Flamborough Head Management Plan

Transcription

FLAMBOROUGH HEAD
MANAGEMENT PLAN
FLAMBOROUGH
HEADLAND
FLAMBOROUGH HEAD
AND BEMPTON CLIFFS
HERITAGE COAST
SPECIAL PROTECTION AREA
Preface
Flamborough Head is one of Yorkshire’s finest environmental assets. The European Marine Site covers
64km2 and is designated as an internationally important site for its sea bird colonies, extensive
intertidal and underwater chalk reef and maritime sea-cliff vegetation. In addition the site is an
outstanding example of coastal geomorphology and geology and is designated as a Heritage Coast for
its superb landscape and heritage value.
The main purpose of this plan is to ensure that human activities at Flamborough Head are managed in a
way that is compatible with the natural assets of Flamborough, and to seek opportunities to improve
these assets and the human activities that depend upon them. To this effect the document provides a
framework for the application of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 within and
around the Flamborough Head European Marine Site and replaces the previous Flamborough Head
European Marine Site Management Scheme (English Nature 2000).
The Plan seeks to act as a framework for the sustainable management of the wider natural environment
at Flamborough Head and as such the review builds upon successes of the European Marine Site
Management Scheme and the Heritage Coast Strategy to ensure integrated management of wildlife,
landscape and access in the area.
The Ecosystem Approach to management has been adopted to underpin the sustainable management of
Flamborough Head. This process seeks to manage human activities within environmental limits to
ensure that future generations and the environment are not compromised by today’s activities.
Summarised as ‘sustaining benefits for all – for ever’ the Ecosystem Approach recognises that people
are an important part of the environment and seeks to understand their interaction with the environment
and how this relates to the functioning of ecosystems at a variety of different scales. A wide-ranging
holistic approach to the management of Flamborough Head has therefore been adopted that is guided
by an overall vision of Flamborough in 20 years time.
The reviewed plan has been put together with the close involvement of a broad range of individuals and
interest groups. This involved a process of shared decision-making where at least 50 individuals
attended one or more of the sequence of three workshops. Interested parties sat down together and
explored the issues and jointly agreed solutions. The plan also takes into account how the natural
environment at Flamborough and how it may contribute to the revitalisation and regeneration of the
surrounding area.
The review identified a number of projects that were important to the long-term management of
Flamborough Head. These ranged from codes of conduct, leaflet production, and improving links with
academic institutions, to running focus groups and research projects. Many of these projects will be
dependent on the continuation of the project officer post and the Management Group securing further
funding, as such they are not guaranteed. However we hope that through the continued close working
between the Relevant Authorities and stakeholders at Flamborough these challenges will be addressed.
These changes will ultimately lead to a healthier marine and coastal environment at Flamborough that
will contribute to an improved quality of life and financial security for local communities and an
improved experience for people that visit the Flamborough area, now and into the future. Adopting a
holistic approach will also make the Flamborough Head Management Plan a leading example of the
integrated management of marine and coastal resources in the UK, which will help to inform
management and policy development in the wider environment.
Finally, the coastal and marine environment is a shared resource and this Management Plan provides an
important opportunity for those involved to make a positive contribution towards its future. Whether or
not Flamborough Head remains a special place for future generations lies ultimately with the relevant
authorities, stakeholders and interest groups working together towards a common goal.
Leanne Stockdale
Flamborough Head Project Officer
March 2007
Flamborough Head
Derived from the Anglo-Saxon word 'flaen' meaning 'sword or arrow'. The peninsular of
Flamborough Head stands proud of the Yorkshire Coast, carved from the land by the North
Sea swells. Soaring chalk cliffs, speckled with sea birds, sheltered rocky coves, sea caves,
and extensive areas of undersea reefs. Flamborough Head is a national treasure, accounting
for nearly 9% of the European coastal chalk exposure. The site is of international importance
due to the exceptional variety and abundance of coastal and marine wildlife that it supports.
The rocks themselves are a window on the past holding important ice age and cretaceous
geology and helping us to understand how the sea affects the land. This unspoilt coastal
landscape provides unrivalled opportunities for tourists and local communities to explore and
appreciate Yorkshire’s coastal heritage and is important to the maintenance of the local
tourism industry, which contributes to local regeneration. Out to sea the marine environment
supports large areas of kelp forest and rocky reef habitat and associated wildlife that in turn
support important fishing grounds for boats operating out of local ports.
A Vision for Flamborough in 2025
The sea – A healthy and wildlife rich sea containing internationally important chalk reefs.
With a local sustainable fishery operating from Flamborough, Filey, Bridlington, Grimsby,
Scarborough and Whitby. Unspoilt beaches and coves offer people the opportunity to
experience and understand the marine environment in safety.
The cliffs – A naturally functioning landscape supporting internationally important seabird
populations and cliff top vegetation. A safe place for people to access, understand and enjoy.
The land – A traditional landscape supporting a healthy farming economy, with a wildlife
rich and varied farmed environment supporting a broad range of habitats and species.
The Flamborough Head Management Plan will do the following:
•
•
•
•
•
Adopt a broad based approach to management that brings together the management of
wildlife, landscape and access on the head
Integrate with the management of the wider coast
Increase public participation
Seek to adopt the Ecosystem Approach to the management of Flamborough Head
Progress specific projects:
1. Access and tourism - to promote, manage and maintain public use of the site;
2. Land management – Help the farming community to manage their land in a
profitable way that improves the landscape and wildlife of Flamborough Head;
3. Science – monitoring of the site to gain baseline information and the collation of
existing data;
4. Education – raise awareness of issues regarding the conservation and sustainable
management of the environment;
5. Responsible use of the marine environment - for both the recreational and
commercial sector.
Contents
Contents ...............................................................................................................................................i
List of figures, tables and boxes .......................................................................................................iii
1.
Introduction and Overview
1.1
The Site .................................................................................................................... 1.1
1.2
The review ............................................................................................................... 1.2
1.2.1 Feedback and monitoring............................................................................ 1.3
1.2.2 Key management issues.............................................................................. 1.3
1.3
Management Scheme or Management Plan? ........................................................... 1.3
1.3.1 What is included in the plan?...................................................................... 1.3
2.
Policy and legal framework of the management plan
2.1
Introduction to the management plan ...................................................................... 2.1
2.2
Background to the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive................................ 2.1
2.3
The Habitats Directive and selection of Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)……2.2
2.3.1 Selection of Special Areas of Conservation............................................... 2.2
2.4
Birds Directive and selection of Special Protection areas (SPA) ............................ 2.2
2.4.1 Selection of Special Protection Areas (SPA).............................................. 2.2
2.5
European Marine Sites............................................................................................. 2.3
2.6
The need for a European Marine Site Management Plan ........................................ 2.3
2.6.1 Flamborough Headland Heritage Coast...................................................... 2.3
2.7
Competent and relevant competent authorities responsible for the site................... 2.4
2.8
English Nature’s Regulation 33(2) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.)
Regulation 1994....................................................................................................... 2.4
2.9
Plans and Projects .................................................................................................... 2.5
2.9.1 Likely significant effect .............................................................................. 2.5
2.9.2 The Appropriate Assessment ...................................................................... 2.6
2.10
Process by which the plan was reviewed ................................................................. 2.7
2.10.1 Facilitated workshops ................................................................................. 2.7
2.10.2 Role of the Flamborough Head Maritime Forum advisory group .............. 2.8
2.10.3 Issues raised and proposed solution........................................................... .2.8
2.10.4 Concerns of Stakeholders ........................................................................... 2.8
3.
Reasons for designation and site description
3.1
General Description ................................................................................................. 3.1
3.2
Flamborough Head SAC.......................................................................................... 3.1
3.2.1 Reefs ........................................................................................................... 3.1
3.2.2 Sea caves .................................................................................................... 3.2
3.2.3 Vegetated sea cliffs..................................................................................... 3.3
3.3
Flamborough Head and Bempton SPA ................................................................... 3.3
3.3.1
Importance of internationally important populations of regularly occurring
Annex 1 species......................................................................................... 3.3
3.3.2
Importance of the internationally important seabird assemblage and
nationally important populations ............................................................... 3.4
3.3.3
Bird Interests ............................................................................................. 3.4
3.4
Geological interests ........................................................................................ 3.4
4.
Site management and associated policies.......................................................................... 4.1
4.1
Introduction.............................................................................................................. 4.1
4.2
Format .................................................................................................................... 4.1
4.3
Layout of activity assessment table ......................................................................... 4.1
4.4
Collection................................................................................................................. 4.3
i
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
4.15
Energy Industries ..................................................................................................... 4.5
Fishing ..................................................................................................................... 4.7
Industrial activity and consented discharges to sea................................................ 4.11
Land management.................................................................................................. 4.14
Mineral extraction.................................................................................................. 4.16
Planning and development ..................................................................................... 4.18
Water quality.......................................................................................................... 4.20
Recreation and tourism .......................................................................................... 4.22
Research and education.......................................................................................... 4.25
Shipping, navigation and deposits at sea................................................................ 4.27
Shoreline management........................................................................................... 4.30
5.
Action plan for the Flamborough Head European Marine Site
5.1
Introduction.............................................................................................................. 5.1
5.2
Action plan structure................................................................................................ 5.1
5.3
Reporting and reviewing.......................................................................................... 5.3
5.3.1 Action plan to deliver management measures and objectives ........................ 5.5
5.3.2 Action plan for the review and revision of the management plan ................ 5.12
5.3.3 Action plan for survey and monitoring of the condition of interest features 5.13
6.
Sustainable developments and the Ecosystem Approach
6.1
Introduction.............................................................................................................. 6.1
6.2
Ecosystem Approach implementation ..................................................................... 6.2
6.3
The Ecosystem Approach at Flamborough Head .................................................... 6.2
6.4
Table structure ......................................................................................................... 6.3
6.5
Conclusions.............................................................................................................. 6.8
7.
Projects
7.1
Introduction.............................................................................................................. 7.1
8.
