Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report

Contract Reference: MB0120 Report Number: 34 Version 5 September 2015

Project Title: Marine Protected Areas Data and Evidence Co-ordination Programme Report No 34. Title: Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report Defra Project Code: MB0120 Defra Contract Manager: Carole Kelly

Funded by:

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

Authorship

Sophie Green British Geological Survey [email protected]

Rhys Cooper British Geological Survey [email protected]

Dayton Dove British Geological Survey [email protected]

Acknowledgements

We thank all Cefas reviewers for advice on earlier drafts of this report and Christopher Barrio Froján for help with the final draft

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

Cefas Document Control

Title: Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report

Submitted to: Marine Protected Areas Survey Co-ordination & Evidence Delivery Group Date submitted: September 2015 Project Manager: David Limpenny Report compiled by: Sophie Green, Rhys Cooper, Dayton Dove Markus Diesing, Chris Jenkins, Jo Murray, Matt Curtis, Christopher Barrio Quality control by: Froján Approved by & date: Keith Weston (17/09/2015) Version: 5

Version Control History Author Date Comment Version Sophie Green, 19/12/2014 Submitted for Cefas review 1 Rhys Cooper, Dayton Dove Sophie Green, 27/1/2015 Updated following Cefas review 2 Rhys Cooper, Dayton Dove Sophie Green, 03/03/2015 Submitted to MPAG for external review 3 Rhys Cooper, Dayton Dove Sophie Green, 05/07/2015 Revised following external reviewers’ comments 4 Rhys Cooper, Dayton Dove Keith Weston 17/09/2015 Revised following reviewers’ comments 5

Table of Contents

Table of Contents ...... i List of Tables ...... iii List of Figures ...... iv 1 Executive Summary: Report Card ...... 1 1.1 Features proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation ..... 1 1.2 Features present but not proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation ...... 2 1.3 Features identified by the dedicated surveys but not included in the SAD .... 2 1.4 Evidence of human activities occurring within the rMCZ ...... 2 2 Introduction ...... 3 2.1 Location of the rMCZ ...... 3 2.2 Rationale for site position and designation ...... 4 2.3 Rationale for prioritising this rMCZ for additional evidence collection ...... 5 2.4 Survey aims and objectives...... 6 3 Methods ...... 7 3.1 Acoustic data acquisition ...... 7 3.2 Ground truth sample acquisition ...... 7 3.3 Production of the updated habitat map ...... 9 3.4 Quality of the updated map ...... 12 4 Results ...... 14 4.1 Site Assessment Document habitat map ...... 14 4.2 Updated habitat map based on new survey data ...... 14 4.3 Quality of the updated habitat map ...... 16 4.4 Broadscale habitats identified ...... 16 4.5 Habitat FOCI identified ...... 17 4.6 Species FOCI identified ...... 18 4.7 Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC) ...... 19 4.8 Data limitations and adequacy of the updated habitat map ...... 19 4.9 Observations of human impacts on the seabed ...... 20 5 Conclusions ...... 21 5.1 Presence and extent of broadscale habitats ...... 21 5.2 Presence and extent of habitat FOCI ...... 21 5.3 Presence and distribution of species FOCI ...... 22 5.4 Evidence of human activities impacting the seabed ...... 22 References ...... 23

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report i Data sources ...... 25 Annexes ...... 26 Annex 1. Broadscale habitat features listed in the ENG...... 26 Annex 2. Habitat FOCI listed in the ENG...... 27 Annex 3. Low or limited mobility species FOCI listed in the ENG...... 28 Annex 4. Highly mobile species FOCI listed in the ENG...... 29 Annex 5. Video and stills processing protocol...... 30 Appendices ...... 32 Appendix 1. Survey metadata (2ENC30914) ...... 32 Appendix 2. Outputs from acoustic surveys ...... 39 Appendix 3. Evidence of human activities within the rMCZ ...... 42 Appendix 4. Species list ...... 43 Appendix 5. Analyses of sediment samples: classification and composition ...... 54 Appendix 6. BSH/EUNIS Level 3 descriptions derived from video and stills ...... 57 Appendix 7. Example images from survey for broadscale habitats...... 61 Appendix 8. Example images from survey for habitat FOCI ...... 62

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report ii List of Tables

Table 1. Broadscale habitats for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. .... 4 Table 2. Habitat FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation...... 5 Table 3. Species FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation...... 5 Table 4. Geological features for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation...... 5 Table 5. Description of derivatives calculated for bathymetry using ArcGIS/Fledermaus...... 10 Table 6. Broadscale habitats identified in this rMCZ...... 17 Table 7. Habitat FOCI identified in this rMCZ...... 18 Table 8. Species FOCI identified in this rMCZ...... 19

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report iii List of Figures

Figure 1. Location of the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ...... 4 Figure 2. Location of ground truth sampling sites in the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ...... 9 Figure 3. Backscatter mosaic generalisation/smoothing prior to autoclassification routine...... 11 Figure 4. Iso cluster maximum likelihood classification routine...... 12 Figure 5. Habitat map from the Site Assessment Document...... 14 Figure 6. Updated map of broadscale habitats based on newly acquired survey data...... 15 Figure 7. Overall MESH confidence score for the updated broadscale habitat map...... 16 Figure 8. Habitat FOCI identified...... 18

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report iv 1 Executive Summary: Report Card This report details the findings of a dedicated seabed survey at the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds recommended Marine Conservation Zone (rMCZ). The site is being considered for inclusion in a network of Marine Protected Areas in UK waters, designed to meet conservation objectives under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. Prior to the dedicated surveys of this site, the site assessment had been made on the basis of best available evidence, drawn largely from historical data, modelled habitat maps and stakeholder knowledge of the area. The purpose of the dedicated surveys was to provide direct evidence of the presence and extent of the broadscale habitats and habitat FOCI (Features of Conservation Importance) that had been detailed in the original Site Assessment Document (SAD; Net Gain, 2011). This Executive Summary is presented in the form of a Report Card that compares the features predicted in the original SAD with those in the updated habitat map and new sample data acquired during the recent dedicated surveys. The comparison covers broadscale habitats and habitat FOCI. Surveys were conducted by the Environment Agency in March 2012, by Titan Environmental Surveys in March and April 2012, by Cefas in January 2013, by Gardline Geosurvey in February and March 2014, and lastly, by the Environment Agency in August and September 2014.

1.1 Features proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation Extent Extent according to Accordance between according updated SAD and updated Feature to SAD habitat map* habitat map Broadscale Habitats Presence Extent A3.1 High energy infralittoral rock 2.71 km2 0.00 km2  -2.71 km2 A3.2 Moderate energy infralittoral rock 145.71 km2 0.00 km2  -145.71 km2 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 11.56 km2 29.97 km2**  +18.41 km2 Habitat FOCI Subtidal Chalk 22 point records 2 2 2 Subtidal Chalk (modelled) 189.37 km 29.97 km  -159.40 km Species FOCI None proposed N/A N/A N/A N/A Geological feature North Norfolk coast (Subtidal) 14.89 km2 N/A N/A N/A * Note that the dedicated surveys only obtained 78% data coverage of the site, therefore area values presented here are relative to the area surveyed. ** Values are for A4 Circalittoral rock. Based on available data it was impossible to make assessment of the energy conditions necessary for further refinement of the classification.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 1 1.2 Features present but not proposed in the SAD for inclusion within the rMCZ designation Extent Extent according to Accordance between according updated SAD and updated Feature to SAD habitat map* habitat map Broadscale Habitats Presence Extent A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment 155.66 km2 148.23 km2  -7.43 km2 Habitat FOCI Blue Mussel Beds Not Not N/A N/A reported recorded Peat and Clay Exposures Not 60 point  N/A reported records Subtidal Sands and Gravels Subtidal Sands and Gravels Not 166.66 km2  166.66 km2 (modelled) reported Geological feature Trimmingham (Subtidal) 0.46 km2 N/A N/A N/A * Note that the dedicated surveys only obtained 78% data coverage of the site, therefore area values presented here are relative to the area surveyed.

1.3 Features identified by the dedicated surveys but not included in the SAD Extent Extent according to Accordance between according updated SAD and updated Feature to SAD habitat map* habitat map Broadscale Habitats Presence Extent A5.2 Subtidal sand N/A 18.43 km2  +18.43 km2 A5.3 Subtidal mud N/A 0.40 km2  +0.40 km2 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments N/A 49.27 km2  +49.27 km2 Habitat FOCI Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) N/A 20 point  +20 point Reefs records records * Note that the dedicated surveys only obtained 78% data coverage of the site, therefore area values presented here are relative to the area surveyed.

1.4 Evidence of human activities occurring within the rMCZ There is evidence of anthropogenic activity on the seabed within the boundaries of the rMCZ, in the form of trawl marks, pipelines and possible areas of spoil, in addition to seven wrecks.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 2 2 Introduction In accordance with the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009, the UK is committed to the development and implementation of a network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). The network will incorporate existing designated sites (e.g., Special Areas of Conservation and Special Protection Areas) along with a number of newly designated sites which, within the English territorial waters and offshore waters of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, will be termed Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs). In support of this initiative, four regional projects were set up to select sites that could contribute to this network because they contain one or more features specified in the Ecological Network Guidance (ENG; Natural England and the JNCC, 2010). The regional projects proposed a total of 127 recommended MCZs (rMCZs) and compiled a Site Assessment Document (SAD) for each site. Each SAD summarised what evidence was available for the presence and extent of the various habitat, species and geological features specified in the ENG and for which the site was being recommended for designation. Due to the scarcity of survey-derived seabed habitat maps in UK waters, site assessments were necessarily made using best available evidence, which included historical data, modelled habitat maps and stakeholder knowledge of the areas concerned. It became apparent that the best available evidence on features for which some sites had been recommended as MCZs was of variable quality. Consequently, Defra initiated a number of measures aimed at improving the evidence base, one of which took the form of a dedicated survey programme, implemented and coordinated by Cefas, to collect and interpret new survey data at selected rMCZs. This report provides an interpretation of survey data collected by recent dedicated surveys of the site intended to collect new acoustic and groundtruthing data. Surveys were conducted by the Environment Agency in March 2012 (Godsell and Fraser, 2013), by Titan Environmental Surveys Ltd in March and April 2012 (Jenner, 2012), by Cefas in January 2013 (Ware, 2013), by Gardline Geosurvey in February and March 2014 (Januszewski, 2014), and by the Environment Agency in August and September 2014 (Miller and Godsell, 2014).

2.1 Location of the rMCZ The Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ is located approximately 200 m from the north Norfolk coast, adjacent to Sheringham, Cromer, West Weybourne and Sea Palling. The depth range of the site is approximately 0-25 m (Figure 1).

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 3

Figure 1. Location of the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ. Bathymetry is from the Defra Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011).

2.2 Rationale for site position and designation The Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ was included in the proposed network of MPAs because of its contribution to Ecological Network Guidance (ENG) criteria to broadscale habitats (BSH), and its added ecological importance. For a detailed site description see Net Gain (2011) and The Marine Conservation Zone Project: Ecological Network Guidance (Natural England and the JNCC, 2010).

2.2.1 Broadscale habitats proposed for designation Three BSHs were included in the recommendations for designation at this site, namely ‘A3.1 High energy infralittoral rock’, ‘A3.2 Moderate energy infralittoral rock’ and ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’ (Table 1). See Annex 1 for full list of BSH features listed in the ENG.

Table 1. Broadscale habitats for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. EUNIS code & Broadscale Habitat Spatial extent according to the SAD A3.1 High energy infralittoral rock 2.71 km2 A3.2 Moderate energy infralittoral rock 145.71 km2 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 11.56 km2

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 4 2.2.2 Habitat FOCI proposed for designation The habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Chalk’ was included in the recommendations for designation (Table 2). Annex 2 presents all the habitat FOCI listed in the ENG.

Table 2. Habitat FOCI for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. Habitat FOCI Spatial extent according to SAD Subtidal chalk 22 point records; 189.37 km2 (modelled)

2.2.3 Species FOCI proposed for designation No ‘Low or limited mobility species’ FOCI and no ‘Highly mobile species’ FOCI were included in the recommendations for designation of this rMCZ (Table 3). Lists of all species FOCI included in the ENG are presented in Annexes 3 and 4.

