convention and Robust Offshore Refuelling Procedures. In addition, to reduce the risk of an accidental collision occurring during the survey, details of the work programme will be passed to the maritime authorities in advance of the survey to increase awareness amongst shipping traffic where relevant. A support boat will monitor shipping and minimise interference by maintaining position near the end of the towed cable, thereby helping to enforce an exclusion zone around the survey vessel and cable. The survey vessel and support boat will meet all national and international regulations for shipping including the appropriate signals and lights to indicate towing the cables and the regulations defined by the International Maritime Organisation for avoiding collisions at sea. State-of-the-art communications and positioning equipment will be on- board the survey vessel to maintain communications with all other shipping and provide accurate information on the position of the survey vessel and the cables.
Given the very low possibility of a major accidental spill of hydrocarbons during the seismic survey, as well as the low volumes and light nature of the oils that are likely to be involved if a spill was to occur, the risk to the environment from an accidental spill is considered to be very low.
4.3.6 Other Minor Impacts
Marine Discharges The largest volume discharges (grey water and sewage) will come from the seismic survey vessel located within the survey area. It is estimated that a maximum of approximately 200 litres per man per day of grey water will be generated. Daily wastewater discharges from the survey vessel and smaller volume wastewater discharges from the support vessel associated with the operations will be rapidly dispersed and diluted in the relatively high energy oceanographic environment prevalent across the survey area and will therefore cause negligible environmental effects. Due to the inshore nature of the survey discharges of grey water will only be made where permitted under OSPAR regulations. Discharge of bilge water from vessels involved in the survey will comply with standards set out in the 1973/78 MARPOL Convention, which are designed to prevent pollution. As such all discharges from machinery spaces will conform to the 15 parts per million (ppm) oil in water discharge limit. Rapid dilution and dispersion in the marine environment will result in negligible, if any, environmental effects.
Solid Wastes Bulk wastes (including domestic refuse, scrap metals and packaging) generated during the proposed survey programme have the potential to cause adverse environmental impact through encouragement of vermin, production of gasses by biodegradable materials and the generation of leachates where chemical residues have been mixed in with the wastes. Careful consideration is given to minimising the total amount of waste generated and controlling its eventual disposal. Responsible waste management may be accomplished through hierarchical application of the practises of source reduction, reuse, recycling, recovery, treatment and responsible disposal. Providence will ensure that all wastes generated during the survey are adequately segregated in order that an appropriate onshore treatment and/or disposal route may be selected. Providence will ensure that, as far as reasonably practicable, all material brought ashore including scrap metals, waste oil and packaging is sent for re-cycle or re-use. Combustible wastes for which no re-use or re-cycle opportunity is identified will either be incinerated in a controlled manner or landfilled. Combustion residues will also be landfilled.
52 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Monitoring of adherence to the waste management commitments outlined above will be undertaken as part of Providence HSE plan for the survey. This will include a vessel HSE audit prior to commencing operations or departure from home port, which will review waste management arrangements on board.
4.4 Assessment of Significance of Environmental Effects
The significance of the hazards and effects identified in Section 4.3 has been assessed in Table 4.7 below against the criteria presented in Tables 4.1 and 4.2. In conclusion, although there is expected be some temporary environmental impact during the proposed seismic survey, long term environmental impacts from the survey will be negligible providing that the appropriate mitigation measures are adopted.
4.5 Assessment of Significance of Navigational Effects
Due to the location, a navigation assessment has been carried out as part of the Environmental Risk Assessment (see Section 3.5.1). The significance of the hazards and effects identified in Section 4.3 has been assessed in Table 4.7 below against the criteria presented in Tables 4.1 and 4.2. In conclusion, although there is expected be some temporary navigational impact during the proposed seismic survey due to implementation of temporary safety zones, only the extended 2D survey will temporarily interact with shipping lanes or areas of high shipping density. The interaction will be of short duration and suitable notices and mitigation will be implemented. The site survey occurs in an area of very low shipping density and should therefore be subject to minimal interaction. There will be no long term impacts from the survey.