Conclusions of the review and future delivery of the plan ............................................. 8.1
Annex I
Glossary of terms, acronyms and useful references
Annex II
List of relevant authority contacts for the Flamborough Head European Marine
Site and other useful addresses, local organisations and group information
Annex III
Stakeholder consultation information
Annex IV
Regulation 33 advice package
List of figures, tables and boxes
Figure 1
Flamborough Head European Marine Site location map......................................... 1.4
Figure 2
Guidance for Competent Authorities applying the Habitats regulations to Plans and
Projects .................................................................................................................. 2.12
Figure 3
Map to illustrate the habitat types found around the Headland .............................. 3.5
Figure 4
Mapped licensed discharges around the Headland ................................................ 4.13
ii
Table 1
Summery of interest features and designations at Flamborough Head.................... 1.2
Table 2
Flamborough Head European Marine Site relevant authorities ............................ 2.10
Table 3
Plans and guidance relevant to the Flamborough Head Management Plan ........... 2.11
Table 4
Kittiwake productivity monitoring 1995 to 2006 .................................................... 3.4
Table 5
‘F list’ indicating general management approach in response to different factors .. 5.2
Table 6
Review of current management at the Flamborough Head European marine site
against the 12 principles of the Ecosystem Approach ............................................. 6.4
Table 7
Project outlines and implementation........................................................................ 7.1
iii
1.0
Introduction and Overview
1.1
The Site
Leanne Stockdale, Flamborough Project Officer
This plan focuses on the coastal chalk cliffs and marine environment of Flamborough Head. The coast
has numerous nature conservation designations, with three of these designations for features
considered to be of importance on a European context:
• Reefs (chalk reefs)
• Sea caves
• Vegetated sea cliffs
• Sea bird assemblages and species
Flamborough Head is also designated as a Heritage Coast for its
outstanding scenic, historic and scientific interest and is a Site of
Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) for the coastal geomorphology,
geology, cliff top plant communities’ vegetation and the species of
sea bird found in the area, including the only mainland gannetry in
England.
There are 3 Local Nature Reserves (LNR’s) in the area, at
Flamborough Outer Headland and Danes Dyke and two other nature
reserves managed, for the benefit of wildlife. These are The Royal
Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) Bempton Cliffs Reserve,
and the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust reserve at Flamborough Cliffs, (see
Figure 1; for further information refer to Annex II).
A summer’s day at North Landing,
Flamborough.
The areas that cover the internationally important features overlap
with one another (see Figure 1). The marine areas of these three
designations are all covered by this management plan and collectively they are referred to as the
Flamborough Head European Marine Site and are
protected under the Habitats Regulations (see Section 2).
Where as European Sites on land, both Special Areas of
Conservation (SACs) and Special Protection Areas
(SPAs), are based upon existing Sites of Special
Scientific Interest (SSSI) designated under the Wildlife
and Countryside Act 1981(as amended by the Country
Side and Rights of Way Act 2000). Table 1 summarises
the various interest features of the European Marine Site
and the designations in place.
1
Value and Volume of the Tourism Industry in East Yorkshire (Yorkshire Tourist Board) May 2000
1.1
Robbie Fisher, Natural England
The section of the coast covered by this Plan includes
many popular tourist areas including Bempton, Danes
Dyke and Sewerby and adjacent to the European Marine
Site is the major resort of Bridlington, with a local
population of about 34,000. The coast attracts many
tourists; with an average of 2.7 million day visitors and
900,000 long stay visitors in the Bridlington area 1 . The
local harbour is Bridlington and a number of launch sites
can be found around the headland, which are used for
Rockpooling at Thornwick Bay, Flamborough.
commercial fishing and recreation use, with South
Landing providing a public boat launch site. North Landing is home to the few remaining cobles at
Flamborough, with the lifeboat station based at South Landing. There are several licensed discharges
situated around the area, these are mapped within Figure 4 (Section 4).
The European Marine Site does have complex human use, and it is suggested through statutory
guidance that where such use occurs a single management scheme should be drawn up, to provide a
framework for Relevant Authorities to exercise their functions within the European Marine Site,
ensuring compliance with the Habitats Directive. The guidance adds that although it is the Relevant
Authorities who have the responsibility for setting up the management scheme, it is essential that
local interests, user groups and conservation groups along with owners and occupiers should be
encouraged to participate in the scheme at the earliest opportunity.
Table 1: Summery of interest features and designations at Flamborough Head
Designations
Interest Feature
Sub-feature
Seabirds
SAC
SPA
SSSI
Heritage
Coast
LNR
Seabird
Assemblage
✔
✔
✔
✔
Kittiwake
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
Gannet
Vegetated sea
cliffs
All
✔
✔
✔
✔
Sea caves
All
✔
✔
✔
✔
Reefs
Rocky shores
✔
✔
✔
Kelp forest
✔
✔
Subtidal Faunal
Turf
✔
✔
Woodland
1.2
All
✔
The Review
The Flamborough Head European Marine Site Management Scheme was published in 2000 and ran
successfully for five years. In 2005 the Management Group for the Scheme employed a project
officer to carry out a review. This review took one year and the results are published in this
document.
Since the last Management Scheme was published in 2000, thinking in areas such as sustainable
development, integrated coastal zone management and the ecosystem approach have increasingly
advocated the adoption of a holistic approach to management. As a consequence the Management
Group felt that a wide-ranging review would benefit the site more than maintaining a focus on the
features of interest for which the European Marine Site was designated. It was felt that a broad based
review would benefit the site by:
• Providing a better understanding of the sites management requirements;
• Making the Management Scheme a focus for integrated management at Flamborough;
• Providing a broader funding base from which to undertake project work;
• Improving long-term commitment to the sites management;
• Facilitate improved communication between managers and users.
1.2
To fulfil the guidance given, the scheme was reviewed through a series of three workshops, which
were designed and facilitated by the Management Group and the project officer. Stakeholders
representing over 25 organisations and interest groups attended the workshops. This process helped
stakeholders identify issues and find appropriate solutions to them, whilst improving their own level
of awareness about the site.
The objective of the workshops was to consider the following:
• Define a 20-year vision for Flamborough Head;
• Discuss and identify issues, which are stopping us from achieving this vision;
• Consider what action the Management Group and stakeholders could take to make the vision
a reality.
This information was taken away and the findings integrated with the Management Scheme. This
resulted in numerous changes and in some instances entirely new sections being included. A second
workshop was held to feed back on and discuss these changes. Once a draft Management Scheme
was produced a final workshop was held to discuss the content, structure, prioritisation of actions and
future communications arrangements. Changes were made following this meeting and a final
consultation issued before the document was finalised.
1.2.1
Feedback and monitoring
The success of the stakeholder involvement was monitored during the review process the results of
this can be seen in Annex III.
1.2.2
Key Management Issues
Through facilitated working groups key management issues where discussed, stakeholders
commented on the suggested solutions to the issues raised, for example to educate tourists about the
areas importance, improved interpretation is essential. The issues raised were incorporated into a
series of proposed projects, these were then presented and any specific issues such as quad biking
were incorporated into the action plan, which will be delivered by the Relevant Authorities.
1.3
Management Scheme or Management Plan?
Under the requirements of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994, Relevant
Authorities were obliged to establish a Management Scheme to ensure the long-term protection of the
internationally important features at Flamborough Head. This Plan delivers these requirements but is
called a ‘Management Plan’ to reflect its broad management role at Flamborough.
1.3.1
What is included in this plan?
The Flamborough Head Management Plan delivers the requirements of the Conservation (Natural
Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994. The key sections and actions included in this plan are listed below,
and provide the framework for delivering integrated management at a local scale: •
•
•
•
•
The European Marine Site (EMS) action plan – will deliver the requirements of the
Habitat Regulations;
Site management – key issues identified and policies defined;
Projects action plan – deliver specific projects relevant to the Heritage Coast and EMS;
The Ecosystem Approach - will be delivered through the above sections;
Communications – Annual/biannual Forum Meeting, permanent Liaison Groups established
(Land Management and Fisheries).
The Project Officer – Employed to ensure communication between groups, progress projects, carry
out actions, organise meetings, support liaison groups and the maritime forum.
1.3
1.4
2.0
Policy and legal framework of the Management Plan
This section describes why Flamborough Head is important and the legislation that is in place to
protect the area
2.1
Introduction to the Management Plan
This Management Plan has been developed to fulfil a number of objectives with an overall view to
ensure that human activities at Flamborough Head are managed in a way that is compatible with the
natural assets of Flamborough Head and to seek opportunities to improve these assets and the human
activities that depend upon them. This objective is defined in more detail by the 20-year management
vision.
As part of this overarching objective, specific sections of this Plan (particularly Section 4) fulfil
requirements of Regulation 34 of The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 with
regards to the Flamborough Head European Marine Site. The Plan has been designed to guide all
aspects of management that are likely to affect the wildlife features of this area. Whilst it is the
responsibility of the relevant statutory organisations to implement this plan, representatives from
different human activities have been involved in agreeing its contents and users of the area are
encouraged to play a part in making this Management Plan a success. As such its roots are in voluntary
co-operation and partnership and in 1998, the Flamborough Head Sensitive Marine Area Management
Strategy put forward a framework for the voluntary management of the coastal waters and maritime
areas of Flamborough Head. This work was supported by several key organisations responsible for the
management of this area and provided the basis for the development of this statutory Management Plan,
first published in December 2000 and reviewed in September 2006. There is a wide range of other
plans, both statutory and non-statutory, also covering this area and those relevant to this Management
Plan are referred to in the site management section (Section 4).
2.2
Background to the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive
The European Union (EU) adopted the Habitats Directive 2 in 1992 as a major contribution to the
Biodiversity Convention signed up to at the Rio Earth Summit. The main aim is to highlight the need to
maintain biodiversity (the variety of plant and animal life and the habitats in which they are found)
throughout all Member States. It focuses on rare, endangered or vulnerable habitats and/or species that
are listed as Annexes within the Directive. Bird species are covered by complementary legislation under
the Birds Directive 3 , which protects all wild birds and their habitats in the European Union, especially
migratory birds and those considered to be rare or vulnerable.