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

2.2.4 Geological features proposed for designation One geological feature was included in the recommendations for designation of this rMCZ, namely ‘North Norfolk Coast (subtidal)’ (Table 4).

Table 4. Geological features for which this rMCZ was proposed for designation. Geological feature Spatial extent according to SAD North Norfolk Coast (subtidal) 14.89 km2

2.3 Rationale for prioritising this rMCZ for additional evidence collection Prioritisation of rMCZ sites for further evidence collection was informed by a gap analysis and evidence assessment. The prime objective was to elevate the confidence status for as many rMCZs as feasible to support designation in terms of the amount and quality of evidence for the presence and extent of BSHs and habitat FOCI and, where possible, species FOCI and any other listed features. The confidence status was originally assessed in the SADs according Technical Protocol E (Natural England and the JNCC, 2012). The confidence score for the presence and extent of broadscale habitats and habitat FOCI reported for the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ was Low (JNCC and Natural England, 2012). This site was therefore prioritised for additional evidence collection.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 5 2.4 Survey aims and objectives Primary Objectives

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

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

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

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 6 3 Methods

3.1 Acoustic data acquisition Three of the five dedicated surveys of the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ were commissioned to collect acoustic data (see Appendix 2 for extent covered by the separate acoustic surveys). The first acoustic survey was undertaken during March and April 2012 by Titan Environmental Surveys Ltd on board the survey catamaran Titan Endeavour. A Geoacoustics Geoswathe system was used to collect detailed swathe bathymetry and acoustic backscatter data. Processing of the bathymetry data was carried out using the GeoSwath processing suite, GS+ 3.50. This survey targeted the foreshore area designated as Priority 1 for survey and partially covered the Priority 2 area, at its western extent (Jenner, 2012). The second acoustic survey was conducted by Cefas in January 2013 on board the RV Cefas Endeavour. This survey was originally intended to collect full coverage acoustic data from the entire site. However, due to time and weather constraints, this survey targeted the site area further offshore, to the north east of the site, and survey lines were conducted with a larger-than-intended line spacing of approximately 320 m (Ware, 2013). Multibeam bathymetry and backscatter data were acquired using the Kongsberg EM2040 system, operated at 300 kHz. Multibeam echosounder (MBES) data were processed using CARIS HIPS software. Backscatter data were processed with Fledermaus Geocoder Toolbox. The final acoustic survey was conducted in February and March 2014 by Gardline Geosurvey using a hull mounted Kongsberg Simrad EM3002 system on board the MV Confidante. Data were processed using CARIS HIPS/SIPS with final visualisation deliverables processed with QPS Fledermaus. This survey targeted the Priority 3 area of the rMCZ (Januszewki, 2014). All bathymetry data were collected and processed in accordance with the International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO) Standards for Hydrographic Surveys - Order 1 (Special Publication 44, Edition 4) (see Appendix 2 for images derived from acoustic data and acoustic survey locations).

3.2 Ground truth sample acquisition Groundtruthing was conducted during three of the five dedicated surveys of the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ, between 2012 and 2014. The first groundtruthing survey was conducted in March 2012 using the Briggs Marine Coastal Survey Vessel Humber Guardian. Sampling stations were selected using an equilateral triangle grid overlain on the predicted BSH map and Admiralty Charts (to identify hazards). No sediment grabs were taken on this survey as no sublittoral sediment BSHs were believed to be present in the area targeted (Godsell and Fraser, 2013). Instead, video samples were taken using a Drop Camera (DC) system, comprising a rectangular frame fitted with a video camera and a capability to capture still images. Illumination was provided by two high intensity LED spotlights and a flash unit. The camera was fitted with a four-spot laser-scaling device to provide a reference scale in the video image. Set-up and operation followed the MESH ‘Recommended Operating Guidelines (ROG) for underwater video and

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 7 photographic imaging techniques’ (Coggan et al., 2007). Video was recorded simultaneously to a Sony GV-HD700 DV tape recorded and a computer hard drive. A video overlay was used to provide station metadata, time and GPS position (of the vessel) in the recorded video image. DC deployments lasted a minimum of 10 minutes, with the vessel executing a controlled drift at c. 0.5 knots (c. 0.25 m s-1) across a 50 m ‘bullring’ centred on the sampling station. Still images were captured at regular one-minute intervals and opportunistically if specific features of interest were encountered. The camera was deployed from the side gantry, amidships, with the height of the camera off the seabed controlled by a winch operator with sight of the video monitor. Seabed imagery was also collected during a second survey aboard the RV Cefas Endeavour (cruise code: CEND0113). Sampling stations were selected based on the processed MBES data collected prior to the groundtruthing survey. The same sample acquisition methodology detailed for the 2012 cruise was applied (Ware, 2013). The third and final groundtruthing survey was conducted in August and September 2014, using the Briggs Marine Coastal Survey Vessels Humber Guardian and Thames Guardian. This survey collected both seabed imagery and sediment grabs. The SRT SeaSpyder camera system was deployed from the stern of the survey vessels. Real-time navigation data acquisition and manual position fixing when the gear contacted the seabed were captured via HYDROpro software. Images of the seabed were captured approximately every 10 to 15 m over a distance of >150 m. Extra photographs were taken in heterogeneous areas of BSH and when particular habitat FOCI were observed. The camera deployment was extended if a BSH habitat boundary was detected, for estimating spatial extent. The drop frame depth was controlled via a winch operator receiving instructions from the survey cabin. Stations were selected for grab sampling if suitable sublittoral sediment was observed in at least 50% of the seabed images collected. Stations were avoided if rocky habitat and/or delicate epifauna were observed. Generally, a position fix from the mid-point of the drop camera survey line was used as the target for grab deployment. However, if a mixture of habitat types was observed during the camera transect, the most appropriate target position was chosen. A mini-Hamon grab, with a sampling area of 0.1 m2, was deployed from the stern gantry of the vessels to collect sediment from the seabed, as described by Ware and Kenny (2011). Sampling positions were recorded using HYDROpro data acquisition software when the gear contacted the seabed. Once recovered, the sample was emptied into a suitable container, photographed, and the sample volume measured. A sub-sample (approx. 500 ml) of sediment was removed for particle size analysis (PSA). The remaining sample was washed over a 1 mm mesh sieve, photographed and preserved in a buffered 8% formaldehyde solution. Underwater camera samples were taken at 196 stations, and the grab sampler was deployed at 70 stations (Figure 2; Appendix 1). Further details on ground truth sample collection are provided in the respective survey reports (Godsell and Fraser; 2013; Ware, 2013; Miller and Godsell, 2014).

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 8

Figure 2. Location of ground truth sampling sites in the Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ. Bathymetry is from the Defra Digital Elevation Model (Astrium, 2011).

3.3 Production of the updated habitat map All new maps and their derivatives have been based on a WGS84 datum. A new habitat map for the site was produced by analysing and interpreting the available acoustic data and the newly acquired ground truth data. The process is a combination of two approaches, auto-classification (image analysis) and expert interpretation, as described below. The routine for auto-classification is flexible and dependent on site-specific data, allowing for the application of a bespoke routine to maximise the acoustic data available. ArcGIS was used to perform an initial unsupervised classification on the acquired backscatter image. The single band backscatter mosaic was filtered and smoothed prior to the application of an Iso cluster/maximum likelihood classification routine. Python scripting language was used to automate the workflow. Each stage in the process is numbered and described in detail below.

Stage 1. Data Preparation Prior to analysis, the bathymetry and backscatter data were re-sampled onto a common grid at 2 m resolution. This data preparation results in a spatial grid with a single value for bathymetry (depth) and a single value for backscatter (acoustic reflectance) in each 2 x 2 m grid cell, and it is these data values that were used in the rest of the process.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 9 Stage 2. Derivatives calculated From the two primary acoustic datasets, bathymetry and backscatter, a range of derivatives were calculated, as detailed in Table 5.

Table 5. Description of derivatives calculated for bathymetry using ArcGIS/Fledermaus. Derivative Description Slope The slope in degrees using the maximum change in elevation of each cell and its 8 neighbours (3*3) Roughness/Rugosity Calculated as the difference between the maximum and minimum value of each cell and its 8 neighbours (3*3) Aspect Identifies the downslope direction of the maximum rate of change in value from each cell to its neighbours. It can be thought of as the slope direction.

Stage 3. Unsupervised classification The following steps outline the routine performed using standard ArcGIS 10.1 functionality to classify automatically the single band backscatter mosaic. This functionality was accessed and performed using a single Python script.

Smoothing/generalisation of the backscatter image This step involved the generalisation and smoothing of the single band backscatter mosaic prior to application of the classification tools, to remove the influence of noise and ‘striping’ from within the backscatter image. This makes the production of smooth, topologically correct, ‘realistic’ polygons easier for later modification and attribution during the manual phase. The raster was down-sampled to a 20 m resolution. Focal statistics were used to populate the cell values of a new 3 m resolution grid based on the mean of a 3 x 3 cell neighbourhood. The focal statistic command was repeated up to 10 times to ensure a smooth, noise free grid, as illustrated in Figure 3. The initial coarse resolution ensures the removal of any striping whilst maintaining the general trend. Converting back to a finer resolution is essential for the production of smooth, realistic vector output. The choice of cell size combination is crucial in determining feature size to be preserved. The cell size is chosen to attain the most appropriate scale of mapping in order to maximise the removal of noise from the data set, whilst preserving the required feature visibility.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 10

Original Image Resample to 20 m

FocalStats back to 3 m FocalStats *10

Figure 3. Backscatter mosaic generalisation/smoothing prior to autoclassification routine.

ArcGIS Iso Cluster Unsupervised Classification Tool This tool is part of the classification toolset available on the image classification toolbar within ArcGIS 10.1. The Iso cluster tool was chosen as it produced the best results from the single band image of backscatter intensity. The tool uses an iterative clustering procedure, also known as a migrating means technique, to find the natural groupings of cells and produce a signature file to be used as an input requirement for the maximum likelihood tool. The analyst chooses an unrealistically high number of potential sediment classes to group each cell into. The algorithm separates each cell into one of these clusters/groupings by calculating an arbitrary mean for each and assigning a cell to the most suitable cluster based on the shortest Euclidean distance. The mean of each group is then recalculated based on this first iteration of groupings. The process is repeated for the number of iterations specified, which should be greater than the number of classes and enough to ensure that the movement of cells across classes has become stable. The maximum likelihood classification tool uses the output signature file from the Iso cluster procedure to create a classified raster. The tool will consider the variance and covariance of the class signature when assigning each cell to one of the classes. With the assumption that the distribution of a class sample is normal, a class can be characterised by the mean vector and the covariance matrix. The statistical probability is computed for each class to determine the membership of

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 11 cells to a class. An a priori probability weighting option is the default value of the maximum likelihood routine, whereby each cell is assigned to the class to which it has the highest probability of being a member.

Raster to polygon to conversion The classified raster obtained from the above steps is converted to a vector polygon shapefile to produce a final fully attributed, topologically clean, smooth vector dataset (Figure 4).

Result of FocalStats/ Iso Cluster Tool Raster to Polygon Generalising

Figure 4. Iso cluster maximum likelihood classification routine. The resultant classified output represents a numeric, thematic map. The number of classes created is simply an over-estimation of the potential number of sediment types present in the study area. The analyst can analyse the resulting map and change the number of classes until satisfied all likely changes in seabed substrate have been represented.

Stage 4. Expert judgement The vectorised output of the semi-automated process is reviewed manually to assign sedimentological classifications in accordance with the EUNIS habitat classification system. An appreciation of the geological characteristics of the area also means that the analyst can ‘sense check’ the outputs. Polygons can be amended, modified and merged to best represent the acoustic data, groundtruthing samples with the influence of geological judgement. The newly acquired acoustic data covered approximately 78% of the site area, mapping was therefore restricted to this area only.

