UK Cetacean Conservation Strategy: consultation outcome report

Overview of responses

During the consultation, a total of 35 responses were received. Respondents to the consultation were asked whether they were replying as an individual or on behalf of an organisation. A total of 16 responses were received from organisations and 19 responses from individuals.

Support for the implementation of a UK Dolphin and Porpoise Conservation Strategy (Q1)

In total there were 35 responses to this question, with 33 respondents (94%) indicating support for the implementation of the Strategy. Two of the organisations that responded did not answer the question.

Of the 35 respondents, a total of 28 provided additional comments. Points raised in these comments included:

• Several respondents suggested that additional species should be added to the strategy, notably, baleen whales, humpback whales, beaked whales, sperm whales, striped dolphins, and killer whales.
• One respondent stated that the high-level targets were not ambitious enough, with specific emphasis on the need to focus the strategy on rebuilding cetacean population levels to above the minimum required to achieve Favourable Conservation Status.
• Some of the respondents stated that the UK-wide strategy provides broad brush coverage but doesn’t address the needs of specific locations.
• A few respondents stated that while research is important, there needs to be more concrete actions.

Agreement that evidence presented supports the case for the strategy (Q2)

A total of 35 respondents answered question 2 of the consultation. Of the 35 respondents, 25 agreed that the evidence presented supports the case for the Strategy, while four organisations did not. One organisation selected “Don’t Know” and five did not answer (four organisations and one individual).

Of the 35 respondents, 22 provided additional comments (nine from individuals and 13 from organisations). Points raised in these comments included:

• Responses from individuals in support of the strategy stated that more evidence is always welcome, but that the evidence gathered to date indicated the severity of impacts on cetaceans and other marine life.
• One respondent stated that the strategy is well evidenced and supports the actions that are proposed. In areas where evidence is lacking the strategy has highlighted these knowledge gaps and proposed ways to address them.
• A few responses referred to the data used to inform the assessments as outdated, and listed sources of evidence that they felt should be included.
• A few responses raised concerns that the fisheries data being assessed at a UK level resulted in a combination of some gear types that did not reflect the reality of fisheries in some areas.
• One response stated more consideration needs to be given to climate concerns and the migration of prey species.

Vulnerability assessments and the conclusions reached (Q3)

Of the 35 respondents, 21 provided comments (11 from individuals and ten from organisations). Points raised in these comments included:

• A few respondents stated that the lack of reliable and recent data made the conclusions of the vulnerability assessments uncertain.
• One respondent stated that the vulnerability assessments are well evidenced overall and support the conclusions presented. However, they raised concerns that the regional variations for some threats were not populated and highlighted that it is difficult to evidence some threats.
• Some respondents expressed concern about the methodology used for the vulnerability assessments and their conclusions (particularly for Acoustic Deterrent Devices (ADDs), trawling, and seine netting).
• One respondent stated that a more explicit explanation should be given on terms used in the assessments (for example, UK population) and how rules have been applied to the vulnerability assessments.
• Some respondents suggested that further research was needed across all species occurring in UK waters.

Actions identified in the strategy (Q4)

Of the 35 respondents, 23 (ten individuals and 13 organisations) provided additional comments. Points raised in these comments included:

• One respondent stated that the actions will allow further understanding of the impacts and mitigate/protect effectively.
• Another organisation stated that they support the actions identified, but there needs to be more focus on the delivery of management measures rather than undertaking further research.
• Many respondents agreed with the actions listed however, they felt they are not sufficiently ambitious, and, in some cases, there were concerns around inconsistency in the level of detail provided for different actions.
• Several respondents stated that more focus on climate change is required.
• One respondent pointed out that care needs to be taken not to duplicate ongoing work.

Accessibility of the information in the consultation documents (Q5)

Of the 35 respondents, 19 provided comments (eight individuals, 11 organisations). Points raised in these comments included:

• One respondent felt the general public may better understand the strategy if headline information was displayed in infographics.
• Many respondents found the information easily accessible although some users struggled to navigate Citizen Space to find the required documents.
• Some respondents highlighted that more data is required rather than just citations, which are more difficult to follow.