The main mechanism used to protect the habitats and species listed in the Habitats Directive is the
selection and subsequent designation of Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), whereas sites classified
under the Birds Directive are Special Protection Areas (SPAs). Sites designated under these two
Directives will collectively form a network of protected sites across the EU, called Natura 2000. The
term Natura 2000 comes from the Habitats Directive and symbolises the conservation of precious
natural resources for the year 2000 and beyond.
The conservation management for the site must ensure that the features for which the site has been
classified stay in a favourable condition. Measures must be taken to make sure that any operations that
may cause deterioration of natural habitats or the habitats of species, or disturbance of species for
which the site has been classified are identified and managed to prevent deterioration of the site. In
2
3
Council Directive 92/43/EEC
Council Directive 79/409/EEC
2.1
order to assess the condition of conservation features and the effectiveness of the current management
the Directive requires the site to be monitored.
2.3 The Habitats Directive and selection of Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)
The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 transpose the European Habitats Directive
into law in Great Britain; this regulation was amended in 2000 via the Conservation (Natural Habitats,
&c.) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2000. With further amendments made in 2006 via the
Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2006. These
Regulations are designed to translate the requirements of both the Habitats and Birds Directives into
UK law and provide the mechanisms required to make it work at both an administrative and a practical
level.
An important feature of the Habitats Directive is that it mentions the need to take account of the
economic, social, cultural and regional requirements of the site. A majority of the sites designated have
been subject to human use for hundreds of years and the implications of the Directive on those patterns
of use have to be considered as part of the whole management process.
2.3.1
Selection of Special Areas of Conservation
Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) are selected by each Member State on the basis of the habitats
and species listed in Annexes I and II of the Habitats Directive. The habitats and/or species on each site
are referred to as interest features. The best examples in each country, once agreed locally and
nationally through consultation, are then submitted to the EC for consideration. At this stage sites are
referred to as candidate sites. After adoption by the EC, these candidate sites become Sites of
Community Importance (SCIs) and are then formally designated as SACs by member states.
Flamborough Head was officially designated as a SAC in April 2005; the reasons for its selection and
designation are given in Section 3. A list of SAC sites in the UK can be viewed at
http://www.jncc.gov.uk.
2.4
Birds Directive and selection of Special Protection areas (SPA)
The main aim of the birds Directive is to protect birds within the European Union through the
conservation of all bird species naturally living in the wild and their habitats. To achieve this aim
measures are needed to address the repercussions of human activities, in particular the destruction and
pollution of habitats and exploitation of bird species.
Conservation is aimed at the long-term protection and management of natural resources. It includes the
preservation, maintenance or restoration of a sufficient diversity and area of habitats essential to the
conservation of all species of birds.
The directive requires that certain species of birds should be the subject of special conservation
measures concerning their habitats in order to ensure their survival and reproduction in their area of
distribution. These conservation measures should also take into account migratory species. To help
achieve these aims member states are required to establish Special Protection Areas (SPA). A list of
SPA sites in the UK can be viewed at http://www.jncc.gov.uk.
2.4.1 Selection of Special Protection Areas (SPA)
Special Protection Areas (SPAs) are selected by each Member State on the basis that they are
particularly important for birds that depend on specialised or restricted habitats for breeding, feeding,
wintering or migration. In addition a number of species are listed in Annex 1 of the Birds Directive,
which are considered to be vulnerable, or at risk of decline within the countries of the EU.
2.2
Under the EC Birds Directive member states are required to classify as Special Protection Areas the
most suitable areas for:
a) Bird species listed in Article 4.1
b) Regular occurring migratory species under Article 4.2
2.5
European Marine Sites
The term European Marine Site (EMS), which may include both SACs and SPAs, refers to those sites
established in the intertidal area and at sea. A number of sites have been identified around our coastline,
which are internationally important for their habitats and species.
2.6
The need for a European Marine Site Management Plan
For each European Marine Site a Management Plan may be produced, as advised under Regulation 34.
Where marine areas of adjacent or overlapping SACs and SPAs occur the recommendation is that only
one Management Plan is produced. This Management Plan is for the following sites:
• Flamborough Head SAC
• Flamborough Head and Bempton cliffs SPA
The Habitats Directive specifically mentions the need to avoid the deterioration of habitats and the
disturbance to species by whatever means necessary. As a consequence, the Habitats Regulations make
provision for the establishment of management plans for European Marine Sites, to protect the sites
interest features, those habitats and species for which the site has been designated.
On land areas those areas selected as SACs and SPAs, are based upon existing Sites of Special
Scientific Interest (SSSI) designated under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended by the
Wildlife and Countryside Act 2000. Therefore those parts of the European Marine Sites that lie above
the mean low water mark will be managed as part of marine sites but will also be SSSIs and subject to
the protection systems for both Nationally and Internationally sites on land.
NOTE: Section 5 (Habitats Regulations Action Plan) of The Flamborough Head Management
Plan fulfils the legal requirements of Regulation 34 of the Conservation (Habitats &c.)
Regulations 1994. All other sections are non-statutory and are concerned with the wider
management of the terrestrial and marine environment at Flamborough.
2.6.1
Flamborough Headland Heritage Coast
The Heritage Coast covers 19km (12 miles) of coastline between Reighton in the north and Sewerby
in the south, with an inland boundary that encloses 3265 ha (about 13 square miles) (see Figure 1).
The original Heritage Coast designation was based on landscape quality, but was revised in 1992 to
include flora and fauna (terrestrial, littoral and marine) and heritage features of architectural, historical
and archaeological interest, as well as environmental quality (e.g. water quality).
The first Management Plan for Flamborough Headland Heritage Coast was published in 1989;
however, since this was published many significant changes have taken place. There is a growing
realisation and acceptance that the economy, health, housing, education, and the environment cannot
be viewed in isolation to each other. A different approach is therefore being adopted which can
balance economic, social and environmental goals to make wise choices for the longer term. This is
sustainable development and it is fundamentally about creating a better quality of life for everyone.
The most current management strategy for the Heritage Coast was published in 2002 and outlines the
objectives and priorities for sustainable development on the headland. Over the past few years this
strategy has become inactive due to having no dedicated project officer to oversee its implementation.
2.3
The rich historic value and varied natural beauty of the Heritage Coast has been recognised by the
Management Plan, with actions and policies from the strategy incorporated within this reviewed Plan.
2.7
Competent and relevant competent authorities responsible for the site
Regulation 3 states that any Competent Authority having functions relevant to marine conservation are
legally bound to exercise them to secure compliance with the requirements of the Habitats Directive.
The term ‘Competent Authority’ includes any Minister, government department, public or statutory
undertaker, public body of any person holding a public office exercising legislative powers, whether on
land or at sea.
The term ‘Relevant Authority’ identifies the specific Competent Authority which has powers or
functions which have, or could have, an impact on the marine environment within, or adjacent to, a
European Marine Site. The Relevant Authorities form the management group for the site and have
statutory responsibilities under the regulations. Table 2 lists the Relevant Authorities for the
Flamborough Head European Marine Site.
These organisations are all equal members of the Flamborough Head SAC Management Group, which
elects a Chair on an annual basis. This group has no delegated powers, as it is purely a representative
body to involve all Relevant Authorities in the ongoing management of the SAC. Each relevant
authority has to undertake its powers and duties with respect to the Habitats Directive and will need to
act accordingly on an individual basis, or in association with other Relevant/ Competent Authorities
when multiple consents are required, to ensure its plans and actions are consistent with this
Management Plan.
2.8
English Nature’s Regulation 33(2) advice to fulfil the Conservation (Natural
Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994
Under regulation 33(2) of The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994, Natural
England, formally English Nature (see note below), have a duty to advise other Relevant Authorities
as to (a) the conservation objectives and (b) any operations which may cause deterioration of natural
habitats or the habitats of species, or disturbance of species for the Flamborough Head European
Marine Site. They have done this by producing a stand-alone document with conservation objectives,
for each feature of the site, with advice on operations that may cause deterioration and disturbance.
The Regulation 33 package is designed to help Relevant and Competent Authorities, who have
responsibilities to implement the Habitats Directive, to:
• Understand the international importance of the site, underlying physical processes and the
ecological requirements of the habitats and species involved;
• Develop a management scheme to ensure that the ecological requirements of the site’s interest
features are met; and
• Set the standards against which the condition of the site’s interest features can be determined and
compliance monitoring undertaken to establish whether they are in favourable condition.
In addition, the Regulation 33 package will provide a basis to inform the scope and nature of
‘appropriate assessment’ required in relation to plans and projects, for further information please refer
to Section 2.9.
The Regulation 33 advice is not replaced by this Management Plan, but should be used as a starting
point for developing such plans and work in conjunction with each other. For further information refer
to the Regulation 33 advice package, Annex IV.
2.4
NOTE: On 2 October 2006 English Nature, the Rural Development Service and parts of the
Landscape Access and Recreation functions of the Countryside Agency merged to form a new
body called Natural England. However, policies and regulations previously written by English
Nature are still valid until they are formally adopted by Natural England.
2.9
Activities requiring consents and permissions -Plans and Projects
Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive states: “Any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site but likely
to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects,
shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of the site's
conservation objectives. In the light of the conclusions of the assessment of the implications for the site
and subject to the provisions of paragraph 4, the competent national authorities shall agree to the plan
or project only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the site
concerned and, if appropriate, after having obtained the opinion of the general public.” Under the
Habitats Regulations, any new activities within a European Marine Site that require permission from a
Competent Authority (including those authorities listed as relevant authorities) constitutes a plan or
project as they have statutory functions to make decisions on applications for consents, authorisations,
licences and permissions as governed by statue. The term “plan or project” is not defined in the
Directive, or its implementing legislation in England and Wales. In guidance provided by European
Commission on the provisions of Article 6 the term “project” is given a broad definition. Drawing on
the definition of project in Article 1(1) of Directive 85/337/EEC, the term project not only includes “the
execution of construction works or of other installations or schemes” but also “other interventions in
the natural surroundings and landscape including those involving the extraction of mineral
resources”. Therefore the advice concludes that the term “project” is not only limited to physical
construction, but also that “a significant intensification of agriculture which threatens to damage or
destroy the semi natural character of a site may be covered”. The guidance concludes that the term
“project” should be given a wide interpretation “to include both construction works and other
interventions in the natural environment” 1 .