Table 4.7: Assessment of impacts associated with the seismic operations
Receptor Physical Biological Socio-Economic
Key Activity Seabed Quality Quality Seabed Water Quality Air Quality Plankton Benthos Fish Seabirds Marine Mammals Turtles Marine Sites Protected Commercial Fishing Shipping Marine Infrastructure / Leisure Tourism Land Use Onshore
Physical Presence 3 3 (survey vessel, towed equipment & support boats) Noise and Vibration 4 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 (airsources, normal vessel operations, drilling) Atmospheric Emission 4 (engines/generators on the vessel) Accidental Events VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL VL (e.g. fuel spill)
4.6 Habitats Directive Assessment of Significance of Effects (Screening)
As there are no sites in the immediate proximity to the survey with marine features listed, the survey will not compromise the conservation objectives of Natura 2000 sites or proposed Natura 2000 sites in the area. As a result, further Habitats Directive Assessment and a Natura Impact Statement are not required.
MGE0282RP002F06 53 Kish Bank Survey ERA
4.7 European Protected Species Assessment of Significance of Effects (Screening)
Given the Code of Practice employed by the survey, the occurrence of the survey outside peak cetacean abundance periods, the use of a support boat and short duration of the survey, any impact on marine mammals from the survey is deemed to be minor and temporary. In addition, no semi-resident marine mammals have been identified in proximity to the survey area. As a result any impact identified is not deemed to be significant, and therefore an Annex IV Species (European Protected Species) Impact Assessment is not considered to be required.
54 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
5 Environmental Management Plan
Providence recognises that effective health, safety, environmental and quality (HSEQ) management contributes significantly to the company’s long-term business success. Environmental management is an integral part of the Providences HSEQ Management System (MS). The HSEQ Policy (refer to Figure 5.1), HSEQ Standards and HSEQ Management System apply to all activities where Providence has any legal and/or moral accountability, or where they present any risk to the business. For the proposed site survey and extended 2D seismic survey Providence’s HSEQ management system will be interfaced with the management systems of the main contracting party; the Survey Contractor. The application of the HSEQ MS during the project will ensure that Providence’s HSEQ Policy is followed and that the Company’s responsibilities under all relevant regulations are met. As outlined in Section 4 above, the survey operations will result in a range of operational releases to the environment and the potential for non-routine or accidental releases. The environmental impact assessment process has systematically identified and assessed all potential environmental impacts associated with the survey operations. As a result of the control measures and management processes in place, there should be no significant impacts resulting from the proposed operations. The key hazards and their residual impacts following the implementation of mitigation measures are shown in the Environmental Management Plan in Table 5.1. The mitigation measures will ensure that all potential impacts are reduced to as low as reasonably practicable. Actions identified to manage the stated environmental impacts will be implemented and communicated to project personnel via a separate Health, Safety and Environment (HSE) plan.
MGE0282RP002F06 55 Kish Bank Survey ERA
Figure 5.1:. Providences HSEQ Policy Statement
56 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Table 5.1: Environmental Management Plan
Hazard Potential Effect Mitigation Responsibility Residual Impact
Physical Survey vessel and towed cables A specialist survey contractor has been appointed to undertake the Operations Minor Presence could disrupt local shipping. survey using Providences contractor selection and management Manager procedures There is sufficient area for ships to easily avoid the survey vessel. At the detailed planning stage the choice of the seismic survey lines have Operations There is an alternative shipping and included consideration of the potential interference with shipping. Manager transit route to the off side of Kish Details of the work programme will be passed to the maritime authorities Operations Bank. (including the Maritime Safety Directorate, the MRCC of the Irish Coast Manager The site survey operations and Guard and the Sea Fisheries Protection Agency of the DCENR) in sampling are occurring in an area of advance of the survey to increase awareness amongst shipping traffic very low shipping density where relevant. Of note is that the Maritime Safety Directorate publishes Marine Notices advertising such operations.
Operating criteria for weather conditions (e.g. wind, waves and visibility) Operations will be established and operations suspended if the criteria are Manager exceeded.
