We use cookies to collect anonymous data to help us improve your site browsing experience.

Click 'Accept all cookies' to agree to all cookies that collect anonymous data. To only allow the cookies that make the site work, click 'Use essential cookies only.' Visit 'Set cookie preferences' to control specific cookies.

Set cookie preferences

Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Publication - Impact assessment

Planning Scotland's Seas: 2013 - The Scottish Marine Protected Area Project – Developing the Evidence Base for Impact Assessments and the Sustainability Appraisal Final Report - Appendix E - Marine Site Reports

Published
19 August 2013
Part of
Marine and fisheries
ISBN
9781782567585

This is Appendix E for the pMPA Impact and Sustainability Report containing the detailed site by site reports. Published separately due to size.

View supporting documents Supporting documents

Loch Sween ( LSW)

Site Area (km 2): 40

Site Summary

Table 1. Summary of Proposed Protected Features, Data Confidence and Conservation Objectives [ LSW]
Proposed protected features
Biodiversity Features
Burrowed mud, maerl beds, native oysters, sublittoral mud and mixed sediment communities.

Geodiversity Features
None.

Site Description The Loch Sween MPA proposal encompasses Loch Sween and the tide-swept waters around the mouth of the Sound of Jura that surround the Island of Danna and the McCormaig Isles. Loch Sween is a typical fjordic loch orientated from south-west to north-east.
Summary of confidence in presence, extent and condition of proposed protected features and conservation objectives
Proposed Protected Feature Estimated Area of Feature (by scenario) (km 2) Confidence in
Feature Presence 		Confidence in
Feature Extent 		Confidence in
Feature Condition 		Conservation Objective and Risk
Biodiversity Features
Burrowed mud *Lower: 16.62
Intermediate: 16.62
Upper: 21.80		 Yes ( SEPA surveys, 2009 & 2010) Yes Not known Conserve
Maerl beds Lower: 0.37
Intermediate: 0.37
Upper: 1.49		 Yes ( SNH video survey, 2008) Yes Not known Conserve
Native oysters Lower: 1.92
Intermediate: 1.92
Upper: 1.92		 Yes ( SNH funded PhD surveys, 2004 & 2005) Yes Not known Conserve
Sublittoral mud and mixed sediment communities Included with Burrowed mud feature extent Yes (Nature Conservancy Council surveys, 1980s) Yes Not known Conserve
Geodiversity Features
N/A
Key: * Estimated area based on best available data
References: Area of Feature: GeMs
Confidence in feature presence and extent: SNH (2012h)