2.9.1
Likely significant effect 2
If the proposed development is not directly connected with or necessary to site management, the
decision-taker must determine whether the proposal is likely to have a significant effect 3 on a
European Marine Site. The decision on whether an appropriate assessment is necessary should be
made on a precautionary basis. An appropriate assessment is required where there is a probability or a
risk that the plan or project will have significant effects on a site. This is in line with the ruling of the
European Court of Justice in Case C-127/02 (the Waddenzee Judgment) which said “any plan or
project not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site is to be subject to an
appropriate assessment of its implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives if it
cannot be excluded, on the basis of objective information, that it will have a significant effect on that
site, either individually or in combination with other plans or projects”.
The decision-taker should consider whether the effect of the proposal on the site, either individually
or in combination with other projects 4 , is likely to be significant in terms of the conservation
objectives for which the site was classified. The European Commission has also issued guidance,
which local planning authorities may wish to consider 5 .
1
Defra 2004
Taken from ODPM Circular 06/2005 – Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – Statutory
Obligations and Their Impact Within the Planning System
3
ibid. Regulation 48(1)(a)
4
ibid. Regulation 48(1)(a)
5
“Managing Natura 2000” April 2000
2
2.5
It is important that the likelihood of a significant effect is assessed in respect of each interest feature
for which the site is classified and for each designation where a site is classified under more than one
international obligation. Planning authorities should ensure that the assessment takes into account the
full range of Ramsar interests for which the site has been listed and their vulnerability to any effects
of the proposed development 6 . Natural England will advise on a case-by-case basis 7 .
In considering the combined effects with other proposals it will normally be appropriate to take
account of outstanding consents that are not fully implemented, ongoing activities or operations that
are subject to continuing regulation (such as discharge consents or abstraction licences) and other
proposals that are subject to a current application for any kind of authorisation, permission, licence or
other consent. Thus, the assessment is not confined to proposals that require planning permission, but
includes all relevant plans and projects.
2.9.2
The Appropriate Assessment 8
If the decision-taker concludes that a proposed development (not directly connected with or necessary
to the management of the site) is likely to significantly affect a European Site, they must make an
appropriate assessment of the implications of the proposal for the site in view of the site’s
conservation objectives 9 . These relate to each of the interest features for which the site was classified
and will be provided in more detail by Natural England, which should be consulted for the purposes
of the assessment 10 . The scope and content of an appropriate assessment will depend on the nature,
location, duration and scale of the proposed project and the interest features of the relevant site. It is
important that an appropriate assessment is made in respect of each interest feature for which the site
is classified; and for each designation where the site is classified under more than one international
obligation. Natural England will advise on a case-by-case basis. The decision-taker can require the
applicant to provide such information as may reasonably be required to undertake the assessment 11 .
In the Waddenzee judgement 12 , the European Court of Justice ruled that an appropriate assessment
implies that all the aspects of the plan or project, which can, by themselves or in combination with
other plans and projects, affect the site’s conservation objectives must be identified in light of the best
scientific knowledge in the field.
As part of the assessment process, the decision-taker may consult the general public 13 . It is for the
decision-taker to decide whether publicity and consultation in addition to that required under the
planning or other regulatory procedures should be undertaken and could consider consulting
organisations that may have relevant information expertise, such as the Environment Agency, County
Wildlife Trusts, Herpetological Conservation Trust, Plantlife, RSPB or The Butterfly Conservation
Society. Where plan or project may affect sites which are close to, or which straddle local authority
boundaries, the relevant local planning authorities should liaise with each other 14 .
Figure 2, on pages 2.12 and 2.13 summaries the stages leading from the proposal of a new plan or
project through preliminary assessment, test for significance, and appropriate assessment. The stages at
which a decision regarding the proposal can be made are described.
6
In May 2005, in England, there were 70 Ramsar sites covering over 377,000 hectares. Of these, only 3 were
completely outside the Natura 2000 network of sites. The remaining 67 were either coincident with or substantially
overlapping SPAs or SACs. The Government does not envisage that the proportion of Ramsar sites outside the Natura 2000
network is likely to change substantially in the light of planned revisions to both site networks.
7
See also the Good Practice Guide accompanying PPS9
8
Taken from ODPM Circular 06/2005 – Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – Statutory
Obligations and Their Impact Within the Planning System
9
Regulation 48(1) The Habitats Regulations 1994
10
ibid. Regulation 48(3)
11
ibid. Regulation 48(2)
12
ECJ Case C-127/02
13
Regulation 48(4) The Habitats Regulations 1994.
2.6
Further Information:
Further detailed guidance on appropriate assessments is available in ‘ODPM Circular 06/2005 –
Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – Statutory Obligations and Their
Impact Within the Planning System’.
Alternatively contact Natural England for information.
2.10
Process by which the plan was reviewed
The Flamborough Head European Marine Site covers a total area of 64km2, covering three different
local authority areas, East Riding of Yorkshire, Scarborough Borough Council and North Yorkshire
County Council. The later two covering only a small section of the site, with approximately 80% falling
into the area of East Riding. For this reason all the consultation through the review took place within
Flamborough village (see Figure 2).
Whilst the plan sets out a series of actions for the future management of the Flamborough Head
European Marine Site, this plan was not reviewed in isolation. It adopts a wide-ranging approach to
management and takes into account current thinking in coastal management, including Integrated
Coastal Zone Management (ICZM), the Ecosystem Approach and sustainable development, and
drawing on experience from other management plans and initiatives, including Shoreline Management
Plans and Local Development Frameworks. It is important to see how the plan fits into the wider
management of the coast, so objectives and policies can work along side each other, whilst bringing
together stakeholders on a local level to inform, support and implement these policies (see Table 3).
This process of involving stakeholders in the review process was conducted using the principle of
‘shared decision making’ where key decisions are not made until there has been an opportunity to
discuss them and agree solutions. As a result local communities and stakeholders played a key role in
defining a shared management vision for Flamborough Head and the objectives and actions required to
implement this. Increased stakeholder involvement improves the Management Plan in many ways, not
only does it increase the level of awareness of the importance of Flamborough Head but it also
improves decision making by helping management to reflect conditions on the ground and
understanding potential areas of conflict. To ensure all those with an interest in the area could
participate in the review a series of three workshops were held (see Section 2.10.1). The Management
Group have also agreed the following broad objectives to inform management in the area and to
facilitate public involvement:
• To encourage dialogue and communication between various organisations in coastal management;
• To encourage stakeholder involvement in the Management Plan;
• To consult with user groups and local people as appropriate on the activities and management
issues that may affect them.
2.10.1 Facilitated workshops
Lawrence Jones Walters, Natural England.
To fulfil the above objectives stakeholders
were invited to take part in facilitated
workshops. These workshops involved
bringing together a group of stakeholders from
different interest groups and organisations,
with representatives present from the Relevant
Authorities. The group met to discuss and
agree policies to issues that were raised during
the consultation period and to agree
management priorities. The workshops were
also used as an opportunity for us to inform
the local users of the site about the
conservation objectives and status of the area,
Discussions taking place at one of the three workshops.
2.7
with additional background information provided in the form of a leaflet as a result of the first
workshop.
2.10.2 Role of the Flamborough Head Maritime Forum advisory group
The Flamborough Head Maritime Forum provides a focus for stakeholder involvement in the
management of the Flamborough Head European Marine Site and is open to all stakeholders not present
on the Management Group. Previously a number of topic groups were set up involving representatives
from a range of organisations and bodies to address specific issues. In addition to these topic groups a
Heritage Coast Steering group provided an effective forum for a number of years. This group has since
lapsed.
At this time the Flamborough Head Maritime Forum is the only group at Flamborough actively
involved in discussions on the management of the Natural Environment. Its membership consists of
representatives from a range of interests, as a result of an open invitation to its establishment meeting.
The Forum is independently chaired and where representatives have not been able to attend all
meetings, all relevant information is disseminated.
The role of the advisory group is as follows:
•
To represent the interests of the users of the site within the development of the
management plan;
•
To represent the conservation interests in the ongoing management of the site;
•
To act as a forum for general discussion of issues relevant to the group;
•
To advise the management group as necessary regarding issues relating to the
site;
•
To report back to other groups within each area of interest.
The forum has been consulted throughout the review and has played an important role in providing
direction as to how to take the plan forward. It is hoped that those stakeholders who attended the
workshops will now attend the forum and continue to contribute and be involved in the
implementation of the new polices and actions. It was proposed during the review that the remit of the
Flamborough Head Forum be expanded to fit with the remit of the revised and combined
Flamborough Head European Marine Site Management Scheme and Heritage Coast Strategy.
2.10.3 Issues raised and proposed solution
Issues raised during the workshops have been addressed through projects (Section 7) or have been
incorporated into the action plan (Section 5).
2.10.4 Concerns of Stakeholders
Lawrence Jones Walters, Natural England.
During the workshops stakeholders raised
the following activities as a potential
concern. All of which are considered as plan
or projects and if proposed would be
considered alone or in combination under
Regulation 48 or Regulation 19 of the
Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.)
Regulations 1994, the activities raised were:
•
•
•
•
Marine aggregate development
Offshore gas and oil terminals
Facilitated discussions at the first workshop in January.
Housing
Expansion of holiday parks and cottages
2.8
•
•
•
Wind farms
Developments in wave power
The impact of increased access on foreshore communities
Further Information:
Further detailed guidance on appropriate assessments is available in ‘ODPM Circular 06/2005 –
Government Circular: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation – Statutory Obligations and Their
Impact Within the Planning System’.
Alternatively contact Natural England for information.