A Providence representative will be on-board the survey vessel at all Operations times to ensure compliance with approved operating procedures, Manager including those concerning environmental protection and to also ensure that the survey is conducted safely.
A support (guard) boat will monitor shipping and minimise interference by Operations maintaining position near the end of the towed cables, thereby helping to Manager enforce an exclusion zone around the survey vessel and cables.
The survey vessel and support boat will meet all national & international Operations regulations for shipping including the appropriate signals & lights to Manager indicate towing the cables and the regulations defined by the IMO for avoiding collisions at sea. State-of-the-art communications and positioning equipment will be on-board the survey vessel to maintain communications with all other shipping and provide accurate information on the position of the survey vessel and the cables.
Survey vessel and towed cables Measures implemented for avoiding impacts on shipping will also be Operations Minor could disrupt fishing activity effective in minimising impacts on fishing activities. Manager causing vessels to stop fishing Fishing will be disrupted in the and/or move to new areas A fisheries liaison officer, with a knowledge of fisheries local to the Operations immediate vicinity of the survey during the survey period. survey area, will be onboard the seismic vessel or support vessel during Manager vessel, drilling location and lines. the survey works.
Acoustic Behavioural disruption affecting The Code of Practice for the Protection of Marine Mammals during Operations Minor Emissions marine mammal’s ability to find Acoustic Seafloor Surveys in Irish Waters Version 1.1 (NPWS, 2007) will Manager food and communicate and be followed. Cetaceans are likely to avoid the
MGE0282RP002F06 57
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Hazard Potential Effect Mitigation Responsibility Residual Impact follow regular movements. area in the immediate vicinity of the Dedicated, trained and qualified Marine Mammal Observers (MMOs) will Operations survey. Toothed whales may also be be present onboard the survey at all times during the survey. Manager affected by the temporal avoidance reaction of fish during seismic Short-term behavioural changes Providence shall ensure that a Fisheries Liaison Officer, with a Operations survey. might be observed in fish knowledge of fisheries local to the survey area, will monitor activities Manager populations in close proximity to onboard the seismic vessel or support vessel for the duration of the Grey and common seals may be the seismic source. survey works. present in the area, however the survey occurs at a significant distance from known haulout and breeding sites and outside sensitive seasons. Coull et al (1998) have identified that fish spawning within the vicinity of the proposed survey area, is sensitive to seismic disturbance between March and July. Although the proposed survey is scheduled to commence in early 2012, it is relatively short in duration and does not cover the entire spawning area of these species.
Atmospheric The main source of atmospheric The emissions generated from the seismic operation will be controlled Operations Negligible Emissions emissions will result from through fuel efficiency measures. Manager engine exhaust gases.
Marine Discharge of sewage and grey All discharges from the seismic survey and supporting support boats will Operations Negligible Discharges water be treated and discharged in accordance with the MARPOL Convention. Manager
Drill cuttings a small amount of Drill cuttings will be minimised during drilling operations. All drilling Operations Minor cuttings will be generated operations will be undertaken according to industry best practice. Manager through drilling operations Benthic impact in the immediate footprint of the drilling operations. No sensitive habitats identified.
Solid Wastes Wastes may include domestic Providence will ensure that all wastes generated during the survey are Operations Negligible refuse, scrap metals and adequately segregated in order that an appropriate onshore treatment Manager packaging. and/or disposal route may be selected. As far as reasonably practicable. All material brought ashore will be sent for recycling or re-use. An HSE audit of the vessel will be carried out prior to commencing Operations operations, this will include a review of waste management practices on Manager board. Spill Risk Risk of spill of fuel from collision The seismic survey vessel has an externally certified Shipboard Oil Operations Negligible or offshore refuelling. Pollution Emergency Plan (SOPEP) as required under the 1973/1978 Manager MARPOL Convention and robust offshore refuelling procedures.