Summary of Costs and Benefits

Table 2a. Site-Specific Economic Costs on Human Activities arising from the Designation and Management of the Site as an MPA (present value of total costs over 2014 to 2033 inclusive) [ LSW]
Human Activity Cost Impact on Activity
Lower Estimate (£Million) Intermediate Estimate (£Million) Upper Estimate (£Million)
Quantified Economic Costs (Discounted)
Commercial Fisheries* 0.018 0.051 0.126
Military See national costs See national costs See national costs
Ports and Harbours 0.000 0.000 0.005
Total Quantified Economic Costs 0.018 0.051 0.131
Non-Quantified Economic Costs
Commercial Fisheries
  • Displacement impacts.
  • Displacement impacts.
  • Displacement impacts.
Military
  • See national assessment.
  • See national assessment.
  • See national assessment.
Ports and Harbours
  • Relocation of anchorages/ mooring areas away from features of high sensitivity.
  • Relocation of anchorages/ mooring areas away from features of high and medium sensitivity.
  • Relocation of anchorages/ mooring areas away from features of high and medium sensitivity; and
  • Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment.
Recreational Boating
  • oCost of anchorage relocation.
  • oCost of anchorage relocation.
  • oCost of anchorage relocation.
Note: For detailed information on economic cost impacts on activities, see Table 4.
* These estimates (present value of total change in GVA) assume zero displacement of fishing activity and hence are likely to overestimate the costs.
Table 2b. Site-Specific Public Sector Costs arising from the Designation and Management of the Site as an MPA (over 2014 to 2033 inclusive) [ LSW]
Description Public Sector Costs
Lower Estimate (£Million) Intermediate Estimate (£Million) Upper Estimate (£Million)
Quantified Public Sector Costs (Discounted)
Preparation of Marine Management Schemes None None None
Preparation of Statutory Instruments 0.004 0.004 0.004
Development of voluntary measures National assessment National assessment National assessment
Site monitoring National assessment National assessment National assessment
Compliance and enforcement National assessment National assessment National assessment
Promotion of public understanding National assessment National assessment National assessment
Regulatory and advisory costs associated with licensing decisions None None <0.001
Total Quantified Public Sector Costs 0.004 0.004 0.004
Non-Quantified Public Sector Costs
None
Table 2c. Summary of Social Impacts and Distribution of Quantified Impacts arising from the Designation and Management of the Site as an MPA (over 2014 to 2033 inclusive) [ LSW]
Key Areas of Social Impact Description Scale of Expected Impact across Scenarios, Average (mean no. of jobs affected) Distributional Analysis
Location Fishing Groups Predominantly Affected Social Groups Affected
Region Port Rural/ Urban/ Island Gear Types Most Affected Vessels most affected Crofters Ethnic minorities With disability or long term sick
Employment with consequent impacts on: Health, Crime, Environment, and Culture and Heritage Commercial fisheries - Loss of jobs (direct and indirect) Lower: 0 jobs
Intermediate: 0 jobs
Upper: 0 jobs		 West
West
Isle of Man		 Oban
Campbeltown
Douglas		 Impacts concentrated in urban and rural coastal areas Nephrops trawls Lower: N/A Upper: <15m No Impact. No Impact No employment data but unlikely to be employed in fisheries.
Note: For detailed information on socio-economic impacts by sector, see Table 7a. For more detailed information on distributional impacts of quantified costs by sector see Tables 7b and 7c.
Table 2d. Site-Specific Benefits arising from the Designation and Management of the Site as an MPA (over 2014 to 2033 inclusive) [ LSW]
Benefit Description
Ecosystem Services Benefits (Moderate and High Benefits) Relevance Scale of Benefits
Non-use value of natural environment Moderate - High. Variety of protected features and contribution of the site to MPA network has non-use values. Low - Moderate
Recreation Moderate - High. Including 1 active dive site, angling and recreational boating routes. Low - Moderate
Research and Education Moderate. Site contains accessible examples of unusual marine features. Low - Moderate
Other Benefits
Tourism Higher biodiversity due to designation, and presence of designations, may attract more tourism activity to local economy.
Contribution to ecologically coherent network See report Section 7.5.
Note: For detailed information on ecosystem services benefits, see Tables 9 and 10. For detailed information on other benefits, see Table 5 (activities that would benefit) and Table 8 (contribution to ecologically-coherent network).

Summary of Overlaps and Interactions between Proposed Designated Features and Human Activities

Table 3. Overlaps and Potential Interactions between Features and Activities under different Scenarios, indicating need for Assessment of Cost Impacts on Human Activities from Designation of the Site as an MPA [ LSW]
Aggregates Aquaculture (Finfish) Aquaculture (Shellfish) Aviation Carbon Capture & Storage Coastal Protection Commercial Fisheries Energy Generation Military Activities Oil & Gas Ports & Harbours Power Interconnectors Recreational Boating Shipping Telecom Cables Tourism Water Sports
Biodiversity Features
Burrowed mud - - - - - - L/ I/U - L/I/U - L/ I/ U L/I/U L/I/U - - L/I/U L/I/U
Maerl beds - - - - - - L/I/U - L/I/U - U U L/I/U - - L/I/U L/I/U
Native oysters - - - - - - L/I/U - L/I/U - - L/I/U L/I/U - - L/I/U L/I/U
Geodiversity Features
N/A
Note: L = Lower Scenario; I = Intermediate Scenario; U = Upper Scenario. Normal font indicates that there is an overlap between the activity and proposed designated feature under that scenario, bold indicates that the overlap results in a potential interaction between the activity and proposed designated feature that has resulted in cost impacts under that scenario. For detail of management measures assessed under each scenario for each activity, and results of the cost estimates, see Table 4.