2.9
Table 2: Relevant Authorities
Type of authority
Roles and responsibilities relevant to the European Marine Site
Area Covered
Bridlington Harbour
Commissioners
Harbour authority
Bridlington Harbour
East Riding of
Yorkshire Council
Unitary planning authority (including planning, recreation, coastal protection,
management of foreshores, council harbours and launch sites)
East Riding of Yorkshire down to mean low water
Environment Agency
Regulatory authority and non-departmental public body established under Environment England & Wales out to 3 nautical miles for consents and 6 nautical miles for fisheries.
Act 1995. Seven main functions; flood defence, water resources, pollution control,
fisheries, navigation, recreation and conservation. Duty to assess implications for
European Site, review existing consents and carry out appropriate assessments
Natural England
Statutory nature conservation body for England. Advises government and implements
statutory nature conservation duties including European duties on behalf of
government. With a duty to provide advice on conservation objectives and operations
for European Marine Sites and provide advice to relevant and competent authorities
and the public.
Out to 12 nautical mile territorial limits
On October 2 2006, English Nature, the landscape, access and recreation elements of the Countryside Agency, and the environmental land management functions of the Rural Development
Service, formed the new integrated agency, known as Natural England.
North Landing Harbour Harbour authority
Commissioners
North Landing
North Eastern Sea
Fisheries Committee
Seaward to 6 nautical miles from the low water mark from the River Tyne to Donna
Nook.
Fisheries regulation, enforcement and marine environmental protection.
North Yorkshire County County planning authority, granting of planning permission
Council
County of North Yorkshire (excluding Scarborough) down to mean low water
Scarborough Borough
Council
Local planning authority (including planning, recreation, coastal protection Scarborough Borough down to low mean water
management of foreshores, council harbours and launch sites)
Trinity House
Lighthouse Service
Safety and navigation at sea for sea areas of England, Wales and Channel Isles
Out to 200 miles
Yorkshire Water
Services Ltd.
Water and sewerage undertaker
Yorkshire region
2.10
Table 3: Plans and guidance relevant to the Flamborough Head Management Plan
Coastal Management
European
National
Conservation Management
Shoreline Management
Catchment Planning
Land Use Planning
Minerals Planning
Other Relevant Plans
EC Directives Habitats Directive, Birds Directive and the Water Framework Directive
The Town and Country
Planning Act 1990
Policy guidence such as Policy Guidelines for the coast, byelaw powers for the coast
Our Coasts and Seas: making space for people, industry and wildife - English Nature
Coastal Policy Guidelines
Regional/
Strategic
Maritime State of Nature
SMP Guidance (DEFRA)
Report for England: Getting on
an even keel - English Nature
Environment Agency
Guidelines
English Nature Maritime
NECAG SMP 2 (River Tyne
Natural Area Profile (Saltburn
to Bridlington)
to Flamborough Head)
Catchment flood
management plans
English Nature Maritime
Natural Area Profile
(Bridlington to Skegness)
HECAG SMP (Flamborough
Head to Donna Nook)
Planning Policy Guidance
Notes and Planning Policy
Statements
Mineral Planning Guidance
(MPG1)
Relevant Planning Policy
Guidance notes such as PP15
and PP21
PPG 20: Coastal Planning
Regional Planning Guidance
RPG12 - to be supeceded by
Regional Spatial Strategy
North Yorkshire County
North
Yorkshire County Council
Regional Spatial Strategy *
Hull and East Riding of
Yorkshire Joint
Waste/Minerals Plan *
Council Mineral Local Plan *
Joint
Structure Plan for Hull and
East Riding (Due 2007) *
Local
East Riding ICZM Plan
North Eastern Sea Fisheries
Flamborough Headland
Performance Plan
Scarborough Borough Local
Plan (to be replaced by the
LDF) *
Hertitage Coast Management
Strategy
East Riding of Yorkshire Local
Plan (to be replaced by the
LDF) *
North Yorkshire County
Council/Scarborough Borough
Council Joint Oil Pollution
Scheme
East Riding of Yorkshire
Council Oil Pollution
Contingency Plan
Bridlington Harbour
Commissioners Pollution
Contingency Plan
DEFRA
ICZM
NECAG
Department of Environment, food and Rural Affairs
Integrated Coastal Zone Management
North East Coastal Authorities Group
EC
HECAG
SMP
European Commission
LDF
Humber Estuary Coastal Authorities Group
*
Shoreline Management Plan
PPG
Local Development Framework
Statutory Plans
Planning Policy Guidance
2.11
Figure 2: Guidance for Competent Authorities applying the Habitats regulations to Plans and Projects
First stage – Preliminary Assessment
Do the Habitats Regulations apply and who will act as the lead authority?
Preliminary assessment by Competent Authorities
Is the plan or project in or near the European Marine Site?
Are there other competent authorities involved? If yes then
select a lead authority
Competent authorities are recommended to seek advice
from Natural England or Defra at this first stage
Second Stage – Assess significant effects
Consider whether the plan or project is likely to have significant effect on the European marine site either alone
or in combination with other projects or plans
Competent Authority consider if the project or plan
likely to have a significant effect
Undertake initial assessment. This will address the
following questions: -
Competent authorities may consult
public and expert opinion during
second and third stages
Is the activity necessary for management of the site
for nature conservation?
What effects (excluding trivial or inconsequential) can be reasonably predicted
from the project/plan that may affect the conservation objectives of the site
(See Regulation 33 advice package)
The scope of additional information may
be discussed with Natural England and the
other competent authorities
Are there site interest features that may be sensitive to
the operations associated with the
If effects or combinations of effects are
trivial or inconsequential the project may be
approved at this point
Could the interest features be exposed to the
operations? (See regulation 33 Advice package)
What is the scale or magnitude of the effects?
Is a more thorough assessment necessary?
Competent authorities may consult
public and expert opinion during
second and third stages
The scope of additional information
may be discussed with Natural
England and the other competent
authorities involved
Conduct public consultation when necessary
Seek additional information from applicant and consider alternatives
Having taken the questions and activities above into account it is
then possible to assess if the activity is likely to have a significant
affect on the integrity of the site?
No
Yes
If the project will not significantly affect the integrity
of the site it may be approved
If the activity is thought likely to significantly affect
the integrity of the site, proceed to the
Third Stage = Appropriate Assessment
2.12
Third Stage – Appropriate Assessment
Can it be established that the plan or project will not affect the European marine site?
Appropriate assessment by competent authority.
If more than one competent authority involved,
select lead authority
Natural England must be consulted during the
course of the assessment, but it is the duty of the
competent authority to undertake the assessment
Identify effects of proposals
If more than one competent authority involved,
select lead authority
Determine the extent of which impacts can be
avoided, for example: Can the location or process be changed?
Can conditions be applied?
Can the activity be modified?
Can monitoring be included in order to detect
changes before there are any adverse effects on
the integrity of the site?
Are there adverse affects remaining either to the
interest features or overall integrity of the site?
No
Competent authorities may approve the proposal
subject to any conditions agreed. Natural
England must be informed of any decisions
Yes
Continue to seek advice from Natural England and
include Defra European Wildlife Directive
Further consideration
Are there alternative solutions?
Yes
No
These will need to be appropriately assessed
before authorisation can be given
Are there reasons of overriding national public
interest?
No
Do not authorise
Yes
Inform secretary of state and all competent
authorities involved
Secretary of state must secure compensation
measures for European marine site
Adapted from the Berkshire and North Northumberland EMS Management Scheme and the Wash and
Norfolk Coast EMS Management Scheme.
2.13
3.0
Reasons for designation and site description
This section describes the wildlife, geological, landscape and heritage importance of
Flamborough Head in more detail
3.1
General Description
The site is characterised by 16km of high chalk
cliffs, rising to 135m at Bempton cliffs, with
over 200 sea caves and numerous stack and arch
formations. Geographically Flamborough Head
lies between two North Sea water bodies. This
boundary is known as the Flamborough front.
The presence of this front means the area can
support a wide range of marine species, some of
which are at either their southern or northern
limit of distribution in the North Sea.
3.2
Flamborough Head SAC
Flamborough Head represents the most northerly outcrop of chalk in the UK. The site contains nearly
9% of the European coastal chalk exposure found. Flamborough Head qualifies as a SAC for the
following Annex I habitats, as listed in the EU Habitats Directive:
•
•
Reefs
Submerged or partly submerged sea caves;
which constitute the European Marine Site and;
•
Vegetated sea cliffs of the Atlantic and Baltic coasts;
which constitute the adjacent European coastal features of interest.
3.2.1
Reefs
Flamborough Head chalk reefs are of international importance due to the rock type, their
biogeographic position and the influence of tides/waves/currents on reef topography and community
structure. The only two other similar SAC sites are Thanet, Kent, and Isle of Wight.
3.1
Robbie Fisher, Natural England.
The Regulation 33(2) advice for the
Flamborough Head European Marine Site states
that the adjacent European coastal interests
might be affected by activities taking place
within, or adjacent to the European Marine Site.
This is because there are ecological and natural
process links that contribute to the favourable
condition of the sites interest features. This,
therefore, is the reason for combining the marine
and coastal interest features in this single
Bempton Cliffs, RSPB Reserve, Flamborough.
management plan. However, the management
options available to the relevant authorities on
the Management Group for the Flamborough Head European Marine Site will differ slightly to those
for the adjacent coastal interests because of the legislative framework that exists to conserve these
different areas. For further information on the advice given in relation to site management, please
refer to the Regulation 33 advice package, Annex IV.
The chalk reefs at Flamborough Head comprise horizontal ledges, vertical walls, broken rock and
boulder fields, which extend from the intertidal rocky shores up to 6 km offshore into waters 30 m or
more in depth. These are not coral reefs like those found in the Great Barrier Reef or the Red Sea, but
a temperate ecosystem with a diverse wildlife associated with rock habitat which includes attached
seaweeds, including kelp, and invertebrates such as sponges, sea firs, sea squirts, sea mats and
molluscs. Usually associated with this ‘living turf’ on the seabed is a range of mobile animals,
including starfish, crabs, lobsters and fish.