58 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
6 References
Anatec (2007). Porcupine Basin Shipping Study. Anatec UK Ltd Report A1763. Berrow S (2001). Biological diversity of cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises) in Irish waters. In: J.D. Nunn (ed.), Marine Biodiversity in Ireland and adjacent waters. Ulster Museum, Belfast. pp. 115 to 120. Berrow SD & Heardman C (1994). The basking shark Cetorhinus maximus (Gunnerus) in Irish waters - patterns of distribution and abundance. Biology and Environment: Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, 94B: 101 to 107. Berrow SD & Rogan E (1997). Review of cetaceans stranded on the Irish coast, 1901-95. Mammal Review, 27: 51 to 76. BIM (2001). Grey Seal Interactions with Fisheries in Irish Coastal Waters 2001. Boelens RGV, Maloney DM, Parsons AP & Walsh AR (1999). Ireland’s Marine and Coastal Areas and Adjacent Seas: an environmental assessment. Prepared by the Marine Institute. Brand AR and Wilson UAW (1996). Seismic Surveys and Scallop Fisheries. A Report on the Impact of a Seismic Survey on the 1994 Isle of Man Queen Scallop Fishery 68 pp. Brongersma LD (1972). European Sea Turtles. Zoologische Verhandelingen - uitgegeven door het rijksmuseum van natuurlijke te Leiden, Nr. 121, Leiden, E.J. Brill. Chapman CJ, Hawkins AD (1969) The Importance of Sound in Fish Behaviour in Relation to Capture by Trawls. FAO Fish Rep., 62(3): 717-729. Charif RA & Clark CW (2000). Acoustic monitoring of large whales to the west of Britain and Ireland using bottom mounted hydrophone arrays, October 1996-September 1998. JNCC report, no. 313. Coull KA, Johnstone R & Rogers SI (1998). Fisheries Sensitivity Maps in British Waters. Published and distributed by UKOAA Ltd. Dalen J, Knutsen GM (1987). Scaring Effects in Fish and Harmful Effects on Eggs, Larvae and Fry by Offshore Seismic Explorations: pp 93-102, in Merklinger, H. M. (Ed). Progress in Underwater Acoustics, Ass. Symp. On Underwater Acoustics, Halifax, N.S., 1986. Plenum Publ. Corp., New York. Dalen J, Raknes A (1985). Scaring Effects in Fish and Harmful Effects on Eggs, Larvae and Fry by Offshore Seismic Explorations. 12th ICA Associated Symposium on Underwater Acoustics, 16-18 July 1986, Halifax, Canada. DCENR (2007) Second Strategic Environmental Assessment for Oil and Gas Activities in Ireland’s Offshore Atlantic Waters: IOSEA2 Porcupine Basin. Environmental Report. DCENR (2008) Third Strategic Environmental Assessment for Oil and Gas Activity in Ireland’s Offshore Atlantic Waters: IOSEA3 Rockall Basin Environmental Report Engas, Lokkeborg S, Soldal AV (1993). Effects of Seismic Shooting on Catch Availability of Cod and Haddock, Havforskningsinstituttet/Institute for Marine Research, Norway, Fisken og Havet, Nr. 9, 117 pp. Entec (2005). Service Contract on Ship Emissions: Assignment, Abatement and Market- based Instruments. Task 1 - Preliminary Assignment of Ship Emissions to European Countries. A report for European Commission Directorate General Environment by Entec UK Limited, London Evans PGH & Nice H (1996). Review of the Effects of Underwater Sound Generated by Seismic Surveys on Cetaceans. Sea Watch Foundation, Oxford. Evans PGH (1990). European cetaceans and seabirds in an oceanographic context. Lutra 33 (2): 95 to 125.
