Clyde Seasonal Closure 2026 - no islands communuties impact assessment needed declaration

Step Four - Assessment

Does your assessment identify any unique impacts on island communities? (Further detail in the Guidance):

• Demographic
• Economic
• Gaelic
• Social

No. The assessment has not identified any disproportionate or uniquely differentiated impacts on island communities in the Clyde region that would require tailored mitigation or further policy response:

• Demographic: The seasonal closure is not expected to alter patterns of employment, residency, or population retention in island communities. Fishing activity is not being displaced from island ports, and the closure does not introduce disproportionate impacts between island and mainland vessels.
• Economic: Restrictions in the closure will apply uniformly to all vessels operating in the designated area, regardless of home port. There is no evidence that island-based vessels will face higher costs or reduced access relative to their mainland counterparts. On the contrary, the proposed management measure — particularly the Targeted Scientific Programme (TSP) — is designed to support long-term stock recovery and enhance the viability of the fishery for all operators. A full BRIA has been undertaken and has not identified any economic impacts that are unique to island communities.
• Gaelic: N/A
• Social: The policy is not anticipated to exacerbate social exclusion, deprivation, or access to services in island communities. The policy does not alter eligibility for support schemes or introduce new administrative burdens that would disproportionately affect island residents.

The proposed management framework also includes a restriction on the number of vessels permitted to operate within the Clyde. However, this applies only to new entrants, and vessels with a verified historical record of fishing activity in the Clyde will be exempt. As a result, the measure is not expected to disproportionately affect island communities, nor alter existing access patterns for island‑based operators. Available evidence indicates that island vessels with established Clyde activity will continue to operate under the same conditions as their mainland counterparts.

Does your assessment identify any potential barriers or wider impacts?

No additional barriers or wider impacts have been identified that are unique to island communities. Consultation responses did not raise concerns nor did they identify any operational disadvantages specific to island-based vessels. The consultation was open to all stakeholders, including those in remote and island locations, and no differentiated impacts or barriers to participation were reported.

The policy team remains committed to pragmatic implementation, particularly in relation to any future technical measures introduced through the Targeted Scientific Programme (TSP). Should any operational challenges emerge during the TSP period, these will be addressed collaboratively with stakeholders, including island-based operators.

Are there mitigations already in place for these impacts raised?

Yes. The policy includes several built-in design features that help mitigate potential impacts across all communities, including:

• Seasonal timing aligned with cod spawning periods to minimise disruption to broader fishing activity while targeting key ecological windows.
• Spatial boundaries informed by scientific advice to focus protection on key spawning habitats while allowing continued access elsewhere.
• The proposed Targeted Scientific Programme (TSP)², which will enable adaptive management and provide a mechanism for refining measures based on emerging evidence.
• The potential for technical exemptions or controls (e.g. creel limits, Remote Electronic Monitoring (REM)) to be developed in collaboration with stakeholders, ensuring that any future requirements are proportionate and feasible for all vessel types and locations.

The Targeted Scientific Programme (TSP) is intended to be developed in collaboration with the fishing industry, drawing where possible on the knowledge and experience of local fishers to support scientific work and data collection. This approach is expected to help ensure the programme is practical, informed by local realities, and proportionate to the needs of inshore fishing. It may also provide opportunities for fishers — including those from island communities — to contribute to the evidence base that can inform future management considerations.

• The TSP may include monitored creel and trawl activity, enhanced reporting, and real-time closures where spawning cod are encountered
• Participation will be supported by pragmatic monitoring tools such as REM

These features are intended to ensure that the policy remains flexible, evidence-led, and inclusive of both island and mainland fishing communities.

Is a full Island Communities Impact Assessment required?

You should now determine whether, in your opinion, your policy, strategy or service is likely to have an effect on an island community which is significantly different from its effect on other communities (including other island communities). To form your opinion, the following questions should be considered:

Are there mitigations in place for the impacts identified and noted above from stakeholders and community consultations? (If further ICIA action is not required, complete the section below and publish).

No significantly different impacts for islands communities are expected, nor were they noted from public consultation. Therefore, no specific mitigations have been put in place to address this specifically other than the built-in design features that help mitigate potential impacts across all communities as mentioned above

Does the evidence show different circumstances or different expectations or needs, or different experiences or outcomes (such as levels of satisfaction, or different rates of participation)?