The chalk reefs at Flamborough Head are also important, since specialist communities of lichens,
seaweeds and invertebrates unique to chalk are found at the site. In addition, geological differences
between the chalk on the north and south of the headland increase the variety of habitats and hence
biodiversity, through the presence of features such as gullies, outcrops, cobble fields, boulders and
rock pools.
The three main reef habitats at Flamborough Head are:
1
Rocky shores: Exposed northeastern shores from North Cliffs to Flamborough Head, for
invertebrate species, hardy seaweeds and rockpools, and more sheltered southern shores from
Flamborough Head to Sewerby rocks, for seaweeds and
invertebrates.
Source, Natural England.
2
Kelp habitats: Kelp extends around the
Headland, Laminaria hyperborea forest nearshore
between Bempton Cliffs and south-east of the Head off
Cattlemere and Laminaria saccharina with red algal
undergrowth in nearshore from Flamborough Head to
Sewerby steps.
Elizabeth Wood.
Kelp beds found around the Headland at Flamborough.
Myxilla Incrustans, one of the many sponges
found around Flamborough Head.
3
Sub tidal faunal turf (animal dominated
submerged rock): Nearshore waters on the north side
characterised by extensive stepped scars dissected to form
overhangs, outcrops and gullies. South side characterised by
stepped bedrock terraces which grade into patches of cobbles
and boulders. In deeper waters east of the headland, sponges,
erect hydroids and horse mussel beds are attached to the
bedrock.
A detailed map of the habitat types found around Flamborough Head can be seen in Figure 3 (page
3.5).
3.2.2
Sea caves
Robbie Fisher, Natural England.
The sea caves at Flamborough Head are
internationally important because of the large
number and wide range of cave habitats, and for the
species they support. They are the most extensive
chalk caves in the UK. This is due to the geology of
the harder chalk on the north and eastern sides of the
headland. Some of the caves are partly submerged at
all stages of the tide, others dry out during low water
and some lie above the high water mark but are
heavily influenced by wave splash and salt spray
The rocky shore and sea caves of Thornwick Bay, Flamborough.
3.2
from the sea. The chalk rock also facilitates the attachment of specialist encrusting and filamentous
lichen/algal communities. There are over 200 sea caves, the largest caves known to extend for more
than 50m from their entrance on the coast, with a high proportion found on the north facing cliffs.
Good sites for sea caves: North Cliff to Flamborough Head display variety of cave sizes, exposure to
waves and height on shore. Distribution of communities is in response to these factors. Caves at the
eastern end of the headland are particularly noted for being rich in sublittoral species, such as the
chalk boring yellow sponge Clionia celata.
3.2.3
Vegetated sea cliffs
The vegetated sea cliffs of Flamborough Head are internationally important because the cliff-top
vegetation is characterised by both a maritime influence, and by the calcareous influence of the chalk
underlying the surface and neutral boulder clay. Thus, sea cliff species such as thrift and sea plantain
grow alongside herbaceous species more typical of chalk grassland such as kidney vetch. Where the
undercliff has slipped and is flushed by calcareous run-off, northern marsh orchid and grass of
Parnassus may be found with saltmarsh species, such as common saltmarsh-grass, sea arrowgrass and
sea-milkwort. Common reeds with associated freshwater marsh species also form significant stands in
flushed cliff areas.
Good sites for plants on vegetated sea cliffs: Coastal slopes extend from Speeton, in the north,
around the headland to Sewerby, in the south.
3.3
Flamborough Head and Bempton SPA
Flamborough Head and Bempton Cliffs qualifies as a SPA under Article 4.2 of the EU Birds Directive
in that it:
•
•
Regularly supports internationally important populations of the following
migratory species; kittiwake Rissa tridactyla;
Regularly supports an internationally important seabird assemblage; nationally
important populations of guillemot Uria aalge, razorbill Alca torda and puffin
Fratercula arctica;
The area was classified as a SPA in March 1993. The boundaries of the Flamborough Head and
Bempton Cliffs SPA are illustrated in Figure 1 and the distribution of substrate types within and
around the SPA are mapped in Figure 3.
3.3.1 Importance of internationally important populations of regularly occurring Annex 1
species
Flamborough Head and Bempton SPA hold the largest kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla) colony in UK, with
an average of 44,000 pairs between 2000-2004, accounting for 12% of the UK population.
The habitat that exists at Bempton is ideal for nesting kittiwakes largely because of the structure of
bedding planes, which make the site a popular area for these migratory species.
Productivity of successfully fledged kittiwake has been increasing for the past two seasons, with
previous research showing poor breeding productivity, thought to be due to food availability. 2006
monitoring is indicating an average of 1 fledging per occupied nest, a significant increase compared to
recent years (see Table 4).
3.3
Table 4: Kittiwake productivity monitoring 1995 to 2006.
1995
0.93
1996
No
count
1997
0.44
1998
0.87
1999
1.34
2000
1.28
2001
1.07
2002
0.76
2003
0.25
2004
0.19
2005
0.62
2006
0.82
* Figures represent the number of successfully fledged birds per occupied nest site.
Importance of the internationally important seabird assemblage and nationally
important populations
Paul Glendell, Natural England.
3.3.2
Flamborough Head and Bempton Cliffs SPA support international and
nationally important populations of guillemot (Uria aalge), razorbill
(Alca torda) and puffin (Fratercula arctica), the ledges, nooks and
crannies found amongst the chalk cliff, making ideal nesting sites for
both puffin and razorbill.
45,000 individual guillemots were recorded during 2004, accounting for
2.9% of the British and Irish population. With 8,300 individual razorbill
and 2,500 individual breeding puffins.
Puffin.
3.3.3
Bird Interests
Good sites for nesting seabirds: Bempton
Cliffs (Also an RSPB Nature Reserve)
3.4
Trevor Charlton, RSPB Bempton..
The chalk cliffs (65-160M years old) are
unique and internationally important for
geology and geomorphology. The geological
exposure of chalk cliff, also its height (up to
126m) is rare in Eastern Britain, so too is its
mainland gannet (Morus bassanus) colony.
The gannetry at Bempton Cliffs, is England’s
only and Britain’s largest mainland nesting
site for gannet, with 3,490 breeding pairs in
2005, accounting for 1.3% of the British and
Irish population.
A Gannet nesting at Bempton Cliffs, Flamborough.
Geological interests
Flamborough Head is of international geological importance with an exposed sequence of rocks,
ranging from the Upper Jurassic through to the late Cretaceous, which is capped throughout by
Pleistocene Boulder Clays. The site is therefore important for the understanding of Jurassic,
Cretaceous and, the much later, Pleistocene stratigraphy, palaeontology and palaeoenvironments. It is
also an important coastal geomorphological site with chalk cliffs uniquely lying within the wave
climate of the North Sea Basin. The geology is a key factor underpinning the internationally important
nature conservation interest of the site.
Good sites for geological interest: Buried Pleistocene cliff and ‘raised shingle beach’ at Sewerby,
Howardian-Flamborough Fault Belt in Selwicks Bay and the marl and flint bands within Thornwick
Bay.
For more information on the interest features contained within the Flamborough Head
European Marine Site, the conservation objectives and the advice given to Relevant and
Competent Authorities on the management implications of the conservation objectives, please
refer to English Nature’s Regulation 33 Advice Package, Annex IV.
3.4
3.5
4.0
Site management and associated policies
This section describes the current site management and defines policies that the
Management Group have adopted to ensure that activities are carried out in a manner
that is compatible with the sustainable management of Flamborough Head
4.1
Introduction
The Flamborough Head European Marine Site has qualified for designation against the background of
uses at the time it was selected. It follows that human use of the site is broadly compatible with the
maintenance of the conservation objectives; however evaluating the following is essential for the
development of the Management Plan:
•
•
•
•
Existing site use against English Natures’ conservation objectives and operations advice;
Assessment of existing site management (regulation, voluntary agreements and unregulated use);
Identifying gaps in management;
Development and introduction of management measures and polices.
In fulfilment of the above points, a comprehensive list of activities that have the potential to harm the
wildlife features in and around the European Marine Site have been assessed to create a concise
inventory of human activity. It should be noted that the assessment of the effects of different human
activities has been based on currently available information. It is required that two sorts of monitoring
be carried out, compliance monitoring, are the Management Plans actions being implemented and is
everyone abiding by the plan, and secondly condition monitoring to assess the condition of the site
(see Section 5.3 and 5.3.3 for monitoring plan). As more information is gathered about the features of
the site it is anticipated that the advice on effects will change, this in turn will lead to a review of the
management measures.
4.2
Format
Each human activity has been evaluated and placed into an appropriate subheading (see Section
Index). Each section includes a general introduction and background to the activity and current
management measures. All the issues contained within the Plan reflect the views and concerns of
local stakeholders. These issues were raised through the consultation period, workshops and forum
meetings. Everyone with an interest in the marine environment was invited to participate and have his
or her say. Polices define the course of action to be taken by Relevant and Competent Authorities
tackling the issues raised. Whilst the points from the Future Management section will be carried
forward to the Action Plan (Section 5), which identifies which authority will carry out the action and
by when.
For each activity there is an activity assessment table. Within this table each activity has been
evaluated and the factors, which may occur from that activity and have an affect on the wildlife
feature of the site, have been tabulated.
4.3
Layout of activity assessment table
To understand each human activity as it is carried out in the site it is necessary to read across the table
(not down) through the following sequence:
Activity
Location
Intensity
Seasonal/Temporal
Existing management
4.1
Potential impact on features of nature conservation interest (based on English Natures Regulation 33
advice)
Effects
Section Index
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
4.14
4.15
Collection
Energy industries
Fishing
Industrial activity and consented discharges to sea
Land management
Mineral extraction
Planning and development
Water quality
Recreation and tourism
Research and education
Shipping, navigation and deposits at sea
Shoreline management
4.2
4.4
Collection
4.4.1
Background Information
The intertidal areas around the headland have historically been subject to the collection of species for
food and bait. The chalk cliffs are geologically internationally important and fossils are regularly
exposed and subject to collection. Eggs of guillemot and other seabirds were traditionally collected by
‘climmers’ from the cliffs of Speeton and Bempton up until the 1950's.