Human Activity Summaries

Human activities that would be impacted by designation of the site as an MPA

Table 4a. Commercial Fisheries (assuming zero displacement of fishing activity) [ LSW]
According to VMS-based estimates and ICES rectangle landings statistics, dredges and nephrops trawls (over-15m) and nephrops trawls, pots, dredges and other gears (under-15m vessels) operate within the LSW proposed MPA. The value of landings from the LSW area was £36,100 (over-15m vessels) and £62,000 (under-15m vessels, indicated from ICES rectangle landings data) (average for 2007-2011, 2012 prices). Landings from the over-15m vessels are made predominantly into Oban (40% by value), Tayinloan (19%), West Loch Tarbert (18%), Tayvallich (12%) and Crinan (9%). For the over-15m fleet, there was sparse activity by dredgers and nephrops trawlers across the proposed MPA.

Provisional ScotMap data indicate that the annual average earnings from the LSW proposed MPA was £74,900, predominantly from pots and diving, which will not be impacted by management measures. The spatial distribution of value from Nephrops trawls indicates that the area is only lightly fished by Nephrops trawls and not fished by dredges and therefore the ICES rectangle estimates for the cost impact on <15m Nephrops trawls and on dredges are over-estimates. The coverage for ScotMap interviews in the region was 63.8% (total value of reported landings from the Fisheries Information Network for those vessels included in the ScotMap value analysis expressed as a percentage of the total reported landings for all vessels <15m). Therefore the ScotMap estimate is likely to under-represent the value of fishing by under-15m vessels, and the spatial representation of the value of fishing is less robust than in regions where coverage is higher.

VMS data indicate that there are no foreign vessels fishing within the LSW proposed MPA. Management measures for the scenarios have been developed based on the sensitivity and vulnerability of the features to the pressures caused by different gear types and SNH recommendations.

Unlike most other sectors, the potential cost of designation on commercial fisheries is a loss or displacement of current (and future) output, caused by restrictions on fishing activities. Any decrease in output will, all else being equal, reduce the Gross Value Added ( GVA) generated by the sector and have knock-on effects on the GVA generated by those industries that supply commercial fishing vessels. The costs estimates for this sector have therefore been estimated in terms of GVA.

GVA estimates have been generated by applying fleet segment-specific ' GVA/total income' ratios to the value of landings affected. The GVA ratios have been calculated using data on total income and GVA from the Sea Fish Industry Authority Multi-year Fleet Economic Performance Dataset (published March 2013). Further details on the GVA ratios and the methodology for estimating GVA and employment impacts applied are presented in Appendix C7.