MGE0282RP002F06 59
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Evans PGH (1998). Biology of Cetaceans of the North East Atlantic (In Relation to Seismic Energy) In: Tasker, M.L. and Weir C. (eds) Proceedings of the Seismic and Marine Mammals Workshop, London 23-25 June 1998. FRS (2007). Fisheries Research Services website. www.marlab.ac.uk Accessed August 2007. Gausland I (2003). Seismic Surveys Impact on Fish and Fisheries. Report for the Norwegian Oil Industry Association (OLF), Stavanger. Gaywood MJ (1997). Marine turtles in British and Irish waters. British Wildlife 9(2): 69 to 77. Godley B, Gaywood M, Law R, McCarthy C, McKenzie C, Patterson I, Penrose R, Reid R & Ross H (1998). Patterns of marine turtle mortality in British waters 1992-96 with reference to tissue contaminant levels. Journal of the Marine Biological Association UK 78: 973 to 984. Goold JC (1996). Acoustic assessment of populations of common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) in conjunction with seismic surveying. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom. 76: 811 to 820. Gordon JCD, Gillespie D, Potter J, Frantzis A, Simmonds M, Swift R & Thompson D (2004). A Review of the Effects of Seismic Survey on Marine Mammals. Marine Technology Society Journal, 37 (4): 14 to 32. Greene CR (1985). A Pilot Study of Possible Effects of Marine Seismic Airgun Array Operations on Rockfish Plumes. Prepared for the Seismic Steering Committee by Greenridge Sciences Inc., Santa Barbara, California, USA Gulland J & Walker C (1998). Marine seismic overview. Seismic and Marine Mammals Workshop. Hansen LP & Quinn TP (1998). The marine phase of the Atlanic Salmon (Salmo salar) life cycle with comparisons to Pacific salmon. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 55: 104 to 118. Hartley Anderson Ltd (2005). Deep Water Environment to the West of Ireland. Report to the Irish Shelf Petroleum Studies Group. Project ISO3/21. Draft report, December 2005. IOOA (1998). Offshore environmental appraisal: west of Ireland. Report 4: South Porcupine Basin. Irish Offshore Operators Association Environment Committee. Irish Naval Service (2007). Fishing vessel sighting data. Provided by Naval Supervisory Center (NSC) of the Irish Naval Service, July 2007. IWEA (2007). Irish Wind Energy Association www.iwea.com Accessed May 2007. JNCC (2007) Second Report by the UK under Article 17 on the implementation of the Habitats Directive from January 2001 to December 2006. Peterborough: JNCC. Available from: www.jncc.gov.uk/article17 Kostyuchenko LP (1971). Effects of Elastic waves generated in marine seismic prospecting on fish eggs in the Black Sea. Hydrobiological Journal. 9(5):45-48. Langton TES, Beckett CL, King GL & Gaywood MJ (1996). Distribution and status of marine turtles in Scottish waters. Scottish Natural Heritage Research, Survey and Monitoring Report, No. 8. Lockley RM (1966). The distribution of Grey and Common seals on the coasts of Ireland. Irish Naturalists’ Journal 15: 136 to 43. Lokkeborg S, Soldal AB (1993). The Influence of Seismic Exploration with Airguns on Cod (Gadus morhua) Behaviour and Catch Rates. ICES Mar. Sci. Symp., 196, (in press). Lordan C, Warnes S, Corss TF & Burnell GM (2001). The distribution and abundance of cephalopod species caught during demersal trawl surveys west of Ireland and in the Celtic Sea. Irish Fisheries Investigations, No. 8.
