Marine Planning Zones extension proposals: final island communities impact assessment screening

Island Communities Impact Assessment (ICIA) Screening - Final

Note: Relevant sections of this final ICIA screening have been updated following the public consultation on the proposed extensions to marine planning zones which ran from 18 September 2024 until 11 December 2024. The partial ICIA screening undertaken ahead of the public consultation was published on 18 September 2024.

Name of Policy, Strategy or Service - Proposals to extend marine planning zones out to 12 nautical miles

Step one – Develop a clear understanding of your objectives

What are the objectives of the policy, strategy or service?

The objective of the proposal is to close an existing gap in marine fish farming planning regulations, by extending marine planning zones to 12 nautical miles. This will be achieved by laying a Scottish Statutory Instrument (SSI) to amend the relevant regulations.

What are the intended impacts/ outcomes and how do these potentially differ across the islands?

At present, any proposed marine fish or shellfish farm sited between 0-12 nautical miles from Scotland’s coast require planning permission, but current marine planning zones (which give local authority planners the power to consider such applications) only cover the area between 0-3 nautical miles. The proposed Order will close this existing gap in planning regulations.

It is considered there will be no differing impacts across islands, as the intention is to extend marine planning zones to 12 nautical miles for all local authorities, including island local authorities.

Step two – Gather your data and identify your stakeholders

What data is available about the current situation in the islands?

The number of fish and shellfish farms operating from each island is available through National Marine Plan Interactive. Data on finfish and shellfish production and direct employment is available on a regional level (including Orkney, Shetland and Comhairle nan Eilean Siar) but not at the individual island level (e.g. Skye and small Isles would fall under Highland Region).

Who are your key Stakeholders?

Aquaculture area communities, aquaculture businesses, regulators (including local authority planners), statutory consultees to the aquaculture planning process and NGOs

How does any existing data differ between islands?

Shetland has the highest numbers of aquaculture sites. Orkney, Lewis/Harris, the Uists, Skye and Mull have fewer farms but are still relatively well developed. A range of other islands have a small numbers of farms (1-3) such as Barra, Gigha, Rum, Muck, Colonsay, Arran, Eigg and Islay.

Step three - Consultation

Is there information already gathered through previous engagements?

Prior to the designation of the current marine planning zones via The Town and Country Planning (Marine Fish Farming) (Scotland) Order 2007, engagement on how each marine planning zone boundary should be defined was carried out through a public consultation. Responses to the consultation informed the boundaries between each marine planning zone.

Consultees included groups associated with island communities including; local authorities, fisherman’s federations, fishery boards, aquaculture groups, yachting associations and port authorities.

The proposed order does not change the delineation of existing marine planning zone boundaries between each local authority area. The intent is to extend the existing marine planning zones from the current 3 nautical mile limit, out to 12 nautical miles.

How will you carry out your consultation and in what timescales?

Public meetings/Local Authorities/key Stakeholders - A public consultation ran between 18 September 2024 and 11 December 2024 and invited formal responses to the proposals from these public bodies, other relevant organisations and stakeholders including individuals.

What questions will you ask when considering how to address island realities?

The public consultation set out the proposed extensions to marine planning zones and the reasons for doing so. Stakeholder groups and individuals with links to island communities were be able to feedback on the appropriateness of these extensions and raise any additional points should they disagree with the proposal.

Separate consultation events for Island communities/Local Authorities?

There were no separate consultation events for island communities and Local Authorities. It is considered the public consultation provided sufficient opportunity for island voices to be considered.

Public consultation results

In total there were 53 responses to the consultation comprising 29 organisations and 24 individuals. Of the 53 respondents, 40 indicated their agreement with the proposals to extend marine planning zones out to 12 nautical miles, 11 indicated that they were not in agreement and 2 respondents neither agreed or disagreed with the proposals.

4 local authorities responded to the consultation, all of which include island communities – Shetland Islands Council, Orkney Islands Council, Highland Council, and Argyll and Bute Council. The 4 local authorities agreed with the proposal to extend marine planning zones.

Of the 4 aquaculture organisations that responded to the consultation, 3 agreed with the proposal to extend marine planning zones and 1 did not answer the question, but noted they neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal.

9 fisheries organisations responded to the consultation, many of which represent members operating in island communities.

Of the 9 fisheries groups that responded to the consultation, 6 agreed with the proposal, 2 disagreed and 1 did not answer the question, but noted they neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal.

In reference to the partial ICIA, one fisheries organisation stated they did not agree with the assumption that there are no anticipated unique impacts on Island Communities, with the main concern with the proposal to extend marine planning zones being that the existing planning system is not robust enough to ensure that existing sectors receive due consideration and support to ensure that their activities are not disadvantaged.