It is important to note that all costs presented below assume that all affected landings are lost, that is, there is no displacement of fishing activity to alternative fishing grounds. In reality, some displacement is likely to occur and hence the cost, GVA and employment impacts presented in this table are likely to overestimate the costs.
Economic Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA
Lower Estimate Intermediate Estimate Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts
  • Closure to mobile bottom-contact gear (whitefish, nephrops and other trawls and seines, beam trawls and dredges) across maerl beds and native oyster.
  • Reduce mobile bottom-contact gear (whitefish, nephrops and other trawls and seines, beam trawls and dredges) pressure by 50% across burrowed mud;
  • Closure to hand collection of native oyster across the feature extent; and
  • Limit further expansion of static gear.
  • Closure to mobile bottom-contact gears (whitefish, nephrops and other trawls and seines, beam trawls and dredges) across burrowed mud;
  • Closure to hand collection of native oyster across the feature extent; and
  • Limit further expansion of static gears.
Description of one-off costs
  • None.
  • None.
  • None.
Description of recurring costs
  • Loss of >15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices):
  • Nephrops trawls (<0.001);
  • Dredges (<0.001).
  • Loss of <15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices):
  • Nephrops trawls (0.002);
  • Dredges (<0.001);
  • Other gear (<0.001).
  • Loss of >15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices):
  • Dredges (0.001);
  • Nephrops trawls (<0.001).
  • Loss of <15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices):
  • Nephrops trawls (0.005);
  • Dredges (0.001);
  • Other gear (<0.001).
  • Loss of >15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices):
  • Dredges (0.003);
  • Nephrops trawls (0.001).
  • Loss of <15m fishing income (annual values, £ million, 2012 prices):
  • Nephrops trawls (0.012);
  • Dredges (0.001);
  • Other gear (<0.001).
Description of non-quantified costs
  • Displacement effects, including conflict with other fishing vessels, environmental impacts in targeting new areas, longer steaming times and increased fuel costs, changes in costs and earnings, gear development and adaptation costs, and additional quota costs.
  • Displacement effects, including conflict with other fishing vessels, environmental impacts in targeting new areas, longer steaming times and increased fuel costs, changes in costs and earnings, gear development and adaptation costs, and additional quota costs.
  • Displacement effects, including conflict with other fishing vessels, environmental impacts in targeting new areas, longer steaming times and increased fuel costs, changes in costs and earnings, gear development and adaptation costs, and additional quota costs.
Quantified Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA (£Million)
Total costs (2014-2033) 0.040 0.137 0.357
Average annual costs 0.002 0.007 0.018
Present value of total costs (2014-2033) 0.030 0.101 0.263
Economic Impacts (£Million)
Total change in GVA (2014-2033) 0.024 0.069 0.171
Average annual change to GVA 0.001 0.003 0.009
Present value of total change in GVA (2014-2033) 0.018 0.051 0.126
Direct and Indirect reduction in Employment 0.0 jobs 0.1 jobs 0.2 jobs
Total costs = Sum of one-off costs and recurring costs for the site summed over the 20 year period.
Average annual costs = Total costs divided by the total number of years under analysis ( i.e. 20).
Present value of total costs = Total costs discounted to their current value, using a discount rate of 3.5%.
Total change in GVA (2014-2033) = The change in direct GVA in the sector for the site summed over the 20 year period.
Average annual change to GVA = Total change in direct GVA in the sector for the site divided by the total number of years under analysis ( i.e. 20).
Present value of total change in GVA (2014-2033) = Total change in direct GVA in the sector for the site discounted to current value, using a discount rate of 3.5%.
Direct and Indirect reduction in Employment = The average (mean) reduction in direct employment in the sector plus the indirect reduction in employment on the sector's suppliers
Table 4b. Military [ LSW]

Three military practice areas (Jura Sound (X5623) and two submarine exercise areas) overlap with the LSW proposed MPA.

The military practice area Jura Sound (X5623) overlaps with burrowed mud (all scenarios), maerl beds (all scenarios) and native oyster (all scenarios).

The two submarine exercise areas overlap with the features of the LSW proposed MPA to varying degrees under the different extent scenarios.

The features and associated habitats which overlap with military activities have not been described as vulnerable to MoD activities in this proposed MPA. It is assumed that management relating to MoD activity will be coordinated through the MoD's Maritime Environmental Sustainability Appraisal Tool ( MESAT) which the MoD uses to assist in meeting its environmental obligations. This process will include operational guidance to reduce significant impacts of military activities on MPAs. It is assumed that the MoD will incur additional costs in adjusting MESAT and other MoD environmental assessment tools in order to consider whether its activities will impact on the conservation objectives of MPAs and also incur additional costs in adjusting electronic charts to consider MPAs. However, these costs will be incurred at national level and hence no site-specific cost assessments have been made.
Economic Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA
Lower Estimate Intermediate Estimate Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts
  • See National Assessment.
  • See National Assessment.
  • See National Assessment.
Description of one-off costs
Description of recurring costs
Description of non-quantified costs
Quantified Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA (£Million)
Total costs (2014-2033) See national costs See national costs See national costs
Average annual costs See national costs See national costs See national costs
Present value of total costs (2014-2033) See national costs See national costs See national costs
Total costs = Sum of one-off costs and recurring costs for the site summed over the 20 year period.
Average annual costs = Total costs divided by the total number of years under analysis ( i.e. 20).
Present value of total costs = Total costs discounted to their current value, using a discount rate of 3.5%.
Table 4c. Ports and Harbours LSW
There is one port/harbour (Tayvallich) within the LSW proposed MPA boundary. Tayvallich overlaps with burrowed mud and maerl beds under the upper scenario only. Therefore, management costs may be incurred under the assumption that small ports/harbours will undergo one new development within the relevant time frame (2014-2033), assumed for the year 2024.