4.4.2
Management
Common rights exist and local acts apply to people collecting a variety of materials for either
building/consumption/bait/other purposes. There is no single body, which regulates these activities,
and management is usually achieved through voluntary agreements and codes of conduct that are
promoted through local or national representatives.
4.4.3
Management for nature conservation
North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee, enforce byelaws prohibiting the collection of any species, for
which a minimum size has been prescribed as bait. With nesting seabirds on the cliffs at Flamborough
Head and Bempton being protected under the Birds Act 1954, making it illegal to collect eggs from
their nests.
4.4.4
Future Management
Current levels of collection appear to show no significant effect on the interest features of the site.
However, there is little or no information on ‘operational limits’ of activities within the site.
Therefore, the precautionary approach should be adopted when looking to develop new
recreational/educational opportunities or expanding on existing activities, either within or adjacent to
the site. Relevant Authorities should attempt to further quantify site usage over the next reporting
period. Users of the European Site should be made aware of the potential effect of their activities on
the interest features and/or encouraged to participate in user-based monitoring.
4.4.5
Issues and Management Plan policies
Issue: Removal of fossils from the headland
Concerns were raised about the removal of fossils from the headland by visitors to be kept as
souvenirs. There is also possible risk to geological interest features resulting from amateur and
professional fossil collectors, however this risk is at present un-quantified.
In so far as each Relevant Authority is able to and where practicable, the following policies will be
adopted: Policies
Seek to identify opportunities for raising public awareness of its geological resource significance and
why it should be protected. Promote fossil collection code of conduct amongst geological collectors.
Manage bait collection through voluntary agreements and code of conduct.
4.3
Factors arising from activity
Activity & location
Intensity
Seasonal/
Temporal
Existing
management
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Effects
Bait collectingShores from
Sewerby to
Flamborough Head
Low/Med
No/Yes
NESFC minimum
landing size byelaws
for species prescribed
as bait
Disturbance to rocky
shore communities if
activity is intensive/
continuous
Not
assessed
Fossil collectingSewerby/South
cliffs
Low/Med
No/Yes
None
Disturbance to chalk cliff
algal/lichen/ vegetation
communities
Not
assessed
4.4
4.5
Energy Industries
4.5.1
Offshore from Flamborough Head, extensive areas of the North Sea are subject to hydrocarbon
extraction. Historically prospecting licences have been granted to companies exploring the marine
area adjacent to Flamborough Head. In 1991 Perenco UK Ltd carried out seismic acquisition and
exploration drilling in licence Block 41/30. Seismic surveys were also carried out in 1993 and 1995,
which also included the foreshore on the southern side of the headland. Other licences awarded for
Blocks 41/24 & 25 and 42/26 have now been surrendered. There are currently no renewable energy,
wind/wave developments in or adjacent to the site.
4.5.2
Management
Land based development associated with both onshore and offshore energy industries are covered by
the Town and Country Planning system and associated Development Plans.
Licences for exploration and development and consents for production are awarded by the
Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). The Department for Communities and Local Government
(DCLG) gives consents for the location of offshore installations.
Gas and oil pipelines are also subject to the Food and Environment Protection Act 1985 Part II (as
amended) assessment procedures administered by DEFRA.
4.5.3
The Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) is consulted on nature conservation matters
outside 12 nautical miles (nm).
The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 apply to all designated sites to 200 nm.
4.5.4
Future Management
Current levels of oil and gas exploitation are located a significant distance offshore. Flamborough
Head is not currently considered suitable for large-scale renewable energy developments. Any
developments associated with these industries may be subject to the Habitats Regulations.
4.5.5
In so far as each Relevant Authority is able to and where practicable, the following policy will be
adopted; however there is no direct issues related to energy industries.
Policy
Apply the Habitats Directive to all proposed developments.
4.5
Activity & location
Intensity
Seasonal/
Temporal
Existing
management
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Effects
Gas storage projects
investigation/develo
pment and operation
(various locations)
Low/med
Yes/Yes
Assess potential
impact of proposed
developments on
SAC/SPA/SSSI and
fisheries
Impact on coastal
process, accidental,
disturbance, accidental
contamination.
Not
assessed
Oil and gas
investigation (e.g.
41/24a)
Low/med
Yes/Yes
Assess potential
impact of proposed
developments on
SAC/SPA/SSSI,
fisheries and
landscape/seascape
Accidental spills,
disturbance, habitat loss,
impact on landscape and
seascape.
Not
assessed
4.6
4.6
Fisheries
4.6.1
The coastal waters encompassed within Flamborough Head SAC and the associated North Sea region
supports a high level of commercial and recreational fishing activity. The earliest comprehensive
records of fishing effort held by the North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee date back to the 1890’s.
However, historic records and archaeological evidence clearly indicate fishing activity throughout
human presence along the coast.
The distinctive headland at Flamborough marks the location of a North Sea oceanographic front
between distinct water bodies to the north and south, the resulting mixing processes enhances
biological productivity with associated benefits for commercial stocks and wildlife. The unique rock
outcrop of Flamborough Head creates strong tidal regimes, which also influence fish stocks and
fishing activities. On a relatively exposed coastline the headland acts as a windbreak and is able to
provide effective shelter for sea areas, ports and launch sites depending on meteorological conditions.
The majority of fishing techniques employed within the SAC have altered significantly with
technological developments, whilst others have remained relatively unchanged over time. Major
changes in the stock levels of target species and demand by markets have also influenced fishing
practices to a great extent. For example the herring fishery was once key to the local economy with
high levels of fishing effort in the 19th and up to the mid 20th century, mow there are only limited
North Sea quotas which are held by Scottish producer organisations.
At present the range of commercial and recreational fishing methods undertaken can be broadly
divided into four distinct categories: potting, trawling, netting and lines. The range of marine species
exploited is broad and reflects the diverse marine ecosystem in the shallow coastal waters of the North
Sea. Flamborough Head SAC contains a mixed fishery, consequently a range of fishing techniques
and management tools are employed. Aquaculture is not currently viable due to the hydrographic
regime of the site and lack of information on potential resources of cultured species.
There is a substantial social and economic value attached to the fisheries within the SAC. In addition
to the economic value and direct income from landings, it has been calculated that a single
commercial fisherman provides direct employment for up to four individuals in associated industries.
Further clear economic and social benefits can be linked to tourism and education.
4.6.2
Management
Statutory management of local fisheries now within the designated site has a history dating back to
the late 19th century when the local North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee was formed. Although no
known records exist it is quite possible that voluntary management arrangements predate legislation
and took the form of local agreements between those operating in the fishery.
Three statutory authorities undertake the present management of commercial and recreational
fisheries within the SAC: Marine Fisheries Agency (MFA), North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee
(NESFC) and the Environment Agency (EA). The regulatory framework is derived from European,
national and local legislation.
Fisheries regulations are extremely wide ranging within the SAC, although no regulations exist that
solely apply to Flamborough Head SAC waters. Currently NESFC are carrying out an appropriate
assessment of the trawl fishery at Flamborough, which may result in changes in management within
the site.
This is in addition to the regulatory regime that exists at the site, which is due to its location inside the
NESFC District, British coastal and Region 2, ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the
4.7
Sea) Division IVb (Central North Sea). The site is currently protected from potentially damaging
fishing activities in a number of ways, these undoubtedly have indirect nature conservation benefits,
including:
• Restrictions on vessel length and power
• Minimum landing sizes (MLS)
• Fisheries quotas
• A prohibition of dredges within 3 nm of baselines
The current regulations controlling fisheries within the Flamborough Head SAC are not contained
within SAC management document due to their volume and complexity, and the need for regular
revision of legislation. Essentially European technical measures and local NESFC byelaws represent
the most commonly used and effective fisheries management measures in force within the SAC.
Details of these regulations can be obtained from local MFA or Sea Fisheries Committee offices.
4.6.3
Sea Fisheries Committee's are empowered by the Sea Fisheries Act 1967 (as amended). They exercise
these powers through a number of Statutory Instruments, which enable the introduction of legislation
for the purpose of protecting the marine environment from fisheries related activities, or taking into
account conservation issues when creating byelaws. All these Acts have come into existence during
the past decade: Sea Fisheries (Wildlife Conservation Act) 1992, Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.)
Regulations 1994 and the Environment Act 1995.
4.6.4
Future Management
There is limited information available regarding the effect of existing fishing activities on specific
interest features within the site. Current scientific evidence indicates that those fishing activities most
likely to affect the SAC's features occur at low frequencies or outside the site boundaries. These
potentially disturbing activities include the use of towed gear, such as scallop dredging, beam trawling
and otter trawls. The NESFC have undertaken a programme to monitor and map fishing effort within
the SAC site. This will be cross-referenced with site condition monitoring and the appropriate
assessment for district trawling permits to assess any detrimental effects. The management of the site
will be reviewed on this basis.
Future fisheries management in the site will also take into account that all licensed fisheries are now
considered to be plans and projects, under Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive. Therefore where a
fishing activity is subject to consent, authorisation or other permission undertaken by a competent
authority, if such an authorisation is not directly connected to, or necessary for the conservation
management of a European Site, and is likely to have a significant effect thereon, an appropriate
assessment will be carried out (see Section 2.9 for more details).
4.6.5
Issue: Fisheries Legislation
There is a need to make sure all relevant user groups are aware of fisheries legislation.
adopted: Policy
Opportunities shall be taken to make more people aware of fisheries legislation and how it might
affect their use of the marine environment.
4.8
Issue: Promotion of a sustainable of fishing industry
Fishing has played an important part in the history and development of the area, particularly for
Flamborough village and North and South Landing, forming part of the local heritage. Traditional
fishing activities should continue to thrive, with the history of the local fishery enhanced by easier
access to local people and visitors.
Fishing is also an important part of the local economy and it is important that it is sustained in order to
continue to provide employment.
adopted: Policies
Promote and support sustainable fishing activity, which is consistent with conservation objectives
for the site.