As well as local authorities and fisheries groups which we consider to represent aspects of local communities, groups which represent other marine users who responded to the consultation; Royal Yachting Society and Clyde Marine Planning Partnership agreed with the proposal to extend marine planning zones.

The Scottish Association for Marine Science commented specifically on the partial ICIA as follows:

The largest expansions of marine planning zones are those allocated to the three islands authorities and to Argyll & Bute, the latter responsible for many island communities. Whereas the Northern Isles have benefitted from the special financial powers of their local authorities, the budgets of Eilean Siar and Argyll & Bute are more constrained. We question whether they have the financial or personnel resources to deal adequately with offshore planning even within the existing 3 nautical mile limit, let alone the extension to 12 nautical miles. In addition, if the Hebridean island communities are to benefit from the servicing of large offshore aquaculture structures, they will need new or upgraded port facilities. It appears therefore that these island communities could be disadvantaged by the planning zone extension, unless there is more support for marine planning and port development.

24 individuals also responded to the consultation, 17 agreed with the proposals to extend marine planning zones and 7 disagreed. No individuals specifically noted whether or not they lived within or were linked with an island community.

Step four - Assessment

Does your assessment identify any unique impacts on island communities?

It is determined that there are no anticipated unique impacts on island communities arising from the proposed extension to marine planning zones.

Does your assessment identify any potential barriers or wider impacts?

One fisheries organisation noted that they disagreed there would be no unique impacts on island communities, but did not give specific reasoning for this. The organisation referenced the planning system not being robust enough to ensure that existing sectors receive due consideration and support to ensure that their activities are not disadvantaged.

It is considered that the planning system and how it considers applications for aquaculture developments does not itself represent a unique impact on island communities. The proposal will provide a structured way to ensure that the impacts of offshore fish farms on island communities can be considered through the planning system, and provide a means for island communities to express their views.

The Scottish Association for Marine Science suggested differences in budgets between local authorities would lead to more resource pressure on smaller local authorities (such as those representing smaller island communities). It was also suggested that smaller island communities would be disadvantaged by marine planning zone extensions with developments in this area more likely to take place in areas with larger port infrastructure.

It is considered that the proposal to extend marine planning zones would not exacerbate any impacts that may already exist between islands communities, such as resource differences between local authorities and existing infrastructure.

It is considered the potential opportunities for aquaculture development between 3-12 nautical miles may encourage investment in island infrastructure, including in smaller island communities.

Are there mitigations already in place for these impacts raised?

In regards to appropriate assessment of aquaculture planning applications and engagement with other marine users, proposed developments between 3 - 12 nautical miles would undergo the same rigorous assessments as for farms located between 0 – 3 nautical miles.

Planners must consider applications in relation to policies set out in National Planning Framework 4, together with relevant Local Development Plans, Regional Marine Plans and the National Marine Plan. Statutory Consultees to the planning process will continue to provide expert advice and applications will be open to representations from non-statutory consultees and the wider public, which must be considered by planners.

Applications for fish and shellfish farms between 3 – 12 nautical miles will also be subject to Environmental Impact Assessment and Habitats Regulations Assessment where a development falls within the scope of those regulations.

Through the work of the Consenting Task Group pre-application pilots, opportunities for early engagement between developers, fisheries groups and other local interests are being enhanced. Representations will be able to be submitted during the formal application stage as is the case for proposed developments in the 0 - 3 nautical mile zone.

In regards to local authority resource to deal adequately with planning applications for developments between 3 – 12 nautical miles, it is not considered that the extension of marine planning zones will have a significant impact on planning authority resourcing.

An applicant is required to submit a fee on submission of a planning application to the relevant planning authority. The Town and Country Planning (Fees for Applications) Scotland Regulations 2022 as amended sets out how the fee should be calculated. The purpose of the planning application fee is cover the cost of the determination of planning applications by the planning authority. Fish and shellfish farms beyond 3 nautical miles will be subject to similar assessment procedures, including EIA and HRA, and therefore we expect costs of processing applications to remain largely the same. If this is found not to be the case, a separate fee structure could be considered for fish and shellfish farms from 3 – 12 nautical miles in future.

In September 2024 we confirmed the next steps for implementing the majority of proposals from our Investing in planning - resourcing Scotland's planning system: consultation - gov.scot (www.gov.scot), including the introduction of an annual inflation linked increase to planning fees.

Is a full Island Communities Impact Assessment required?

It has been determined that the proposed extension to marine planning zones will not have an effect on an island community which is significantly different from its effect on other communities.

Impacts of the extension to marine planning zones will be monitored once proposals are implemented, and further assessments will be considered if required.

ICIA approved by:

Position: Deputy Director – Marine Economy and Communities

Signature: Malcolm Pentland

Date completed: 21 February 2025