There are three anchorages/mooring areas within the LSW proposed MPA boundary, all of which overlap burrowed mud under all scenarios. Costs may be expected to relocate anchorages/mooring areas to less sensitive areas, although any associated costs are non-quantifiable.
Economic Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA
Lower Estimate Intermediate Estimate Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts
  • Relocate anchorages/mooring areas away from all features with a high sensitivity.
  • Relocate anchorages/mooring areas away from all features with a high or medium sensitivity. If not possible to relocate away from medium-sensitivity features, relocate to more representative areas.
  • Additional licensing costs for small port developments (up to 1 in total); and
  • Relocate anchorages/mooring areas away from all features with a high or medium sensitivity. If not possible to relocate away from medium-sensitivity features, relocate to more representative areas.
Description of one-off costs
  • None.
  • None.
  • Additional assessment costs for licence application - £6.75k per licence application. Application estimated for submission in 2024 (Tayvallich).
Description of recurring costs
  • None.
  • None.
  • None.
Description of non-quantified costs
  • Relocation of anchorages/mooring areas away from features of high sensitivity.
  • Relocation of anchorages/mooring areas away from features of high and medium sensitivity.
  • Relocation of anchorages/mooring areas away from features of high and medium sensitivity; and
  • Costs of project delays during consenting; risk of deterrent to investment.
Quantified Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA (£Million)
Total costs (2014-2033) 0.000 0.000 0.007
Average annual costs 0.000 0.000 0.000
Present value of total costs (2014-2033) 0.000 0.000 0.005
Total costs = Sum of one-off costs and recurring costs for the site summed over the 20 year period.
Average annual costs = Total costs divided by the total number of years under analysis ( i.e. 20).
Present value of total costs = Total costs discounted to their current value, using a discount rate of 3.5%.
Table 4d. Recreational Boating [ LSW]
One medium traffic cruising route for recreational boating intersects the LSW proposed MPA boundary, although vessels transiting cruising routes are not expected to require any additional management measures.

Under the upper scenario, eight recreational boating anchorages overlap with proposed protected features. Five of the anchorages (and associated 100m buffer zones) overlap with all feature extents for burrowed mud, and three with upper feature extents for burrowed mud. Three of the anchorages also overlap with feature extents for maerl beds. There are also 26 Crown Estate mooring points within the proposed MPA boundary and five mooring areas. The data does not indicate any individual mooring points within any of the five mooring areas, although it is expected that this is an underestimate and additional moorings will be present that are not represented by the data. The Crown Estate's moorings overlap with burrowed mud, maerl beds and native oyster.

Under the intermediate and lower scenarios, SNH have identified seven recreational boating anchorages that overlap with proposed protected features. Four anchorages overlap with sublittoral mud and mixed sediment communities; one within the 100m buffer zone and three within the 200m buffer zones. Another anchorage overlaps with sublittoral mud and mixed sediment communities within 200m and burrowed mud within 100m and 200m buffer zones. One further anchorage overlaps with burrowed mud in the 100m buffer zone and one more with a maerl bed point record on the boundary of 100m zone. A further two moorings owned by The Crown Estate overlaps with point records of sublittoral mud and mixed sediment communities.
Economic Costs on the Activity of Designation of the Site as an MPA
Lower Estimate Intermediate Estimate Upper Estimate
Assumptions for cost impacts
  • No additional management required for burrowed mud or sublittoral mud and mixed sediment communities. Burrowed mud has medium sensitivity to surface abrasion associated with anchoring although effects are highly localised and mostly relate to demersal fishing activity. Sublittoral mud and mixed sediment communities maybe more mobile in nature and therefore more tolerant to such pressures, and the effect of anchoring pressures is also very localised; and
  • Relocate anchorage away from the mouth of Caol Scotnish due to overlap with maerl bed, which has high sensitivity to surface abrasion associated with anchoring. If not possible to relocate away from feature, relocate to less sensitive or more representative area of maerl within MPA.
  • No additional management required for burrowed mud or sublittoral mud and mixed sediment communities. Burrowed mud has medium sensitivity to surface abrasion associated with anchoring although effects are highly localised and mostly relate to demersal fishing activity. Sublittoral mud and mixed sediment communities maybe more mobile in nature and therefore more tolerant to such pressures, and the effect of anchoring pressures is also very localised; and
  • Relocate anchorage away from the mouth of Caol Scotnish due to overlap with maerl bed, which has high sensitivity to surface abrasion associated with anchoring. If not possible to relocate away from feature, relocate to less sensitive or more representative area of maerl within MPA.
  • Relocate all anchorages/moorings away from all features with a high or medium sensitivity to surface abrasion pressure associated with anchoring: maerl beds; native oysters; burrowed mud. If not possible to relocate away from features, relocate to less sensitive or more representative area.
Description of one-off costs
  • None.
  • None.
  • None.
Description of recurring costs
  • None.
  • None.
  • None.
Description of non-quantified costs
  • Cost of anchorage relocation.
  • Cost of anchorage relocation.
  • Cost of anchorage relocation.