60 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Lyons DO (2004). Summary of National Parks & Wildlife Service surveys for common (harbour) seals (Phoca vitulina) and grey seals (Halichoerus grypus), 1978 to 2003. Irish Wildlife Manuals, No. 13.National Parks & Wildlife Service, Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Dublin, Ireland. MacGillivray AO& Chapman NR (2005). An acoustic modelling study of airgun noise from seismic surveys performed offshore British Columbia. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 117 (4): 2578- 2578 Mackey M & Perales I Giménez D (2004). SEA678 data report for offshore seabird populations. Coastal and Marine Resources Centre, University College Cork. Mackey M, Ó Cadhla O, Kelly TC, Aguilar de Soto N & Connolly N (2004a). Cetaceans and Seabirds of Ireland’s Atlantic Margin. Volume I – Seabird distribution, density & abundance. Report on research carried out under the Irish Infrastructure Programme (PIP): Rockall Studies Group (RSG) projects 98/6 and 00/13, Porcupine Studies Group project P00/15 and Offshore Support Group (OSG) project 99/38. Mackey M, Perales I, Giménez D & Ó Cadhla O (2004b). SEA678 data report for offshore cetacean populations. Coastal and Marine Resources Centre, University College Cork. MacLeod CM (2005). Niche Partitioning, Distribution and competition in North Atlantic Beaked Whales. PhD thesis submitted to the School of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen. Malme CI, Wursig B, Bird JE, Tyack P (1988). Observations of feeding grey whale responses to controlled industrial noise exposure. Port and ocean engineering under arctic conditions. McCauley RD, Fewtrell J, Duncan AJ, Jenner C, Jenner MN, Penrose JD, Prince RIT, Anita A, Murdoch J & McCabe K (2000). Marine Seismic Surveys: analysis and propagation of air-gun signals; and effects of air gun exposure on humpback whales, sea turtles, fishes and squid. Prepared for Australian Petroleum Production Exploration Association. McConnel BJ, Fedak M, Lovell P, and Hammon PS (1999) Movement and Foraging Areas of Grey Seals in the North Sea. Journal of Applied Ecology, 36 (4): 573-590. MI (2007). Irish fisheries landings data by ICES rectangle. Provided by the Marine Institute, July 2007. NPWS (2007). Code of Practice for the Protection of Marine Mammals during Acoustic Seafloor Surveys in Irish Waters. Version 1.1 July 2007. NRC (2004). Ocean noise and marine mammals. National Research Council of the National Academies, Washington DC. Ó Cadhla O, Mackey M, Aguilar de Soto N, Rogan E & Connolly N (2004). Cetaceans and seabirds of Irelands Atlantic Margin. Volume II – Cetacean distribution and abundance. Report on research carried out under the Irish Infrastructure Programme (PIP): Rockall Studies Group (RSG) projects 98/6 and 00/13, Porcupine Studies Group project P00/15 and Offshore Support Group (OSG) project 99/38. 82 pp. Ó Cadhla O, Strong D, O'Keeffe C, Coleman M, Cronin M, Duck C, Murray T, Dower P, Nairn R, Murphy P, Smiddy P, Saich C, Hiby L & Lyons D (2007). Grey seal breeding population assessment in the Republic of Ireland, 2005. Published by National Parks & Wildlife Service of the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. Irish Wildlife Manual Series. International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (2004) Joint OGP/IAGC paper, Seismic Surveys and Marine Mammals, www.iagc.info/webdata/public/news downloaded April 2006. Parsons WH, Skalski JR, Malme CI (1992). Effects of Sounds from a Geophysical Survey Device on Behaviour of Captive Rockfish (Sebastes spp.) Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 49: 1343-1356 pp.
MGE0282RP002F06 61
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Penhallurick RD (1990). Turtles off Cornwall, the Isles of Scilly and Devonshire. Truro, Cornwall, Dyllansow Pengwella, ISBN 0-9515785-0-2. Pickett GD, Seaby RHM, Eaton, DR & Arnold GP (1994). Poole Bay Seismic Survey: Effects on Bass Movements and Catch-rates in the Local Fishery. Pierpoint C & Penrose RS (1999). TURTLE: A Database of Marine Turtle Records for the United Kingdom & Eire, Version 1 (Oct. 1999): Introduction, Data Summary & User Notes. (Contractor: Marine Environmental Monitoring, Llechryd.). Unpublished report to English Nature Pierpoint C (2000). Bycatch of marine turtle in UK and Irish waters. JNCC report, no. 310. Pollock C, Reid JB, Webb A & Tasker ML (1997). The distribution of seabirds and cetaceans in the waters around Ireland. JNCC Report, No. 267. Reid J, Evans PGH & Northridge S (Eds). 