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

1 http://emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/confidence/confidenceAssessment.html [Accessed 18/12/2014]

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 12 maps that had been developed using different techniques and data inputs, but were to be used in compiling a full coverage map for north-west Europe. Where two of the original maps overlapped, that with the highest MESH confidence score would take precedence in the compiled map. Subsequent to the MESH project, the confidence assessment tool has been applied to provide a benchmark score that reflects the technical quality of newly developed habitat/biotope maps. Both physical and biological survey data are required to achieve the top mark of 100 but, as the current rMCZ exercise requires the mapping of broadscale physical habitats not biotopes, it excludes the need for biological data. In the absence of biological data, the maximum score attainable for a purely physical map based on physical data alone is 88. In applying the tool to the current work, none of the weighting options were altered; that is, the tool was applied in its standard form, as downloaded from the internet.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 13 4 Results Lists of benthic taxa found in the grab and video samples are presented in Appendix 4; in total, 358 infaunal and 146 epifaunal taxa were recorded. A summary of the PSA data acquired from the grab samples is given in Appendix 5. Of the 70 samples analysed, coarse sediment was recorded at 40 stations, sand at 16 stations, mixed sediments at 9 stations and mud at 5 stations. Results from the analysis of video and still samples are summarised in Appendix 6. Example images of the BSHs and habitat FOCI recorded in the video samples are given in Appendices 7 and 8 respectively.

4.1 Site Assessment Document habitat map The SAD habitat map (Figure 5) was produced using modelled data from the UKSeaMap (McBreen, 2010). For further detail see Net Gain (2011).

Figure 5. Habitat map from the Site Assessment Document.

4.2 Updated habitat map based on new survey data The updated habitat map resulting from an integrated analysis of data from all dedicated surveys is presented in Figure 6.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 14

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

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 15 4.3 Quality of the updated habitat map The newly produced map attained a score of 81 from the MESH Confidence Assessment Tool (Figure 7), which is good, given that the maximum possible score for a map produced from purely physical data is 88.

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

4.4 Broadscale habitats identified The mapped area is characterised by chalk close to shore, with sediments present further offshore. Due to lack of distinct acoustic signature associated with the different sediment textures present, and limited groundtruthing data, difficulties arose in delineating boundaries, particularly between mixed and coarse sediments. The predominant habitats were therefore mapped, placing a higher weighting on the bathymetry data and PSA to classify seabed textures. The following BSHs have been recorded and mapped: ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’, ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’, ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’, and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’. In addition ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’ has been identified, but it has not been possible to refine the classification to EUNIS Level 3 with the available data. ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’ is the parent habitat to the BSH ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’ listed in the SAD for this site. It is present in the shallowest part of the site, proximal to the coastline. However, it is difficult to make a distinction between high and moderate energy conditions based on the available data. The distinction between these classes is usually made on the basis of the benthic

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 16 assemblages present. However, in this case these data are inconclusive and therefore all subtidal rock is mapped as ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’. The BSH ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ is the most widespread of all the BSHs identified, occupying 60% of the mapped area of the rMCZ (Figure 6, Table 6). The BSH ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ occupies 20% of the mapped area and BSH ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’ occupies just over 10% the area. The BSH ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ is also identified, occupying 7% of the mapped area. A small area of the site (<1%) is classified as the BSH ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’. The BSH ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ is present in the east of the site in the inshore section and at the western extent of the site, both inshore and offshore. The BSH ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’ is identified towards the north-western extent of the area, occupying localised depressions in the seabed. The BSHs ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ and ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ are found across the remainder of the mapped area. PSA data suggest the presence of mixed sediments at the eastern extent of the site with coarse sediment covering the majority of the central site area (Figure 6).

Table 6. Broadscale habitats identified in this rMCZ. Broadscale habitat type Spatial extent according Spatial extent according to (EUNIS Level 3) to the SAD the updated habitat map* A4 Circalittoral rock (EUNIS Level 2) N/A** 29.97 km2 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock 11.56 km2 N/A** A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment 155.66 km2 148.23 km2 A5.2 Subtidal sand Not recorded 18.43 km2 A5.3 Subtidal mud Not recorded 0.40 km2 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments Not recorded 49.27 km2 * Note that the dedicated surveys only obtained 78% data coverage of the site, therefore area values presented here are relative to the area surveyed. ** It was not possible to distinguish between energy conditions associated with circalittoral rock habitats, therefore the values reported for A4.2 in the SAD map and A4 in the updated map are not strictly comparable, although A4.2 will be part of A4.

4.5 Habitat FOCI identified The habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Chalk’ identified in the SAD and proposed for designation of this site (Table 7), has been identified as occupying 12% of the mapped area of the rMCZ (Figure 8). The majority of the mapped area (67%), however, is classified as the habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Sands and Gravels’. This habitat FOCI is also mentioned in the SAD but it is not in the list of features proposed for designation. A further two habitat FOCI are identified from the photographic stills, namely ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’ and ‘Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs’. ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’ is also mentioned in the SAD but not proposed for designation, whereas ‘Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs’ is not mentioned in the SAD. Due to the patchy nature of these habitat FOCI at a small spatial scale, it has not been possible to map their full extent using the available data. Sixty stills are classified as ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’, located in the north-western section of the site. The exposures appear to be associated with the slopes of localised depressions of the seabed. Similarly, 20 stills indicate the presence of ‘Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs’ in the western part of the rMCZ. These data points are located on the boundary of the data available for the site (Figure 8).

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 17 The SAD reports the presence of the habitat FOCI ‘Blue Mussel Beds’ in the rMCZ, although it is not proposed as a feature for designation. The extent or location of this feature is not reported in the SAD. This habitat FOCI was not observed by the recent dedicated surveys of this site.

Figure 8. Habitat FOCI identified.

Table 7. Habitat FOCI identified in this rMCZ. Spatial extent according Spatial extent to the updated habitat Habitat FOCI according to the SAD map* Subtidal Sands and Gravels Subtidal Sands and Gravels (modelled) Not reported 166.66 km2 Subtidal Chalk 22 point records Subtidal Chalk (modelled) 189.37 km2 29.97 km2 Blue Mussel Beds Not reported Not recorded Peat and Clay Exposures Not reported 60 point records Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs N/A 20 point records * Note that the dedicated surveys only obtained 78% data coverage of the site, therefore area values presented here are relative to the area surveyed.

4.6 Species FOCI identified No species FOCI were recorded from samples taken during the recent dedicated surveys (Table 8). The list of taxa identified from grab and video samples collected by the dedicated surveys is presented in Appendix 4.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 18 Table 8. Species FOCI identified in this rMCZ. Previously recorded Identified during evidence Species FOCI within rMCZ gathering survey Low or Limited Mobility Species FOCI None observed N/A N/A Highly Mobile Species FOCI None observed N/A N/A

4.7 Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC)

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

4.7.2 Particle Size Analysis of sediments PSA was carried out by Cefas following standard laboratory practice and the results checked by specialist Cefas staff following the recommendations of the National Marine Biological Analytical Quality Control (NMBAQC) scheme (Mason, 2011). Results of the PSA are shown in Appendix 5.

4.7.3 Infaunal samples from grabs Infaunal samples were processed by APEM Ltd following standard laboratory practices and results checked following the recommendations of the NMBAQC scheme (Worsfold et al., 2010).

4.7.4 Video and still images and analysis Video and photographic stills collected by the EA survey in August 2014 were processed by Marine Ecosol, and video collected by Cefas in January 2014 was processed by RSS Marine Ltd in accordance with the guidance documents developed by Cefas and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) for the acquisition and processing of video and stills data (Coggan and Howell, 2005; JNCC, in prep.; summarised in Annex 5).

4.8 Data limitations and adequacy of the updated habitat map The quality of the updated habitat map, which covers 78% of the site, is assessed to be High (MESH assessment tool). A source of potential misclassification of habitats arises from the location of groundtruthing samples in relation to habitat types. The survey has provided substantial, robust evidence for the presence of the mapped habitats. However, as it is impractical (and undesirable) to sample the entire area of the site with grabs and video, there is a chance that a BSH or FOCI

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 19 may exist within the site but has not been recorded, especially if it was limited in extent. The precise location of the boundaries between the broadscale habitats depicted on the map should be regarded as indicative, not definitive. In nature, such boundaries are rarely abrupt. Instead it is typical for one BSH to grade into another across a transitional boundary, especially between sedimentary habitats. In contrast, the mapped boundaries are abrupt and have been placed using best professional judgment. This may have implications when calculating the overall extent of any of the mapped BSHs or FOCI.

4.9 Observations of human impacts on the seabed There is evidence from the acoustic data of anthropogenic activity within the boundaries of the rMCZ. Evidence includes possible trawl marks, pipelines and potential areas of spoil, in addition to seven wrecks (Appendix 3).

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 20 5 Conclusions

5.1 Presence and extent of broadscale habitats

5.1.1 Presence  The 2012-2014 dedicated surveys of this rMCZ reported the presence of the EUNIS Level 2 habitat ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’. The SAD included the BSH ‘A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock’ in the recommendations for designating this site as an MCZ, which is a descendant habitat of A4. There was insufficient evidence to refine the classification of ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’.

 The dedicated surveys have not confirmed the presence of the BSHs ‘A3.1 High energy infralittoral rock’ and ‘A3.2 Moderate energy infralittoral rock’, which were included in the recommendations made by the SAD for designating this site as an MCZ.

 The dedicated surveys have reported the presence of the BSHs ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’, ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’, ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’ and ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’.

5.1.2 Extent  The spatial extent of the ‘A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment’ BSH on the updated habitat map is 148.23 km2. This is 7.43 km2 less than its spatial extent in the SAD habitat map. However, the recalculated value is based on 78% data coverage of the rMCZ.

 The spatial extent of the ‘A5.2 Subtidal sand’ BSH on the updated habitat map is 18.43 km2, based on 78% data coverage of the site. This was not identified in the SAD habitat map.

 The spatial extent of the ‘A5.3 Subtidal mud’ BSH on the updated habitat map is 0.40 km2, based on 78% data coverage of the site. This was not identified in the SAD habitat map.

 The spatial extent of the ‘A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments’ BSH on the updated habitat map is 49.27 km2, based on 78% data coverage of the site. This was not identified in the SAD habitat map.

 The spatial extent of the habitat ‘A4 Circalittoral rock’ on the updated habitat map is 29.97 km2.

5.2 Presence and extent of habitat FOCI

5.2.1 Presence  The 2012–2014 dedicated surveys have confirmed the presence of the habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Chalk’ that was included in the recommendations made by the SAD for designating this site as an rMCZ.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 21  The dedicated surveys have confirmed the presence of two habitat FOCI, ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’ and ‘Subtidal Sands and Gravels’, which were mentioned in the SAD but not included in the recommendations for designation of this site as an MCZ.

 The dedicated surveys have not identified the presence of the habitat FOCI ‘Blue Mussel Beds’ which was mentioned in the SAD but not put forward as a recommendation for designating this site as an MCZ.

 The dedicated surveys have identified the habitat FOCI ‘Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs’ within the rMCZ boundary. This habitat FOCI was not listed in the SAD.

5.2.2 Extent  The spatial extent of the habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Chalk’ on the updated habitat map is 29.97 km2, based on 78% data coverage. This is 159.40 km2 less than its spatial extent in the SAD habitat map.

 The spatial extent of the habitat FOCI ‘Subtidal Sands and Gravels’ on the updated habitat map is 166.66 km2, based on 78% data coverage. No area for this habitat FOCI was reported in the SAD as it was not included on the features proposed for designation.

 The habitat FOCIs ‘Peat and Clay Exposures’ and ‘Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs’ were recorded within the rMCZ boundary. It was not possible to calculate the extent of these features.

5.3 Presence and distribution of species FOCI

5.3.1 Low or limited mobility species  No low or limited mobility species FOCI were recorded at this site by the dedicated surveys. These observations are consistent with the evidence presented in the SAD.

5.3.2 Highly mobile species FOCI  No highly mobile species FOCI were recorded at this site by the dedicated surveys. These observations are consistent with the evidence presented in the SAD.