Human activities that would benefit from designation of the site as an MPA

Table 5. Human Activities that would Benefit from Designation of the Site as an MPA [ LSW]
Activity Description Lower Estimate Intermediate Estimate Upper Estimate
Tourism Coastal areas are well represented when considering the locations of various tourist related sites within Scotland with a range of site types present in all regions including the West. Where significant impacts to recreational boating or water sports have been identified for the site, there could also be consequential impacts on tourism. Tourism may benefit from the designation of the MPA as an added attraction to the destination. In addition, there may also be indirect benefits to tourism as a result of benefits to some water sports activities, for example, recreational angling and diving. The intermediate management measures applied to sector activities will result in an increase of the beneficial impacts seen in the lower estimate. The upper management measures applied to sector activities will result in an increase of the beneficial impacts seen in the lower and intermediate estimates.
Water Sports - Scuba Diving There is one shore dive location within the LSW proposed MPA (Castle Sween Reef). This site overlaps with 'Burrowed Mud' under the upper scenario only. No management restrictions upon this activity are required. The added protection offered by an MPA designation and management measures placed upon sector activities may increase the aesthetic attraction of the dive sites through an improved marine ecosystem and a reduction in degradation to the wreck sites. The intermediate management measures applied to sector activities will result in an increase of the beneficial impacts seen in the lower estimate. The upper management measures applied to sector activities will result in an increase of the beneficial impacts seen in the lower and intermediate estimates.
Water Sports - Sea Angling Sea angling is carried out along most of the Scottish coastline within 6nm ( SSACN). LSW proposed MPA is a coastal site and is located wholly within 6nm of the UK coastline. Therefore, sea angling overlaps with all features and there corresponding extents within the proposed MPA. No management restrictions upon this activity are required. Sea anglers could benefit from any on-site positive effects resulting from the MPA designation and corresponding management restrictions on sector activities including an increase in the size and diversity of species which in turn is expected to increase the attraction of a site for anglers (Fletcher et al. 2012). The intermediate management measures applied to sector activities will result in an increase of the beneficial impacts seen in the lower estimate. The upper management measures applied to sector activities will result in an increase of the beneficial impacts seen in the lower and intermediate estimates.

Human activities that are present but which would be unaffected by designation of the site as an MPA

Table 6. Human Activities that are Present but which would be Unaffected by Designation of the Site as an MPA [ LSW]
Activity Description
Power Interconnectors One interconnector is within 1km of the LSW proposed MPA. The interconnector is within 1km of burrowed mud (all scenarios), native oyster (all scenarios) and maerl beds (upper scenario only). No cost impacts are foreseen, as it is assumed that there will be no review of the existing consents.