No. Available evidence does not indicate that island communities affected by the proposed closure have different expectations, needs, or experiences compared to each other or mainland coastal communities. Vessel registry data and stakeholder engagement suggest that fishers operating in the Clyde — whether island- or mainland-based — share similar operational characteristics, gear types, and perspectives on cod management. They are also represented by organisations and associations such as the Scottish Fishermen’s Organisation (SFO) and the Clyde Fishermen’s Association (CFA), which routinely engage with government. Participation in relevant consultations and stakeholder forums has been consistent across areas, and no island-specific concerns or differentiated expectations were raised in consultation responses.

Are these different effects likely?

Are these different effects likely? No. The proposed closure applies uniformly across the designated area and does not introduce measures that would result in different effects for island communities in the Clyde region. Operational impacts — such as spatial restrictions or seasonal timing — are expected to affect all vessels equally, regardless of home port.

Are these effects significantly different?

This conclusion is supported by the findings of the BRIA, which did not identify any disproportionate economic or operational impacts specific to island-based vessels. The BRIA notes that the proposed management measures are expected to benefit the wider inshore fleet over time through stock recovery and improved sustainability.

No. The assessment has not identified any disproportionate or uniquely differentiated impacts on island communities that would require tailored mitigation or further policy response. The closure is being developed in line with the sustainability objective of the Fisheries Act 20201¹, which requires environmental measures to be balanced with social and economic considerations. The inclusion of the TSP² and an adaptive management approach ensures that any unintended effects — including those affecting island communities — can be monitored and addressed over time.

Could the effect amount to a disadvantage for an island community compared to the mainland or between island groups?

No. The evidence suggests that, while a small number of vessels operating within the Clyde cod closure area are registered to island districts, their expectations regarding seasonal management measures are consistent with those of the wider inshore fleet — including vessels operating from other rural coastal locations in Scotland. Fishers across both island and mainland communities are represented by organisations such as the Scottish Fishermen’s Organisation (SFO) and the Clyde Fishermen’s Association (CFA), which engage regularly with government. The policy does not introduce any unique outcomes or disproportionate disadvantage for island-based operators resulting from the proposed closure.

• If your answer is ‘no’ to the above questions, please complete the box below.
• If the answer is ‘yes’, an ICIA must be prepared and you should proceed to Step 5.

A full Islands Community Impact Assessment is NOT required

In preparing the ICIA, I have formed an opinion that our policy is NOT likely to have an effect on an island community which is significantly different from its effect on other communities (including other island communities). The reason for this is detailed below.

Reason for not completing a full Islands Communities Impact Assessment:

Following completion of the screening process, we have formed the opinion that a full Island Communities Impact Assessment is not required for the Clyde cod seasonal closure (2026–2028).

This conclusion is based on the following considerations:

• No significantly different impacts on island communities were identified. The closure applies uniformly across all affected vessels, regardless of home port, and does not introduce measures that would disproportionately affect island‑based operators.
• Available evidence shows very limited island representation in the affected fleet. Vessel registry data and BRIA analysis indicate that only a small number of vessels operating in the closure area are registered to island districts, and these vessels share similar operational profiles and gear types with mainland operators.
• Consultation responses raised no island‑specific concerns. Participation was consistent across regions, and no respondent identified differentiated expectations, needs, or impacts for island communities.
• Stakeholder representation is collective and inclusive. Island and mainland fishers are represented by organisations such as the Scottish Fishermen’s Organisation (SFO) and the Clyde Fishermen’s Association (CFA), which routinely engage with government through co-management structures.
• The proposed vessel restrictions will not disadvantage island communities. This applies only to new entrants, and vessels with a historical record of fishing in the Clyde will be exempt, ensuring no disproportionate effect on island‑based operators.
• Adaptive management through the Targeted Scientific Programme (TSP)² provides safeguards. he TSP enables ongoing monitoring and refinement of measures, ensuring that any emerging impacts — including those affecting island communities — can be identified and addressed collaboratively with the fishing industry.
• No evidence of unique demographic, economic, social, or operational impacts. The policy does not alter access to services, introduce new administrative burdens, or create differential economic effects for island communities.

In summary, the assessment has not identified any disproportionate or uniquely differentiated impacts on island communities that would require tailored mitigation or further policy response. The policy is designed to be inclusive, evidence-led, and responsive to stakeholder input across all affected regions.

Screening ICIA completed by (name)

Catriona Millar

Position

Policy Manager, Inshore Fisheries Management

Signature and date

Catriona Millar 08/01/26

ICIA authorised by (we recommend DD level)

Malcolm Pentland

Position

Deputy Director – Marine Economy and Communities Portfolio

Signature and date

09/01/26