5.4 Evidence of human activities impacting the seabed There is abundant evidence for human impacts on the seabed from the multibeam bathymetry and backscatter images. Seven wrecks can be identified along with numerous trawl marks and pipelines and an area of possible spoil.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 22 References

Astrium (2011). Creation of a high resolution Digital Elevation Model (DEM) of the British Isles continental shelf: Final Report. Prepared for Defra, Contract Reference: 13820. 26 pp. Coggan, R., Mitchell, A., White, J. and Golding, N. (2007). Recommended operating guidelines (ROG) for underwater video and photographic imaging techniques. www.searchmesh.net/PDF/GMHM3_video_ROG.pdf [Accessed 18/12/2014] Coggan, R. and Howell, K. (2005). Draft SOP for the collection and analysis of video and still images for groundtruthing an acoustic basemap. Video survey SOP version 5. 10 pp. Godsell, N. and Fraser, M. (2013), Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ, C5784A. 38 pp. Januszewski, L. (2014). Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds Survey Report. 17 pp. Jenner, M. (2012). Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Acoustic Survey: End of Cruise Report, CS0349/R1/V3. 180 pp. JNCC (in prep.). Video/Stills Camera Standard Operating Procedure for Survey and Analysis: for groundtruthing and classifying an acoustic basemap, and development of new biotopes within the UK Marine Habitat Classification. JNCC Video and Stills Processing SOP v2. 6 pp. JNCC and Natural England (2012). Marine Conservation Zone Project: JNCC and Natural England's advice to Defra on recommended Marine Conservation Zones. Peterborough and Sheffield. 1455 pp. Mason, C. (2011). NMBAQC’s Best Practice Guidance Particle Size Analysis (PSA) for Supporting Biological Analysis. McBreen, F. (2010). UKSeaMap 2010 EUNIS model Version 3.0. UKSeaMap 2010: Predictive seabed habitat map (v5). JNCC. Miller, C. and Godsell, N. (2014) Draft version- Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ, C5784A. 227 pp. Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2010). The Marine Conservation Zone Project: Ecological Network Guidance. Sheffield and Peterborough, UK. Natural England and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2012). SNCB MCZ Advice Project-Assessing the scientific confidence in the presence and extent of features in recommended Marine Conservation Zones (Technical Protocol E). Net Gain (2011). Final Recommendations Submission to Natural England and JNCC, Version 1.1. 880 pp. Ware, S. (2013). Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Survey Report, C5785. 50 pp.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 23 Ware, S. and Kenny, A. (2011). Guidelines for the conduct of benthic studies at marine aggregate extraction sites – 2nd edition. Marine Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund. 80 pp. Worsfold, T.M., Hall, D.J. and O’Reilly, M. (2010). Guidelines for processing marine macrobenthic invertebrate samples: a processing requirements protocol version 1 (June 2010). Unicomarine Report NMBAQCMbPRP to the NMBAQC Committee. 33 pp.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 24 Data sources

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

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 25 Annexes

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

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 26 Annex 2. Habitat FOCI listed in the ENG. Habitat Features of Conservation Importance (FOCI) Blue Mussel Beds (including Intertidal Beds on Mixed and Sandy Sediments)** Cold-Water Coral Reefs *** Coral Gardens*** Deep-Sea Sponge Aggregations*** Estuarine Rocky Habitats File Shell Beds*** Fragile Sponge and Anthozoan Communities on Subtidal Rocky Habitats Intertidal Underboulder Communities Littoral Chalk Communities Maerl Beds Horse Mussel (Modiolus modiolus) Beds Mud Habitats in Deep Water Sea-Pen and Burrowing Megafauna Communities Native Oyster (Ostrea edulis) Beds Peat and Clay Exposures Honeycomb Worm (Sabellaria alveolata) Reefs Ross Worm (Sabellaria spinulosa) Reefs Seagrass Beds Sheltered Muddy Gravels Subtidal Chalk Subtidal Sands and Gravels**** Tide-Swept Channels * Habitat FOCI have been identified from the ‘OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats’ and the ‘UK List of Priority Species and Habitats (UK BAP)’. ** Only includes ‘natural’ beds on a variety of sediment types. Excludes artificially created mussel beds and those which occur on rocks and boulders. *** Cold-Water Coral Reefs, Coral Gardens, Deep-Sea Sponge Aggregations and File Shell Beds currently do not have distributional data which demonstrate their presence within the MCZ project area. **** Subtidal Sands and Gravels are considered to be adequately protected by its component habitat features subtidal sand and/or subtidal coarse sediment, and is no longer included within MCZ designations

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 27 Annex 3. Low or limited mobility species FOCI listed in the ENG. Group Scientific name Common Name Brown Algae Padina pavonica Peacock’s Tail Red Algae Cruoria cruoriaeformis Burgundy Maerl Paint Weed Grateloupia montagnei Grateloup’s Little-Lobed Weed Lithothamnion corallioides Coral Maerl Phymatolithon calcareum Common Maerl Annelida Alkmaria romijni** Tentacled Lagoon-Worm** Armandia cirrhosa** Lagoon Sandworm** Teleostei Gobius cobitis Giant Goby Gobius couchi Couch’s Goby Hippocampus guttulatus Long Snouted Seahorse Hippocampus hippocampus Short Snouted Seahorse Bryozoa Victorella pavida Trembling Sea Mat Cnidaria Amphianthus dohrnii Sea-Fan Anemone Eunicella verrucosa Pink Sea-Fan Haliclystus auricula Stalked Jellyfish*** Leptopsammia pruvoti Sunset Cup Coral Lucernariopsis campanulata Stalked Jellyfish Lucernariopsis cruxmelitensis Stalked Jellyfish Nematostella vectensis Starlet Sea Anemone Crustacea Gammarus insensibilis** Lagoon Sand Shrimp** Gitanopsis bispinosa Amphipod Shrimp Pollicipes pollicipes Gooseneck Barnacle Palinurus elephas Spiny Lobster Mollusca Arctica islandica Ocean Quahog Atrina pectinata Fan Mussel Caecum armoricum** Defolin’s Lagoon Snail** Ostrea edulis Native Oyster Paludinella littorina Sea Snail**** Tenellia adspersa** Lagoon Sea Slug** * Species FOCI have been identified from the ‘OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats’, the ‘UK List of Priority Species and Habitats (UK BAP)’ and Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. ** Those lagoonal species FOCI may be afforded sufficient protection through coastal lagoons designated as SACs under the EC Habitats Directive. However, this needs to be assessed by individual regional projects. *** The stalked jellyfish Haliclystus auricula is now referred to as Haliclystus species for the purpose of MCZ protection to account for potential presence of Haliclystus octoradiatus that has not been consistently differentiated within scientific records. The species are therefore considered jointly as an MCZ feature. **** The sea snail (Paludinella littorina) has been removed from Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act. This means that it is no longer a Feature of Conservation Importance (FOCI) so has been removed as a feature for MCZ designation.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 28 Annex 4. Highly mobile species FOCI listed in the ENG. Group Scientific name Common Name Teleostei Osmerus eperlanus Smelt Anguilla anguilla European Eel Elasmobranchii Raja undulata Undulate Ray * Species FOCI have been identified from the ‘OSPAR List of Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats’, the ‘UK List of Priority Species and Habitats (UK BAP)’ and Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 29 Annex 5. Video and stills processing protocol. The purpose of the analysis of the video and still images is to identify which habitats exist in a video record, provide semi-quantitative data on their physical and biological characteristics and to note where one habitat changes to another. A minimum of 10% of the videos should be re-analysed for QA purposes. Video Analysis

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 30 Taxon identification In all analyses, the identification of taxa should be limited to a level that can be confidently achieved from the available image. Hence, taxon identity could range from the ‘life form’ level (e.g. sponge, hydroid, anemone) to the species level (e.g. Asterias rubens, Alcyonium digitatum). Avoid the temptation to guess the species identity if it cannot be determined positively from the image. For example, Spirobranchus sp. would be acceptable, but Spirobranchus triqueter would not, as the specific identification normally requires the specimen to be inspected under a microscope.

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 31 Appendices

Appendix 1. Survey metadata (2ENC30914) Date Stn No Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 06/08/2014 1 CSCB063 DC SoL 52.99552 1.12296 06/08/2014 1 CSCB063 DC EoL 52.99407 1.12673 06/08/2014 2 CSCB073 DC SoL 52.98678 1.17417 06/08/2014 2 CSCB073 DC EoL 52.98698 1.17714 06/08/2014 3 CSCB006 DC SoL 52.97076 1.21638 06/08/2014 3 CSCB006 DC EoL 52.96978 1.2251 06/08/2014 4 CSCB009 DC SoL 52.9559 1.27028 06/08/2014 4 CSCB009 DC EoL 52.95455 1.27155 06/08/2014 5 CSCB013 DC SoL 52.9513 1.31958 06/08/2014 5 CSCB013 DC EoL 52.95093 1.32341 06/08/2014 6 CSCB038 DC SoL 52.93565 1.38765 06/08/2014 6 CSCB038 DC EoL 52.93473 1.38909 07/08/2014 7 CSCB026 DC SoL 52.83798 1.53703 07/08/2014 7 CSCB026 DC EoL 52.83915 1.53498 07/08/2014 8 CSCB022 DC SoL 52.85282 1.49107 07/08/2014 8 CSCB022 DC EoL 52.85281 1.48966 07/08/2014 9 CSCB021 DC SoL 52.85821 1.49686 07/08/2014 9 CSCB021 DC EoL 52.85807 1.49525 07/08/2014 10 CSCB024 DC SoL 52.87745 1.50716 07/08/2014 10 CSCB024 DC EoL 52.87824 1.50426 07/08/2014 11 CSCB023 DC SoL 52.88618 1.48939 07/08/2014 11 CSCB023 DC EoL 52.88728 1.48767 07/08/2014 12 CSCB020 DC SoL 52.89761 1.44947 07/08/2014 12 CSCB020 DC EoL 52.89683 1.4489 07/08/2014 13 CSCB018 DC SoL 52.89878 1.42577 07/08/2014 13 CSCB018 DC EoL 52.8979 1.42472 07/08/2014 14 CSCB016 DC SoL 52.90192 1.40931 07/08/2014 14 CSCB016 DC EoL 52.90093 1.41033 07/08/2014 15 CSCB015 DC SoL 52.92058 1.38015 07/08/2014 15 CSCB015 DC EoL 52.91943 1.38177 07/08/2014 16 CSCB014 DC SoL 52.93572 1.36185 07/08/2014 16 CSCB014 DC EoL 52.93597 1.35956 07/08/2014 17 CSCB036 DC SoL 52.95155 1.34747 07/08/2014 17 CSCB036 DC EoL 52.95242 1.34582 07/08/2014 18 CSCB108 DC SoL 52.96625 1.33571 07/08/2014 18 CSCB108 DC EoL 52.96781 1.33361 07/08/2014 19 CSCB107 DC SoL 52.98247 1.32344 07/08/2014 19 CSCB107 DC EoL 52.98282 1.32034 07/08/2014 20 CSCB153 DC SoL 52.99195 1.31899 07/08/2014 20 CSCB153 DC EoL 52.99329 1.31863 07/08/2014 21 CSCB155 DC SoL 53.00212 1.32559 07/08/2014 21 CSCB155 DC EoL 53.00322 1.32368 07/08/2014 22 CSCB156 DC SoL 53.01275 1.34061 07/08/2014 22 CSCB156 DC EoL 53.01426 1.34115