Social and Distributional Analysis of Impacts from Designation of the Site as an MPA

Table 7a. Social Impacts Associated with Quantified and Non-Quantified Economic Costs [ LSW]
Sector Potential Economic Impacts Economic Costs and GVA ( PV) Area of Social Impact Affected Mitigation Significance of Social impact
Commercial Fisheries Loss of traditional fishing grounds with consequent loss in landings, value of landings and hence GVA Annual Average Loss in Value of Landings*:
Lower: <£0.01m
Intermediate: <£0.01m
Upper: £0.02m

Annual Average Loss in GVA (direct and indirect)*:
Lower: <£0.01m
Intermediate: <£0.01m
Upper: £0.01m		 Culture and heritage - impact on traditions from loss of fishing grounds. Health: x (for individuals affected who do not find alternative employment)
If the loss in GVA significant enough, risk of job losses (direct and indirect) Job Losses*:
Lower: 0.0 jobs
Intermediate: 0.1 jobs
Upper: 0.2 jobs		 A reduction in employment can generate a wide range of social impacts which, in turn, can generate a range of short and long term costs for wider society and the public purse:
  • Healt h (increase in illness, mental stress, loss of self esteem
and risk of depression);
  • Increase in crime; and
  • Reduction in f u ture emp lo y me n t prospects/future earnings.
 Support to retrain those affected and for the promotion of new small businesses in fisheries dependent areas.
Displacement Effects Not quantified Quantified impact on jobs assume worst case scenario ( i.e. no redistribution of effort). In reality displacement effects likely to occur with socio-economic consequences:
  • Empl o y m e nt - reduced employment due to changes in costs and earnings profile of vessels ( e.g. increased fuel costs, gear development and adaption costs, additional quota costs);
  • Conflict/Loss of social cohesion - diminishing fishing grounds may increase conflict with other vessels/gear types, increase social tensions within fishing communities and lead to a loss of social cohesion among fleets. Could also lead to increased operating costs as a result of lost or damaged gear. Equally, gear conflict could reduce where gears are restricted/prohibited;
  • Healt h - increased risks to the safety of fishers and vessels and increased stress due to moving to lesser known areas;
  • E n v ironmental - increased impact in targeting new areas, longer streaming times and increased fuel consumption; and
  • Cul t ur e a nd her i tag e - change in traditional fishing patterns/ activities.
 x
Impacts: xxx - significant negative effect; xx - possible negative effects; x - minimal negative effect, if any; 0 - no noticeable effect expected.
* These estimates assume zero displacement of fishing activity and hence are likely to overestimate the costs.
Table 7b. Distribution of Quantified Economic Costs for Commercial Fisheries and Fish Processors (assuming zero displacement of fishing activity) - Location, Age and Gender [ LSW]
Sector/Impact Location Age Gender
Region Ports* Rural, Urban, Coastal or Island Children Working Age Pensionable Age Male Female

Commercial Fisheries

Reduction in landed value, GVA and employment

x

West

x

Largest employment impacts in:

Oban (57%), Campbeltown (37%), Douglas (5%)

x

Coastal

Urban

 0 0

xx

Potential negative effect if retirees own affected vessels or live in households affected by unemployment.

 0 0.04-0.2 job losses 0

Fish Processors

Reduction in local landings at landing ports

x

West

x

West Loch
Tarbet
Tayvallich
Tayinloan
Oban

x

Coastal

Rural and Urban

 0 0 0 0 0
Impacts: xxx - significant negative effect; xx - possible negative effects; x - minimal negative effect, if any; 0 - no noticeable effect expected.
* Based on value of landings by home port affected under intermediate scenario.
Table 7c. Distribution of Quantified Economic Costs for Commercial Fisheries and Fish Processors (assuming zero displacement of fishing activity) - Fishing Groups, Income Groups and Social Groups [ LSW]
Sector/Impact Fishing Groups Income Groups Social Groups
Vessel Category <15m >15m Gear Types/Sector* 10% Most Deprived Middle 80% 10% Most Affluent Crofters Ethnic minorities With Disability or Long-term Sick

Commercial Fisheries

Reduction in landed value, GVA and employment

 Lower: N/A Upper: <15m Nephrops trawls 0 0

x

Information only available on average incomes not the distribution of income. Therefore, not clear whether this group will be affected.

 0 0 0

Fish Processors

Reduction in local landings at landing ports

 Shellfish: xxx
Demersal: 0
Pelagic: 0		 0 0 0 0 0 0
Impacts: xxx - significant negative effect; xx - possible negative effects; x - minimal negative effect, if any; 0 - no noticeable effect expected.
* Based on costs to gear types/sectors and vessel categories affected under the intermediate scenario.