2003. An atlas of cetacean distribution on the northwest European continental shelf. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. Rice AL, Billett DSM, Thurston MH & Lampitt RS (1991). The Institute of Oceanographic Sciences Biology Programme in the Porcupine Seabight: Background and General Introduction. J Mar Biol Ass UK, 71: 281 to 310. Richardson WJ, Greene CR Jr, Malme CI & Thomson DH (1995). Marine mammals and noise. Academic Press, San Diego. Ridgway SH, Scronce BL, Kanwisher J (1969). Respiration and deep diving in the bottlenoise porpoise. Science 166 (3973): 1651-1654. Roche, C., Lyons, D.O., Farinas Franco, J. & O’Connor, B. (2007) Benthic surveys of sandbanks in the Irish Sea. Irish Wildlife Manuals, No. 29. National Parks and Wildlife Service, Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Dublin, Ireland. Sears R (1983). A glimpse of blue whale feeding in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. Whalewatcher 17: 12 to 14. Sigurjonsson J (1995). On the life history and autecology of North Atlantic rorquals. In: Whales, seals, fish and man (eds Blix AS, Walløe L & Ulltang Ø). Pp. 425 to 441. Elsevier Science, New York. Skalski JR, Pearson WH, Malme CI (1992). Effects of Sounds from a Geophysical Survey Device on Catch-per-unit-effort in a Hook-and-Line Fishery for Rockfish (Sebastes spp.). Canadian Journal of Fisheries andAquatic Sciences. 49: 1357-1365. Southall BL, Bowles AE, Ellison WT, Finneran JJ (2007). Marine mammal noise exposure criteria: initial scientific recommendations. Aquatic Mammals, 33 (4): i. Stockbook (2008) Report to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Annual Review of Fish Stocks in 2008 with Management Advice for 2009. Stone CJ & Tasker ML (2006). The effect of seismic airguns on cetaceans in UK wasters. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management, 8(3): 255-263. Stone CJ, Webb A, Barton C, Ratcliffe N, Reed TC, Tasker ML, Camphuysen CJ & Pienkowski MW (1995). An Atlas of Seabird Distribution in North-west European Waters. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. Stone CJ (2003). The effects of seismic activity on marine mammals in UK waters, 1998- 2000. JNCC Report No. 323. Summers CF, Warner PJ, Nairn RGW, Curry MG & Flynn J (1980). An assessment of the status of the Common seal Phoca vitulina in Ireland. Biological Conservation 17 (2): 115 to 123. Swan JM, Neff JM and Young PC (1994). Environmental Implications of Offshore Oil and Gas Development in Australia. 3-122 pp.
62 MGE0282RP002F06
Kish Bank Survey ERA
Terhune & Ronald (1976). In: Thomspon, D., Duck, C.D. and McConnel, B. J. (1998). Biology of seals of the north-east Atlantic in relation to seismic surveys. In: Tasker, M.L. and Weir C. (eds) Proceedings of the Seismic and Marine Mammals Workshop, London 23-25 June 1998. Thompson PM, M Sjoberg, EB Bryant, P Lovell, and A Bjorge (1998) Behavioural and Physiological Responses of harbour (Phoca vitulina) and grey (Halichoerus grypus) seals to seismic surveys Page 134 in Abstracts World Marine Mammal Conference, Monaco, January 1998 Turnpenny WH and Nedwell JR (1994). The Effects on Marine Fish, Diving Mammals and Birds of Underwater Sound Generated by Seismic Surveys. Consultancy Report proposed for UKOOA by Fawley Aquatic Research Laboratories Ltd. UKDMap (1998) United Kingdom Digital Map. Version 3 National Environmental Research Council. Wardle CS, Carter TJ, Urquhart GG, Johnstone ADF, Ziolkowski AM, Hampton G & Mackie D (1998). The Sound of a Triple ‘G’ Seismic Airgun and its Effects on the Behaviour of Marine Fish. Fisheries Research Services Services, Marine Laboratory, Aberdeen. Webb A, Stronach A, Tasker ML & Stone CJ (1995). Vulnerable Concentrations of Seabirds South and West of Britain. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. Weir CR (2008). Overt Responses of Humpback Whales, Sperm Whales, and Atlantic Spotter Dolphins to Seismic Exploration off Angola. Aquatic Mammals, 34 (1): 71-83. White J, O’Boyle S, Dransfeld L, O’Maoileidigh N, Monaghan E, Westbrook G & Cheileachair ON (2002). Oceanographic Data Coverage of the Northeast Atlantic 1970- 2000. Marine Institute, Galway.
MGE0282RP002F06 63