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 32 Date Stn No Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 07/08/2014 23 CSCB159 DC SoL 53.01209 1.36252 07/08/2014 23 CSCB159 DC EoL 53.01028 1.36493 07/08/2014 24 CSCB162 DC SoL 52.99953 1.39457 07/08/2014 24 CSCB162 DC EoL 52.99791 1.39736 07/08/2014 25 CSCB164 DC SoL 52.98678 1.42788 07/08/2014 25 CSCB164 DC EoL 52.98503 1.43092 07/08/2014 26 CSCB046 DC SoL 52.97877 1.44102 07/08/2014 26 CSCB046 DC EoL 52.97783 1.44522 21/08/2014 27 CSCB025 DC SoL 52.85183 1.52122 21/08/2014 27 CSCB025 DC EoL 52.85310 1.52022 21/08/2014 28 CSCB019 DC SoL 52.90181 1.44707 21/08/2014 28 CSCB019 DC EoL 52.90304 1.44601 21/08/2014 29 CSCB044 DC SoL 52.91628 1.43725 21/08/2014 29 CSCB044 DC EoL 52.91768 1.43617 21/08/2014 30 CSCB033 DC SoL 52.91610 1.40073 21/08/2014 30 CSCB033 DC EoL 52.91715 1.39979 21/08/2014 31 CSCB017 DC SoL 52.92572 1.38981 21/08/2014 31 CSCB017 DC EoL 52.92678 1.38910 21/08/2014 32 CSCB042 DC SoL 52.93280 1.42296 21/08/2014 32 CSCB042 DC EoL 52.93387 1.42213 21/08/2014 33 CSCB040 DC SoL 52.94971 1.40969 21/08/2014 33 CSCB040 DC EoL 52.95072 1.40852 21/08/2014 34 CSCB037 DC SoL 52.94899 1.38035 21/08/2014 34 CSCB037 DC EoL 52.95026 1.37874 21/08/2014 35 CSCB110 DC SoL 52.96584 1.36675 21/08/2014 35 CSCB110 DC EoL 52.96667 1.36487 21/08/2014 36 CSCB109 DC SoL 52.98122 1.35211 21/08/2014 36 CSCB109 DC EoL 52.98189 1.35054 21/08/2014 37 CSCB106 DC SoL 52.96682 1.30717 21/08/2014 37 CSCB106 DC EoL 52.96728 1.30559 21/08/2014 38 CSC011 DC SoL 52.95167 1.29165 21/08/2014 38 CSC011 DC EoL 52.95267 1.28990 21/08/2014 39 CSCB012 DC SoL 52.94434 1.28821 21/08/2014 39 CSCB012 DC EoL 52.94486 1.28946 21/08/2014 40 CSCB010 DC SoL 52.96869 1.27624 21/08/2014 40 CSCB010 DC EoL 52.96968 1.27705 21/08/2014 41 CSCB112 DC SoL 52.97032 1.27021 21/08/2014 41 CSCB112 DC EoL 52.97093 1.26927 21/08/2014 42 CSCB008 DC SoL 52.96885 1.24753 21/08/2014 42 CSCB008 DC EoL 52.96999 1.24699 21/08/2014 43 CSCB031 DC SoL 52.95268 1.23162 21/08/2014 43 CSCB031 DC EoL 52.95264 1.23326 21/08/2014 44 CSCB007 DC SoL 52.95796 1.21353 21/08/2014 44 CSCB007 DC EoL 52.95824 1.21536 21/08/2014 45 CSCB005 DC SoL 52.95627 1.20124 21/08/2014 45 CSCB005 DC EoL 52.95630 1.20278 21/08/2014 46 CSCB032 DC SoL 52.96651 1.20333 21/08/2014 46 CSCB032 DC EoL 52.96598 1.20464

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 33 Date Stn No Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 21/08/2014 47 CSCB102 DC SoL 52.98504 1.23309 21/08/2014 47 CSCB102 DC EoL 52.98603 1.23423 21/08/2014 48 CSCB104 DC SoL 52.98398 1.26257 21/08/2014 48 CSCB104 DC EoL 52.98457 1.26424 21/08/2014 49 CSCB105 DC SoL 52.98221 1.29253 21/08/2014 49 CSCB105 DC EoL 52.98209 1.29465 21/08/2014 50 CSCB158 DC SoL 52.98878 1.36386 21/08/2014 50 CSCB158 DC EoL 52.98872 1.36574 21/08/2014 51 CSCB161 DC SoL 52.98872 1.38186 21/08/2014 51 CSCB161 DC EoL 52.98868 1.38398 21/08/2014 52 CSCB113 DC SoL 52.97654 1.39136 21/08/2014 52 CSCB113 DC EoL 52.97639 1.39314 21/08/2014 53 CSCB039 DC SoL 52.96449 1.39565 21/08/2014 53 CSCB039 DC EoL 52.96414 1.39763 21/08/2014 54 CSCB045 DC SoL 52.95144 1.42295 21/08/2014 54 CSCB045 DC EoL 52.95100 1.42489 21/08/2014 55 CSCB047 DC SoL 52.93189 1.45164 21/08/2014 55 CSCB047 DC EoL 52.93134 1.45347 21/08/2014 56 CSCB058 DC SoL 52.88341 1.52253 21/08/2014 56 CSCB058 DC EoL 52.88285 1.52436 22/08/2014 57 CSCB027 DC SoL 52.87290 1.53553 22/08/2014 57 CSCB027 DC EoL 52.87224 1.53742 22/08/2014 58 CSCB052 DC SoL 52.93528 1.47485 22/08/2014 58 CSCB052 DC EoL 52.93502 1.47591 22/08/2014 59 CSCB043 DC SoL 52.96419 1.42528 22/08/2014 59 CSCB043 DC EoL 52.96479 1.42557 22/08/2014 60 CSCB035 DC SoL 52.95016 1.18374 22/08/2014 60 CSCB035 DC EoL 52.95044 1.18163 22/08/2014 61 CSCB094 DC SoL 52.95735 1.17699 22/08/2014 61 CSCB094 DC EoL 52.95721 1.17820 22/08/2014 62 CSCB090 DC SoL 52.95718 1.17112 22/08/2014 62 CSCB090 DC EoL 52.95644 1.16939 22/08/2014 63 CSCB088 DC SoL 52.95611 1.16585 22/08/2014 63 CSCB088 DC EoL 52.95581 1.16515 22/08/2014 64 CSCB029 DC SoL 52.95312 1.16359 22/08/2014 64 CSCB029 DC EoL 52.95340 1.16529 22/08/2014 65 CSCB030 DC SoL 52.96337 1.15971 22/08/2014 65 CSCB030 DC EoL 52.96322 1.16154 22/08/2014 66 CSCB004 DC SoL 52.97061 1.18755 22/08/2014 66 CSCB004 DC EoL 52.97173 1.18790 28/08/2014 67 CSCB060 DC SoL 52.89891052 1.539656639 28/08/2014 67 CSCB060 DC EoL 52.89770889 1.539498329 28/08/2014 68 CSCB053 DC SoL 52.96276093 1.485663295 28/08/2014 68 CSCB053 DC EoL 52.9621315 1.487201691 28/08/2014 69 CSCB0151 DC SoL 53.01519775 1.295741677 28/08/2014 69 CSCB0151 DC EoL 53.01490021 1.297746658 28/08/2014 70 CSCB139 DC SoL 53.02159882 1.298993349 28/08/2014 70 CSCB139 DC EoL 53.02118683 1.301026702

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 34 Date Stn No Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 28/08/2014 71 CSCB0127 DC SoL 53.02221298 1.290804982 28/08/2014 71 CSCB0127 DC EoL 53.02190399 1.292966723 28/08/2014 72 CSCB0126 DC SoL 53.02524185 1.269711614 28/08/2014 72 CSCB0126 DC EoL 53.02506256 1.272480011 28/08/2014 73 CSCB125 DC SoL 53.02295303 1.258090019 28/08/2014 73 CSCB125 DC EoL 53.02268219 1.260151625 28/08/2014 74 CSCB138 DC SoL 53.02780914 1.255271673 28/08/2014 74 CSCB138 DC EoL 53.02756882 1.257725 28/08/2014 75 CSCB124 DC SoL 53.03209305 1.234529972 28/08/2014 75 CSCB124 DC EoL 53.03187943 1.236548305 28/08/2014 76 CSCB123 DC SoL 53.02978134 1.223453283 28/08/2014 76 CSCB123 DC EoL 53.02954102 1.225863338 28/08/2014 77 CSCB147 DC SoL 53.02093506 1.224009991 28/08/2014 77 CSCB147 DC EoL 53.02060699 1.225870013 28/08/2014 78 CSCB115 DC SoL 53.00815201 1.241479993 28/08/2014 78 CSCB115 DC EoL 53.00792694 1.243783355 28/08/2014 79 CSCB150 DC SoL 53.00455856 1.276168346 28/08/2014 79 CSCB150 DC EoL 53.00431824 1.278745055 28/08/2014 80 CSCB101 DC SoL 53.00114822 1.219110012 28/08/2014 80 CSCB101 DC EoL 53.00091171 1.221166611 28/08/2014 81 CSCB167 DC SoL 53.01027679 1.195729971 28/08/2014 81 CSCB167 DC EoL 53.01017761 1.19808495 28/08/2014 82 CSCB096 DC SoL 53.00298691 1.159178376 28/08/2014 82 CSCB096 DC EoL 53.00291061 1.161304951 28/08/2014 83 CSCB068 DC SoL 52.98793793 1.14348495 28/08/2014 83 CSCB068 DC EoL 52.98787689 1.145353317 28/08/2014 84 CSCB087 DC SoL 52.9754715 1.16209662 28/08/2014 84 CSCB087 DC EoL 52.97556305 1.163841724 28/08/2014 85 CSCB092 DC SoL 52.97823334 1.145249963 28/08/2014 85 CSCB092 DC EoL 52.97823715 1.147078276 28/08/2014 86 CSCB111 DC SoL 53.01714706 1.12836504 28/08/2014 86 CSCB111 DC EoL 53.01763535 1.130078316 28/08/2014 87 CSCB097 DC SoL 53.01748276 1.175803304 28/08/2014 87 CSCB097 DC EoL 53.01793289 1.177576661 28/08/2014 88 CSCB146 DC SoL 53.02821732 1.192276716 28/08/2014 88 CSCB146 DC EoL 53.02843094 1.19415164 28/08/2014 89 CSCB136 DC SoL 53.02855682 1.197236657 28/08/2014 89 CSCB136 DC EoL 53.02878189 1.199283361 28/08/2014 90 CSCB122 DC SoL 53.03256989 1.204471707 28/08/2014 90 CSCB122 DC EoL 53.03324127 1.206136703 28/08/2014 91 CSCB133 DC SoL 53.03190231 1.185695052 28/08/2014 91 CSCB133 DC EoL 53.03239822 1.187868357 28/08/2014 92 CSCB137 DC SoL 53.03829956 1.179826617 28/08/2014 92 CSCB137 DC EoL 53.03882217 1.177994967 28/08/2014 93 CSCB131 DC SoL 53.03863525 1.165993333 28/08/2014 93 CSCB131 DC EoL 53.0391922 1.164281726 28/08/2014 94 CSCB120 DC SoL 53.04136658 1.156445026 28/08/2014 94 CSCB120 DC EoL 53.04232407 1.155066609

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 35 Date Stn No Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 28/08/2014 95 CSCB130 DC SoL 53.03875351 1.155208349 28/08/2014 95 CSCB130 DC EoL 53.03943253 1.153805017 28/08/2014 96 CSCB165 DC SoL 53.03453827 1.15621829 28/08/2014 96 CSCB165 DC EoL 53.03549194 1.154466629 28/08/2014 97 CSCB116 DC SoL 53.04159927 1.130223274 28/08/2014 97 CSCB116 DC EoL 53.04251099 1.128606677 28/08/2014 98 CSCB095 DC SoL 53.01806641 1.155509949 28/08/2014 98 CSCB095 DC EoL 53.01886368 1.153736711 28/08/2014 99 CSCB145 DC SoL 53.02913284 1.174129963 28/08/2014 99 CSCB145 DC EoL 53.02968979 1.172213316 28/08/2014 100 CSCB132 DC SoL 53.03620529 1.172534943 28/08/2014 100 CSCB132 DC EoL 53.03691483 1.170799971 28/08/2014 101 CSCB134 DC SoL 53.03465652 1.183276653 28/08/2014 101 CSCB134 DC EoL 53.03542328 1.181419969 28/08/2014 102 CSCB121 DC SoL 53.03252029 1.193009973 28/08/2014 102 CSCB121 DC EoL 53.03326035 1.191174984 28/08/2014 103 CSCB135 DC SoL 53.03218842 1.201709986 28/08/2014 103 CSCB135 DC EoL 53.03278351 1.199754953 28/08/2014 104 CSCB140 DC SoL 53.03226471 1.215654969 28/08/2014 104 CSCB140 DC EoL 53.03287506 1.213578343 28/08/2014 105 CSCB141 DC SoL 53.02628708 1.228500009 28/08/2014 105 CSCB141 DC EoL 53.02682495 1.226461649 28/08/2014 106 CSCB148 DC SoL 53.02038574 1.248743296 28/08/2014 106 CSCB148 DC EoL 53.02098846 1.246675014 28/08/2014 107 CSCB168 DC SoL 53.0118103 1.254245043 28/08/2014 107 CSCB168 DC EoL 53.01230621 1.25199163 28/08/2014 108 CSCB103 DC SoL 52.96625 1.250481725 28/08/2014 108 CSCB103 DC EoL 53.00047684 1.24811995 28/08/2014 109 CSCB152 DC SoL 53.00251007 1.306424975 28/08/2014 109 CSCB152 DC EoL 53.0030899 1.304218292 28/08/2014 110 CSCB160 DC SoL 53.00070953 1.373821616 28/08/2014 110 CSCB160 DC EoL 53.00138474 1.371676683