Potential Contribution of the Site to an Ecologically-Coherent Network

Table 8. Overview of Features Proposed for Designation and how these contribute to an Ecologically Coherent Network of MPAs [ LSW]
Feature Name Representation Replication Linkages Geographic Range
and Variation		 Resilience
Burrowed mud Provides representation of burrowing megafauna and mud volcano worm in OSPAR Region III. Represents one of two areas of burrowing megafauna and mud volcano worm in OSPAR Region III. Not currently understood for burrowed mud. Burrowed mud occurs within a range of environments. All records of this feature of burrowed mud are from OSPAR Region III. The recommended MPA areas would provide representation for the geographic range of the firework anemone type of burrowed mud.
Maerl beds, Provides representation of maerl beds in OSPAR Region III. Represents one of three areas of maerl bed within OSPAR Region III and one of five in the Scottish seas. Maerl beds are listed by OSPAR as threatened and/or declining. The MPA may increase resilience.
Native oysters Provides representation of native oysters in OSPAR Region III. Represents one of two areas of native oysters within OSPAR Region III. Native oysters are listed as threatened and/or declining by OSPAR. The MPA may increase resilience.
Sublittoral mud and mixed sediment communities No information available
JNCC (pers. comm.); SNH and JNCC. (2012). Assessment of the potential adequacy of the Scottish MPA network for MPA search features: summary of the application of the stage 5 selection guidelines.
Available online from: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/mpanetwork/engagement/270612.

Anticipated Benefits to Ecosystem Services

Table 9. Summary of Ecosystem Services Benefits arising from Designation of the Site as an MPA [7] [ LSW]
Services Relevance
to Site		 Baseline Level Estimated Impacts of Designation Value Weighting Scale of Benefits Confidence
Lower Intermediate Upper
Fish for human consumption High. Support food web and contain nursery habitats. Stocks not at MSY, some vulnerable habitats Low Low, Protection of shellfish beds can contribute to maintenance and recovery of stocks - benefits may be higher under stronger protection measures but ecosystem response is uncertain. High: Commercially valuable species supported. Low Moderate, uncertainty mainly in response of habitats to management measures.
Fish for non-human consumption Stocks reduced from potential maximum
Gas and climate regulation Low Uncertain Nil Minimal Moderate, social cost of carbon Nil - Minimal Low - Moderate
Natural hazard protection Minimal Low Nil Minimal Low Nil - Minimal High
Regulation of pollution Moderate, benthic communities regulate pollution Low, major water quality issues to be dealt with through WFD Nil Minimal Low, water quality in this area not affecting human welfare Minimal High
Non-use value of natural environment Moderate - High, variety of protected features, and contribution of the site to MPA network, have non-use value. Non-use value of the site may decline Low Moderate - protection of features of site from decline, and/or allowing some recovery Moderate - range of features means strong contribution to halting decline of marine biodiversity. Low - Moderate Low - Moderate, extent of features, responses to management measures, and value to society all uncertain
Recreation Moderate - High, including 1 active dive site, angling and recreational boating routes Moderate - High, including tourism activities. Angling may be reduced by damage to features Low Low - Moderate, Angling benefits and biodiversity encountered by divers and recreational boaters are protected from possible decline, and could recover under upper scenario. Designation could enhance tourism activity. Moderate, extensive activities, but substitutes are available. Low - Moderate, enhancement of activities through improved angling and visitor experiences. Nil - Moderate, extent of change from management measures uncertain
Research and Education Moderate, site contains some accessible examples of unusual marine features. Moderate, biological features used for research, but there are substitutes Low Low, some aspects of research value are not at risk, some aspects protected from possible decline, and could increase. Moderate due to existing activity at this site Low - Moderate Low - Moderate, extent to which research uses site in future uncertain
Total value of changes in ecosystem services Low for lower scenario, Moderate for upper scenarios Low - Moderate Low

Human Activities which Occur within the Proposed MPA Loch Sween

Fishing Activities which Occur within the Proposed MPA Loch Sween

Contact

Back to top