Key: DC; Drop Camera; EoL - End of Line; SoL – Start of Line

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 36 Survey metadata (CEND0113Y) Date Stn No Station code Gear Latitude Longitude 29/01/2013 180 CSBC100 DC SoL 53.02971 1.16075 29/01/2013 180 CSBC100 DC EoL 53.02974 1.16061 29/01/2013 183 CSBC103 DC SoL 53.01352 1.21019 29/01/2013 183 CSBC103 DC EoL 53.01355 1.21101 29/01/2013 182 CSCB101 DC SoL 53.02951 1.18368 29/01/2013 182 CSCB101 DC EoL 53.02949 1.18387 29/01/2012 181 CSCB102 DC SoL 53.01985 1.16151 29/01/2012 181 CSCB102 DC EoL 53.01983 1.16161 30/01/2013 197 CSCB104 DC SoL 53.00366 1.22539 30/01/2013 197 CSCB104 DC EoL 53.00387 1.22548 30/01/2013 195 CSCB106 DC SoL 52.982 1.28419 30/01/2013 195 CSCB106 DC EoL 52.98201 1.28434 30/01/2013 194 CSCB108 DC SoL 52.96418 1.37707 30/01/2013 194 CSCB108 DC EoL 52.96417 1.37735 30/01/2013 193 CSCB109 DC SoL 52.95738 1.41563 30/01/2013 193 CSCB109 DC EoL 52.9574 1.41527 30/01/2013 192 CSCB110 DC SoL 52.94839 1.43842 30/01/2013 192 CSCB110 DC EoL 52.94827 1.43871 29/01/2013 184 CSCB112 DC SoL 53.02327 1.19869 29/01/2013 184 CSCB112 DC EoL 53.0232 1.19857 30/01/2013 191 CSCB113 DC SoL 52.95066 1.48862 30/01/2013 191 CSCB113 DC EoL 52.95061 1.48879 30/01/2012 196 CSCD105 DC SoL 52.99368 1.29015 30/01/2012 196 CSCD105 DC EoL 52.99382 1.29018

Key: DC; Drop Camera; EoL - End of Line; SoL – Start of Line

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 37 Survey metadata (EA Survey 2012) Date Stn No Stn Code Gear Latitude Longitude 01/03/2012 CSCB_48 CS SoL 52.83735 1.53289 01/03/2012 CSCB_48 CS EoL 52.83886 1.53060 01/03/2012 CSCB_46 CS SoL 52.85654 1.51778 01/03/2012 CSCB_46 CS EoL 52.85757 1.51710 01/03/2012 CSCB_39 CS SoL 52.87703 1.46340 01/03/2012 CSCB_39 CS EoL 52.87737 1.46179 01/03/2012 CSCB_42 CS SoL 52.89675 1.48404 01/03/2012 CSCB_42 CS EoL 52.89790 1.48354 01/03/2012 CSCB_34 A1 CS SoL 52.91690 1.43014 01/03/2012 CSCB_34 A1 CS EoL 52.91726 1.42931 01/03/2012 CSCB_34 A2 CS SoL 52.91812 1.42718 01/03/2012 CSCB_34 A2 CS EoL 52.91835 1.42605 01/03/2012 CSCB_56_A1 CS SoL 52.92458 1.36314 01/03/2012 CSCB_56_A1 CS EoL 52.92462 1.36278 01/03/2012 CSCB_56_A2 CS SoL 52.92458 1.36298 01/03/2012 CSCB_56_A2 CS EoL 52.92547 1.35874 01/03/2012 CSCB_55 CS SoL 52.94441 1.30985 01/03/2012 CSCB_55 CS EoL 52.94444 1.30780 01/03/2012 CSCB_29 CS SoL 52.91616 1.39333 01/03/2012 CSCB_29 CS EoL 52.91557 1.39306 01/03/2012 CSCB_57 CS SoL 52.90404 1.41211 01/03/2012 CSCB_57 CS EoL 52.90458 1.40993 03/03/2012 CSCB_rRA_A1 CS SoL 52.92220 1.47784 03/03/2012 CSCB_rRA_A1 CS EoL 52.92424 1.47647 03/03/2012 CSCB_rRA_A2 CS SoL 52.91959 1.47538 3/03/2012 CSCB_rRA_A2 CS EoL 52.92288 1.47320 03/03/2012 CSCB_35 CS SoL 52.95657 1.43217 03/03/2012 CSCB_35 CS EoL 52.95596 1.43511 03/03/2012 CSCB_25 CS SoL 52.95783 1.35873 03/03/2012 CSCB_25 CS EoL 52.95934 1.36102 03/03/2012 CSCB_17 CS SoL 52.96030 1.28367 03/03/2012 CSCB_17 CS EoL 52.96189 1.28302 03/03/2012 CSCB_54 CS SoL 52.95219 1.27638 03/03/2012 CSCB_54 CS EoL 52.95324 1.27953 03/03/2012 CSCB_52 CS SoL 52.95547 1.19126 03/03/2012 CSCB_52 CS EoL 52.95663 1.19144 03/03/2012 CSCB_11 CS SoL 52.98166 1.22876 03/03/2012 CSCB_11 CS EoL 52.98317 1.22959 03/03/2012 CSCB_14 CS SoL 53.00071 1.24944 03/03/2012 CSCB_14 CS EoL 53.00321 1.25063 03/03/2012 CSCB_08 CS SoL 53.02059 1.19593 03/03/2012 CSCB_08 CS EoL 53.02258 1.19873

Key: CS; Camera Sledge; EOL - End of Line; SOL – Start of Line

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 38 Appendix 2. Outputs from acoustic surveys

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 39

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 40

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 41 Appendix 3. Evidence of human activities within the rMCZ

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 42 Appendix 4. Species list Species list for grab samples (Species FOCI indicated by grey shading, if present). Percentage occurrence was calculated as the ‘Number of samples where the species occurs/Total number of samples x 100’.

Taxa % Occurrence PROTOZOA Astrorhiza 2 Protozoa 2 FORAMINIFERA Lagotia viridis 22 SPONGES Sycon ciliata 24 Cliona 17 Porifera 12 Leucosolenia 5 Dysidea fragilis 2 HYDROIDS, CORALS, JELLYFISH, ANEMONES Actiniaria 39 Sertularia 22 Hydrallmania falcata 20 Clytia hemisphaerica 17 Eudendrium 17 Sertularella 17 Corynidae 15 Diphasia 10 Calycella syringa 7 Campanulariidae 7 Cnidaria 7 Nemertesia 7 Plumularia setacea 7 Tridentata distans 7 Abietinaria abietina 5 Edwardsia claparedii 5 Halecium 5 Kirchenpaueria pinnata 5 Nemertesia antennina 5 Tubulariidae 5 Hydrozoa 2 Sertularella rugosa 2 FLATWORMS Turbellaria 27 RIBBON WORMS Nemertea 41 Tubulanus polymorphus 12 Cerebratulus 2 ROUND WORMS Nematoda 46 ENTOPROCTS Pedicellina 7 Barentsia 2 ARROW WORMS Spadella cephaloptera 2 PEANUT WORMS Golfingia elongata 29 Nephasoma minutum 12 Golfingia vulgaris 2

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 43 Taxa % Occurrence SEGMENTED WORMS Lumbrineris cingulata (agg) 56 Sabellaria spinulosa 54 Scoloplos armiger 54 Polycirrus 46 Spirobranchus lamarcki 44 Dipolydora coeca (agg) 41 Nephtys 41 Eteone longa (agg) 39 Mediomastus fragilis 37 Pholoe inornata (sensu Petersen) 34 Syllis variegata 34 Harmothoe impar (agg) 32 Notomastus 32 Eumida bahusiensis 29 Eumida sanguinea (agg) 29 Nephtys caeca 29 Nephtys cirrosa 29 Pholoe baltica (sensu Petersen) 29 Glycera lapidum (agg) 27 Lanice conchilega 27 Caulleriella alata 24 Lepidonotus squamatus 24 Myrianida 24 Sphaerosyllis taylori 22 Syllis armillaris 22 Aonides paucibranchiata 20 Dipolydora caulleryi 20 Eulalia bilineata 20 Leiochone 20 Spio goniocephala 20 Cirriformia tentaculata 17 Eunereis longissima 17 Exogone naidina 17 Exogone verugera 17 Psamathe fusca 17 Spiophanes bombyx 17 Travisia forbesii 17 Aphelochaeta marioni 15 Eusyllis blomstrandi 15 Ophelia borealis 15 Pseudopolydora pulchra 15 Scalibregma celticum 15 Spio armata 15 Syllides 15 Ampharete lindstroemi 12 Eulalia expusilla 12 Exogone hebes 12 Nicolea venustula 12 Procerastea 12 Protodorvillea kefersteini 12 Scalibregma inflatum 12 Serpulidae 12 Asclerocheilus 10 Cirriformia 10 Grania 10 Nereimyra punctata 10 Pista elongata 10 Poecilochaetus serpens 10

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 44 Taxa % Occurrence Synmerosyllis lamelligera 10 Terebellidae 10 Circeis spirillum 7 Eulalia viridis 7 Nephtys longosetosa 7 Sphaerosyllis bulbosa 7 Thelepus cincinnatus 7 Ampharete acutifrons 5 Anaitides maculata 5 Aphelochaeta (Type A) 5 Chaetozone christiei 5 Cirratulus 5 Euclymene oerstedii 5 Gattyana cirrhosa 5 Glycera oxycephala 5 Harmothoe extenuata 5 Hydroides norvegicus 5 Magelona johnstoni 5 Nereididae 5 Praxillella affinis 5 Sabella discifera 5 Scalibregma (Type A) 5 Sphaerosyllis erinaceus 5 Sthenelais boa 5 Tubificidae 5 Amblyosyllis formosa 2 Ampharete baltica 2 Amphicteis midas 2 Capitella 2 Chaetozone zetlandica 2 Eulalia aurea 2 Eulalia ornata 2 Eupolymnia nebulosa 2 Eusyllis blomstrandi (epitoke) 2 Euzonus flabelligerus 2 Fabricia (Type A) 2 Galathowenia oculata 2 Hesionura elongata 2 Lagis koreni 2 Laonice bahusiensis 2 Macrochaeta 2 Magelona mirabilis 2 Mysta picta 2 Nereis pelagica 2 Nereis zonata 2 Nicolea zostericola 2 Ophelina acuminata 2 Orbinia sertulata 2 Paraonis fulgens 2 Perinereis cultrifera 2 Pherusa plumosa 2 Pista malmgreni 2 Proceraea 2 Pseudopotamilla (Type A) 2 Rullierinereis ancornunezi 2 Sabellidae 2 Salvatoria 2 Scolelepis korsuni 2 Sphaerosyllis tetralix 2

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 45 Taxa % Occurrence Spio filicornis (agg) 2 Spio martinensis 2 Syllis gracilis 2 Syllis licheri 2 Thelepus setosus 2 Trypanosyllis coeliaca 2 SEA SPIDERS Callipallene 20 Nymphon brevirostre 20 Nymphon hirtum 7 Anoplodactylus petiolatus 5 Endeis spinosa 2 CRUSTACEANS Pisidia longicornis 34 Urothoe elegans 34 Ampelisca diadema 32 Galathea intermedia 27 Unciola crenatipalma 27 Bathyporeia elegans 20 Paguridae 17 Pseudoprotella phasma 17 Sessilia 17 Verruca stroemia 17 Balanus crenatus 15 Hippolyte varians 15 Macropodia 15 Aora gracilis 12 Cheirocratus (female) 12 COPEPODA 12 Gnathia dentata 12 Abludomelita obtusata 10 Ampelisca spinipes 10 Aoridae (female) 10 Gammaropsis cornuta 10 Janira maculosa 10 Othomaera othonis 10 Pagurus cuanensis 10 Pseudoparatanais batei 10 Bathyporeia guilliamsoniana 7 Eualus pusiolus 7 Gastrosaccus spinifer 7 Gnathiidae 7 Leptocheirus pectinatus 7 Parapleustes bicuspis 7 Stenothoe marina 7 Thoralus cranchii 7 Zenobiana prismatica 7 Ascidicola rosea 5 Cancer pagurus 5 Cheirocratus assimilis 5 Eurydice spinigera 5 Gammaropsis maculata 5 Gnathiidae (female) 5 Hippolytidae 5 Liocarcinus 5 Macropodia parva 5 Monocorophium acherusicum 5 Nebalia reboredae 5 Orchomene humilis 5

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 46 Taxa % Occurrence Pilumnus hirtellus 5 Upogebia 5 Urothoe brevicornis 5 Acidostoma neglectum 2 Acidostoma obesum (sensu Stoddart & Lowry) 2 Alteutha 2 Amphilochus manudens 2 Amphilochus neapolitanus 2 Anapagurus hyndmanni 2 Apherusa bispinosa 2 Bodotria scorpioides 2 Caprella 2 Caprella equilibra 2 Cheirocratus intermedius 2 Crassicorophium bonellii 2 Crassicorophium crassicorne 2 Ebalia 2 Elminius modestus 2 Eualus occultus 2 Galathea squamifera 2 Iphimedia nexa 2 Leptocheirus hirsutimanus 2 Monocorophium sextonae 2 Orchomenella nana 2 Pagurus bernhardus 2 Pandalus montagui 2 Philocheras fasciatus 2 Philocheras sculptus 2 Phtisica marina 2 Pirimela denticulata 2 Pleurocrypta porcellanae 2 Pontocrates altamarinus 2 Socarnes erythrophthalmus 2 Synchelidium maculatum 2 Tritaeta gibbosa 2 Upogebia deltaura 2 Urothoe marina 2 MOLLUSCS Abra alba 37 Crepidula fornicata 34 Goodallia triangularis 32 Gibbula cineraria 29 Gibbula tumida 27 Nucula nucleus 24 Onoba semicostata 22 Rissoa parva 20 Hiatella arctica 15 Kurtiella bidentata 12 Leptochiton asellus 10 Mya truncata 10 Mytilus edulis 10 Anomiidae 7 Buccinum undatum 7 Ocenebra erinacea 7 Onchidoris muricata 7 Spisula 7 Spisula elliptica 7 Chrysallida interstincta 5 Lucinoma borealis 5

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 47 Taxa % Occurrence Alvania semistriata 2 Barnea candida 2 Cuthona 2 Doto 2 Ensis 2 Flabellina 2 Goniodoris nodosa 2 Hinia incrassata 2 Lacuna crassior 2 Modiolus 2 Oenopota rufa 2 Pholadidae 2 Polititapes 2 Tornus subcarinatus 2 BRYOZOANS Conopeum reticulum 51 Electra pilosa 46 Alcyonidioides mytili 37 Crisia 37 Escharella immersa 37 Flustra foliacea 37 Amphiblestrum auritum 32 Amathia lendigera 29 Bicellariella ciliata 29 Alcyonidium diaphanum 27 Vesicularia spinosa 24 Eucratea loricata 15 Scrupocellaria scruposa 15 Chorizopora brongniartii 12 Fenestrulina (Type A) 12 Tubulipora 12 Bowerbankia 10 Bugula plumosa 7 Candidae 7 Escharella ventricosa 7 Eurystrotos compacta 7 Schizomavella auriculata 7 Scruparia 7 Bugula fulva 5 Callopora 5 Callopora dumerilii 5 Plagioecia patina 5 Schizomavella linearis 5 Alcyonidium gelatinosum 2 Cellepora pumicosa 2 Disporella hispida 2 Electra monostachys 2 Penetrantia concharum 2 Phaeostachys spinifera 2 Schizotheca fissa 2 HORSESHOE WORMS Phoronis 27 SEA STARS, URCHINS, SEA CUCUMBERS Ophiuridae 24 Amphipholis squamata 22 Amphiuridae 20 Crossaster papposus 10 Cucumariidae 5 Ophiura albida 5

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 48 Taxa % Occurrence Thyone fusus 5 Ophiothrix fragilis 2 SEA SQUIRTS Ascidiacea 37 Dendrodoa grossularia 37 Ascidiella scabra 29 Didemnidae 27 Polycarpa fibrosa 20 Botryllus schlosseri 17 Polycarpa pomaria 15 Botrylloides leachi 12 Archidistoma aggregatum 2 Microcosmus claudicans 2 Polyclinidae 2 Styela clava 2 ALGAE Chlorophyta 2 Heterosiphonia plumosa 2 Melobesia membranacea 2 Plocamium cartilagineum 2 Rhodophyta 2

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 49 Species list for video samples (Species FOCI indicated by grey shading, if present). Percentage occurrence was calculated as the ‘Number of samples where the species occurs/Total number of samples x 100’.

Taxa % Occurrence SPONGES Porifera 29 Dysidea fragilis 15 Sycon ciliatum 6 Amphilectus fucorum 2 Cliona celata 2 Grantia compressa 2 Polymastia penicillus 2 Polymastiidae 2 Sycon 2 Hymedesmiidae 1 HYDROIDS, CORALS, JELLYFISH, ANEMONES Hydrozoa 69 Actiniaria 53 Urticina 51 Nemertesia antennina 50 Hydrallmania falcata 47 Sagartiidae 45 Nemertesia 15 Sertularia 13 Halecium 10 Nemertesia ramosa 10 Abietinaria abietina 7 Tubularia 6 Aglaopheniidae 6 Sertulariidae 6 Tubularia indivisa 6 Urticina felina 6 Plumularioidea 4 Alcyonium digitatum 2 Haleciidae 2 Cereus pedunculatus 2 Cerianthidae 2 Haliclona oculata 2 Metridium senile 2 Aglaophenia tubulifera 1 Halcampa chrysanthellum 1 Sertularella 1 Urticina eques 1 RIBBON WORMS Nemertea 1 Tubulanus annulatus 1 SEGMENTED WORMS Spirobranchus 53 Sabellaria spinulosa 31 Lanice conchilega 27

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 50 Taxa % Occurrence Serpulidae 9 Sabella 4 Sabellida 3 Sabella pavonina 2 Canalipalpata 1 Chaetopterus 1 Lagis Koreni 1 Myxicola 1 Serpula vermicularis 1 Terebellidae 1 SEA SPIDERS Pycnogonida 1 CRUSTACEANS Balanidae 79 Cancer pagurus 42 Paguridae 34 Liocarcinus 24 Galatheidae 23 Inachidae 23 Crepidula fornicata 19 Pagurus bernhardus 15 Brachyura 15 Decapoda 14 Palamonoidea 11 Ebalia 10 Carcinus maenas 8 Necora puber 7 Caridea 6 Palaemon 6 Crustacea 6 Pandalidae 5 Homarus gammarus 4 Inachus 4 Majoidea 4 Macropodia 2 Majidae 2 Galathea 2 Liocarcinus depurator 2 Maja squinado 2 Munida rugosa 2 Crangonidae 1 Pisidia longicornis 1 MOLLUSCS Calliostoma 31 Gastropoda 30 Gibbula 16 Gibbula cineraria 15 Janolus cristatus 6 Mollusca 5 Nudibranchia 4

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 51 Taxa % Occurrence Bivalvia 3 Buccinum undatum 3 Nucella lapillus 2 Ostrea edulis 2 Triviinae 2 Anomiidae 1 Calliostoma zizyphinum 1 Eledone cirrhosa 1 Nassarius 1 Pholadinae 1 Polyplacophora 1 Trivia 1 BRYOZOANS Bryozoa 73 Flustra foliacea 53 Alcyonidium diaphanum 29 Vesicularia spinosa 26 Bowerbankia 10 Bugula 3 Eucratea loricata 3 BRACHIOPODA Brachiopoda 1 SEA STARS, URCHINS, SEA CUCUMBERS Asterias rubens 62 Crossaster papposus 61 Henricia 29 Ophiuroidea 11 Ophiura albida 10 Asteroidea 6 Echinoidea 1 SEA SQUIRTS Ascidiacea 24 Didemnidae 21 Styelidae 20 Molgula 11 Botryllus schlosseri 10 Polyclinidae 6 Clavelina lepadiformis 5 Molgula manhattensis 2 Polycarpa pomaria 2 Polycarpa 1 FISH Callionymus 15 Pholis gunnellus 9 Pisces 8 Pomatoschistus 8 Gobiidae 6 Actinopterygii 2 Syngnathidae 2 Taurulus bubalis 2

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 52 Taxa % Occurrence Gadidae 1 Labridae 1 Perciformes 1 Pleuronectiformes 1 ALGAE Rhodophyta 23 Corallinales 14 Phaeophyceae 1

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 53 Appendix 5. Analyses of sediment samples: classification and composition Stn No Stn Code Latitude Longitude Sediment Description EUNIS Level 3/BSH Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt/clay (%) 110 GT116 53.042090 1.128645 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.94 99.06 0.00 111 GT120 53.041502 1.155942 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.00 100.00 0.00 112 GT130 53.039010 1.154525 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 3.91 96.09 0.00 113 GT165 53.035020 1.155122 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 31.46 68.54 0.00 114 GT131 53.038870 1.165152 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.04 99.96 0.00 115 GT132 53.036495 1.171437 mud and sandy mud Subtidal mud 0.00 18.72 81.28 116 GT145 53.029247 1.173277 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 16.63 81.18 2.20 117 GT137 53.038332 1.179103 mud and sandy mud Subtidal mud 0.00 28.43 71.57 118 GT134 53.034945 1.182555 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 17.55 82.45 0.00 119 GT133 53.032023 1.186527 mud and sandy mud Subtidal mud 0.00 15.96 84.04 120 GT146 53.028468 1.192697 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 13.43 85.12 1.45 121 GT121 53.032895 1.191917 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 29.78 70.22 0.00 122 GT135 53.032428 1.201210 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 22.92 77.08 0.00 123 GT138 53.027850 1.256845 mud and sandy mud Subtidal mud 4.57 35.55 59.88 124 GT125 53.022898 1.258653 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 25.45 73.26 1.29 125 GT124 53.032205 1.234943 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.00 100.00 0.00 126 GT141 53.026385 1.227678 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 33.91 65.28 0.82 127 GT147 53.020838 1.224483 mixed sediments Subtidal mixed sediments 13.62 66.03 20.35 129 GT122 53.032780 1.204988 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 16.80 83.20 0.00 130 GT097 53.017778 1.176788 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 43.38 55.07 1.56 131 GT087 52.975488 1.162440 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.37 99.63 0.00 132 GT092 52.978315 1.146513 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.10 99.90 0.00 133 GT030 52.963387 1.160112 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 51.41 46.85 1.74 134 GT088 52.955883 1.166018 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.35 99.65 0.00 135 GT090 52.956767 1.170890 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 1.99 98.01 0.00 136 GT094 52.957370 1.177413 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.64 99.36 0.00 138 GT068 52.987925 1.143755 mixed sediments Subtidal mixed sediments 21.60 64.55 13.85 139 GT073 52.986908 1.176337 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 51.97 43.88 4.15 140 GT004 52.971560 1.187970 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 51.56 48.44 0.00 141 GT032 52.966385 1.203697 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 25.96 72.82 1.22

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 54 Stn No Stn Code Latitude Longitude Sediment Description EUNIS Level 3/BSH Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt/clay (%) 142 GT006 52.970925 1.217503 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 1.48 98.52 0.00 143 GT008 52.969230 1.247113 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 24.12 75.88 0.00 144 GT102 52.985337 1.233425 mixed sediments Subtidal mixed sediments 24.33 41.61 34.06 145 GT104 52.984277 1.263545 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 52.30 43.97 3.73 146 GT105 52.982050 1.293570 mixed sediments Subtidal mixed sediments 45.73 48.30 5.97 147 GT022 52.853078 1.490198 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 1.31 98.69 0.00 148 GT025 52.852373 1.520370 mixed sediments Subtidal mixed sediments 34.01 58.12 7.87 149 GT026 52.838590 1.536060 mixed sediments Subtidal mixed sediments 38.82 53.56 7.62 150 GT060a 52.898158 1.539292 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 36.82 59.48 3.70 150 GT060b 52.897957 1.539555 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 39.66 56.17 4.17 151 GT053 52.962182 1.486760 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 38.48 61.16 0.36 152 GT043 52.964588 1.425602 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 46.75 50.61 2.65 153 GT164 52.986348 1.428740 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 25.60 70.33 4.08 154 GT113 52.976820 1.392633 mixed sediments Subtidal mixed sediments 35.33 56.41 8.26 155 GT161 52.988548 1.382538 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 39.04 55.79 5.18 156 GT162 52.998410 1.396723 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 40.43 54.63 4.94 157 GT160 53.001180 1.372373 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 22.20 70.21 7.58 158 GT159 53.010930 1.364032 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 45.95 50.95 3.09 159 GT156 53.013623 1.340750 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 35.81 60.76 3.44 160 GT155 53.002767 1.324317 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 37.92 59.60 2.48 161 GT152 53.002710 1.305430 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 69.14 28.28 2.58 162 GT153 52.992973 1.318522 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 51.25 44.94 3.82 163 GT016 52.901157 1.409708 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.00 100.00 0.00 165 GT033 52.916517 1.400315 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.54 99.46 0.00 166 GT017 52.926440 1.389615 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 1.11 98.89 0.00 167 GT015 52.920092 1.380668 sand and muddy sand Subtidal sand 0.01 99.99 0.00 168 GT045 52.951230 1.424255 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 55.76 42.09 2.14 169 GT040 52.950113 1.408982 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 53.96 41.49 4.56 170 GT110 52.966208 1.365943 mixed sediments Subtidal mixed sediments 43.62 48.82 7.56 171 GT158 52.988698 1.364342 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 44.18 52.26 3.56 172 GT109 52.981417 1.351590 mixed sediments Subtidal mixed sediments 64.19 31.52 4.28

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 55 Stn No Stn Code Latitude Longitude Sediment Description EUNIS Level 3/BSH Gravel (%) Sand (%) Silt/clay (%) 173 GT139 53.021595 1.299210 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 57.24 42.01 0.76 174 GT127 53.022027 1.292813 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 22.82 74.65 2.53 175 GT126 53.025165 1.271912 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 9.36 90.64 0.00 176 GT150 53.004338 1.277708 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 29.00 68.44 2.56 177 GT103 53.000098 1.249745 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 50.21 46.45 3.33 178 GT115 53.008128 1.242387 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 41.24 55.53 3.23 179 GT123 53.029628 1.223840 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 19.24 80.76 0.00 180 GT136 53.028813 1.197615 mud and sandy mud Subtidal mud 0.00 9.96 90.04 181 GT167 53.010143 1.197670 coarse sediment Subtidal coarse sediment 24.11 68.86 7.03

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 56 Appendix 6. BSH/EUNIS Level 3 descriptions derived from video and stills Station No. Station Code Latitude Longitude Habitat No. EUNIS Level 3/BSH MNCR Code 180 CSCB100 53.0295678 1.161554 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 182 CSCB101 53.0294619 1.184368 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 181 CSCB102 53.0198243 1.161634 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 183 CSCB103 53.0135779 1.211191 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 197 CSCB104 53.0039601 1.225532 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 196 CSCB105 52.9938487 1.290201 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 195 CSCB106 52.9819731 1.283938 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 194 CSCB108 52.9642244 1.376577 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 193 CSCB109 52.957399 1.41527 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 192 CSCB110 52.9486257 1.437519 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 184 CSCB112 53.0227617 1.197671 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR 191 CSCB113 52.9508671 1.487758 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 066 GT004 52.97061 1.18755 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 045 GT005 52.95627 1.20124 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 003 GT006 52.97076 1.21638 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 044 GT007 52.95796 1.21353 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 042 GT008 52.96885 1.24753 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 004 GT009 52.9559 1.27028 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR 040 GT010 52.96869 1.27624 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 038 GT011 52.95167 1.29165 S1 A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock CR.HCR 039 GT012 52.94434 1.28821 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR 005 GT013 52.9513 1.31958 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR 016 GT014 52.93572 1.36185 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 015 GT015 52.92058 1.38015 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 014 GT016 52.90192 1.40931 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 031 GT017 52.92572 1.38981 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 013 GT018 52.89878 1.42577 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 028 GT019 52.90181 1.44707 S1 A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock CR.HCR 012 GT020 52.89761 1.44947 S1 A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock CR.HCR 009 GT021 52.85821 1.49686 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 57 Station No. Station Code Latitude Longitude Habitat No. EUNIS Level 3/BSH MNCR Code 008 GT022 52.85282 1.49107 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 011 GT023 52.88618 1.48939 S1 A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock CR.HCR 010 GT024 52.87745 1.50716 S1 A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock CR.HCR 027 GT025 52.85183 1.52122 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 007 GT026 52.83798 1.53703 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 057 GT027 52.8729 1.53553 S1 A5.6 Subtidal biogenic reef SS.SBR 064 GT029 52.95312 1.16359 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR 065 GT030 52.96337 1.15971 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 043 GT031 52.95268 1.23162 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 046 GT032 52.96651 1.20333 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 030 GT033 52.9161 1.40073 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 060 GT035 52.95016 1.18374 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR 017 GT036 52.95155 1.34747 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 034 GT037 52.94899 1.38035 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR 006 GT038 52.93565 1.38765 S1 A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock CR.HCR 053 GT039 52.96449 1.39565 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 033 GT040 52.94971 1.40969 S1 A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock CR.HCR 032 GT042 52.9328 1.42296 S1 A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock CR.HCR 059 GT043 52.96419 1.42528 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 029 GT044 52.91628 1.43725 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 054 GT045 52.95144 1.42295 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 026 GT046 52.97877 1.44102 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 055 GT047 52.93189 1.45164 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 058 GT052 52.93528 1.47485 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 068 GT053 52.96276 1.48566 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 056 GT058 52.88341 1.52253 S1 A4.1 High energy circalittoral rock CR.HCR 067 GT060 52.89891 1.53966 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 001 GT063 52.99552 1.12296 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 083 GT068 52.98794 1.14348 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 002 GT073 52.98678 1.17417 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 084 GT087 52.97547 1.1621 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 58 Station No. Station Code Latitude Longitude Habitat No. EUNIS Level 3/BSH MNCR Code 062 GT090 52.95718 1.17112 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 085 GT092 52.97823 1.14525 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 061 GT094 52.95735 1.17699 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 098 GT095 53.01807 1.15551 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 082 GT096 53.00299 1.15918 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 087 GT097 53.01748 1.1758 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 080 GT101 53.00115 1.21911 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 047 GT102 52.98504 1.23309 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 108 GT103 52.96625 1.25048 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 048 GT104 52.98398 1.26257 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 049 GT105 52.98221 1.29253 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 037 GT106 52.96682 1.30717 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 019 GT107 52.98247 1.32344 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 018 GT108 52.96625 1.33571 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 036 GT109 52.98122 1.35211 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 035 GT110 52.96584 1.36675 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 086 GT111 53.01715 1.12837 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 041 GT112 52.97032 1.27021 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 052 GT113 52.97654 1.39136 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 078 GT115 53.00815 1.24148 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 097 GT116 53.0416 1.13022 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 094 GT120 53.04137 1.15645 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 102 GT121 53.03252 1.19301 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 090 GT122 53.03257 1.20447 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 076 GT123 53.02978 1.22345 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 075 GT124 53.03209 1.23453 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 073 GT125 53.02295 1.25809 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 072 GT126 53.02524 1.26971 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 071 GT127 53.02221 1.2908 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 095 GT130 53.03875 1.15521 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 093 GT131 53.03864 1.16599 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 59 Station No. Station Code Latitude Longitude Habitat No. EUNIS Level 3/BSH MNCR Code 100 GT132 53.03621 1.17253 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 091 GT133 53.0319 1.1857 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR 091 GT133 53.03228 1.187 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR 101 GT134 53.03466 1.18328 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 103 GT135 53.03219 1.20171 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 089 GT136 53.02856 1.19724 S1 A4.2 Moderate energy circalittoral rock CR.MCR 089 GT136 53.02886 1.1983 S2 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 092 GT137 53.0383 1.17983 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 074 GT138 53.02781 1.25527 S1 A5.2 Subtidal sand SS.SSa 070 GT139 53.0216 1.29899 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 104 GT140 53.03226 1.21565 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 105 GT141 53.02629 1.2285 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 099 GT145 53.02913 1.17413 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 088 GT146 53.02822 1.19228 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 077 GT147 53.02094 1.22401 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 106 GT148 53.02039 1.24874 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 079 GT150 53.00456 1.27617 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 069 GT151 53.0152 1.29574 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 109 GT152 53.00251 1.30642 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 020 GT153 52.99195 1.31899 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 021 GT155 53.00212 1.32559 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 022 GT156 53.01275 1.34061 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 050 GT158 52.98878 1.36386 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 023 GT159 53.01209 1.36252 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 110 GT160 53.00071 1.37382 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 051 GT161 52.98872 1.38186 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 024 GT162 52.99953 1.39457 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 025 GT164 52.98678 1.42788 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 096 GT165 53.03454 1.15622 S1 A5.1 Subtidal coarse sediment SS.SCS 081 GT167 53.01028 1.19573 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx 107 GT168 53.01181 1.25425 S1 A5.4 Subtidal mixed sediments SS.SMx

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 60 Appendix 7. Example images from survey for broadscale habitats Broadscale habitat Description Example image taken during survey A4 Circalittoral rock Circalittoral rock is (Note: EUNIS Level 2, characterised by animal not a BSH) dominated communities (a departure from the algae dominated communities in the infralittoral zone)

A5.1 Subtidal coarse Coarse sediments

sediment including coarse sand, gravel, pebbles, shingle and cobbles which are often unstable due to tidal currents and/or wave action

A5.2 Subtidal sand Clean medium to fine sands or non-cohesive slightly muddy sands on open coasts, offshore or in estuaries and marine inlets

A5.3 Subtidal mud Mud and cohesive No image available sandy mud extending from the extreme lower shore to offshore, circalittoral habitats A5.4 Subtidal mixed Sublittoral mixed

sediments (heterogeneous) sediments found from the extreme low water mark to deep offshore circalittoral habitats

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 61 Appendix 8. Example images from survey for habitat FOCI Habitat FOCI Description Example image taken during survey Subtidal Sands and Sand and gravel Gravels seabeds widespread around the UK

Subtidal Chalk Bored chalk bedrock reef with sparse fauna

Ross Worm Sand with elevated (Sabellaria spinulosa) clumps of Sabellaria Reefs spinulosa aggregations

Peat and Clay Seabeds formed of Exposures exposed peat or clay

Cromer Shoal Chalk Beds rMCZ Post-survey Site Report 62

© Crown Copyright 2015