Support the development of new sustainable fisheries where appropriate stocks exist.
Issue: Potential impact of fishing techniques on marine wildlife
There are some concerns that some fishing techniques may damage the chalk reefs and associated
marine habitats and the ecosystem of Flamborough Head as a whole.
adopted: Policies
Assess impacts of fisheries on habitats and species.
Encourage environmentally sensitive fishing methods.
Apply Habitat Regulations to ensure that all fishing methods are compliant with the European
Marine Site management objectives.
Ensure close working between fishermen, fisheries managers and nature conservation bodies.
Activity &
location
PottingWithin SAC site
and surrounding
sea areas.
Concentrated
within 1 nm
Intensity
High
Seasonal/
Temporal
Yes/Yes
Existing management
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Commercial vessels
require fishing licences
from Defra and Shellfish
Permits from the
NESFC (vessel length
restriction), Commercial
& non-commercial
vessels subject to
minimum landing size
(MLS) on crustacea
species, lobster 'V' notch
regulations.
Potential disturbance to
reef features from
anchors*, ropes and pots.
Potential biological
disturbance by removal
of stock and alteration of
predator prey
interactions. See Reg 33
advice.
Effects
Not
assessed
4.9
Activity &
location
Intensity
NettingWithin SAC site
and surrounding
sea areas
Med
Trawling- Within
SAC site and
surrounding sea
areas. Mainly
outside 1 nm
Med/High
Dredging- outside
of 3 nm from
shore
Seasonal/
Temporal
Yes/Yes
Existing management
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Effects
Commercial vessels
from Defra and Shellfish
Permits from NESFC
(vessel length
restriction) if removing
shellfish. Quota
controls. All operators
subject to MLS on
finfish, restrictions on
net size and fishing
areas according to
season.
reef features from
anchors* and ropes.
Potential entanglement
of feeding seabirds,
especially auks and
biological disturbance.
Not
assessed
Yes/Yes
Commercial vessels
from Defra, Trawl
Permits (vessel length
restriction in the
majority of the SAC)
and quota controls. All
operators MLS on
finfish/ crustacea
restrictions on trawl
structure and net size.
Potential disturbance and
abrasion to reef habitats
and species. May favour
communities more
tolerant to physical
disturbance, due to resuspension of sediment
and smothering.
Potential biological
disturbance by removal
of stock and alteration of
predator prey
interactions. See Reg 33
advice, Annex IV.
Assessment
underway
(appropriate
assessment)
Low
Yes/Yes
Commercial vessels
from Defra, dredging
not permitted within the
majority of the SAC
under byelaw XXIII,
seasonal restrictions and
technical restrictions on
permitted areas, target
species MLS.
Significant and likely
impact to benthic reef
habitats and abrasion of
features, promotion of
communities tolerant of
physical disturbance.
Not
assessed –
outside site
Lining- Within
SAC site and
surrounding sea
areas. Mainly on
hard ground N of
headland
Low
Yes/Yes
Commercial vessels
from Defra, quota
controls. MLS on
finfish.
reef features from
anchors* and ropes.
Not
assessed
Sea angling- From
the shore and
boats, within SAC
site and adjacent
sea areas,
including
nearshore, subject
to seasonal
conditions
Low /Med
Yes/Yes
Commercial angling
boats require permission
from the appropriate
authority (Maritime and
Coastguard Agency) to
carry the public. All
angling MLS on finfish.
Potential cumulative
impact on reef features
from anchors. Biological
disturbance.
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
* During the revision of the Management Plan the potential impacts of anchors on the site was discussed and it
was felt that with the current usage patterns this impact was not likely to be significant.
4.10
4.7
Industrial activity and consented discharges to sea
4.7.1
Industry is not a major land use in the immediate area of the SAC/SPA. The only industrial discharge
into the European Site is from the Muntons plc maltings factory, which has been established for over
80 years. A new reed bed treatment system was commissioned in October 2005, designed to improve
effluent quality and the discharge regime has also been improved, with the outlet always submerged
and no pumping taking place within an hour of the predicted low water.
Smaller wastewater discharges occur within the site, whilst there are two larger sewage treatment
facilities adjacent to the site within Bridlington and Filey bays (please see Figure 4). The public
sewerage system and sewage treatment facilities in the area are under the control of Yorkshire Water
Services plc. Under the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (UWWTD) Yorkshire Water are
carrying out a programme of improvements to their sewerage and treatment plants on the east coast.
4.7.2
Management
The regulatory regime for dealing with water quality issues affecting coastal waters in this country is
largely driven by European legislation. Whilst European Directives relating to water quality issues are
largely driven by public health issues, such as Bathing Waters and Shellfish Waters. Other important
international agreements to which the UK is committed include The Convention on the Protection of
the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic, 1992 (OSPAR Convention) and the North Sea
Conferences.
The principal regulatory body responsible for industrial and wastewater discharges is the Environment
Agency. Regulation is achieved through the application of discharge consent licensing and monitoring
of outfalls. A statutory consultation is also required by the Water Resources Act 1991. Discharges are
currently under review by the Environment Agency and will seek to address the cumulative impact of
consented operations upon the European Marine Site interest features.
The Environment Agency’s corporate strategy for 2006 to 2011 outlines their plans and objectives in
more detail, for the improvement of inland and coastal waters, in the Yorkshire and Humber
government region.
4.7.3
The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994, Regulations 33, 48 & 50 which make
provision for using English Nature’s advice package for European Marine Sites, undertaking a review
of consents both within and adjacent to European Sites and assessing all plans and projects, as defined
in the Regulations.
4.7.4
Future Management
Discharges are currently consented by the Environment Agency and are undergoing a period of
review, under Regulation 24 of the Habitat Regulation 1994. The review will also seek to address the
cumulative impact of consented operations upon the European Marine Site interest features. The
result of this work will be reported in 2007/2008.
4.7.5
The Management Group has adopted the following policy, however there is no direct issues related to
industrial activity and consented discharges to sea.
4.11
adopted: Policies
Work to ensure that consented discharges around Flamborough conform to all appropriate standards.
Use the best available technique not entailing excessive costs (BATNEEC) for treating discharges.
Activity &
location
OutfallsSewerby cliffs
and adjacent
Bridlington/
Filey bays
Intensity
Med
Seasonal/
Temporal
No/Yes
Existing
management
Discharge consents
with EA sampling.
Possible effect on feature(s)
Potential smothering, changes
in nutrients, input of
contaminants and light
reduction through increased
turbidity.
Effects
Assessment
underway
(review of
consents).
4.12
4.13
4.8
Land Management
4.8.1
Agriculture is the dominant land use in areas on the headland adjacent to the vegetated sea cliffs. The
surface boulder clay with underlying chalk makes the area, in the main, both productive and easily
worked. Agricultural holdings, across the whole headland, vary in size from large (up to about 200 ha)
blocks to relatively small (7 ha or less) and fragmented parcels of land (Venes 1996).
The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) or Yorkshire Wildlife Trust (YWT), or the local
authority manages a number of areas of land adjacent to the cliff tops for both visitor enjoyment and
wildlife.
4.8.2
Management
Changes in agricultural practice, led by changing economic factors, have contributed to a decline in
biodiversity and quality of habitats. The majority of agricultural land is under cultivation for arable
crops, the remainder being used as (seasonal) pasture.
The principal regulatory body associated with farming activities is Department for Environment Food
and Rural Affairs (Defra). Integrated pollution control in the area, in particular in relation to any
discharges into drainage channels, is the responsibility of the Environment Agency. The Environment
Agency’s corporate strategy for 2006 to 2011 outlines their plans and objectives in more detail, for the
improvement of land management, reducing resources and waste in the Yorkshire and Humber
government region.
4.8.3
Several areas are currently farmed under the Countryside Stewardship Scheme (CSS), which is
administered through Natural England. The RSPB Bempton Cliffs Nature Reserve manages cliff top
grassland habitats through the Stewardship Scheme. A 1.5-mile stretch of coastal slope and adjacent
farmland has also been acquired by the YWT as a nature reserve and is managed under a CSS
agreement.
The Environmental Stewardship Scheme (ESS) developed through the success of the CSS has now
replaced the CSS; the three entry levels for applying for the ESS are as follows:
1. Entry level one is open to all those farming in England;
2. Organic entry level stewardship, available to those wishing to farm organically;
3. Higher-level stewardship provides more resources in exchange for more significant
environmental benefits in high priority situations and areas.
Natural England works with owners and occupiers of land containing SSSIs to provide advice to
ensure that activities undertaken are consistent with the conservation objectives of the site.
4.8.4
Future Management
Financial incentives aimed at encouraging lower intensity agriculture, including reversion of coastal
strips to managed semi-natural grassland, offer opportunities to further conserve the internationally
important vegetated sea cliffs in partnership with the farming community. This can be achieved
through Environmental Stewardship.
A commitment has also been made by the UK Biodiversity Group in their national Action Plan to
maintaining maritime cliff and slopes, a priority habitat, in a natural state. A specific habitat action
plan has also been prepared.
4.14
4.8.5
adopted, however there are no direct issues related to land management.
Policies
To maintain a viable agricultural economy that delivers maximum environmental benefit whilst
contributing to the farming economy.
Encourage close working between farming community, Natural England and other stakeholders.
Activity &
location
Agricultural
practice- farmland
adjacent to cliff
tops
Intensity
Med
Seasonal/
Temporal
Yes/No
Existing
management
Use of fertilisers and
pesticides, based on
individual farm
holdings.
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Effects
Intensive farming and/or
Observed but
run-off can alter sea cliff and not assessed
littoral chalk plant
communities.
Changing drainage patterns
can alter sea cliff
communities.
4.15
4.9
Mineral Extraction
4.9.1
Background information
Filey Bay, north of the European Marine Site was subject to the commercial extraction of sand from
the beach up until the late 1960s. The activity stopped after it was shown to be the cause of cliff
erosion. In the early 1990s an application for a licence to prospect for sand and gravel over a large
area of seabed, including Filey Bay, was withdrawn because of concerns expressed about the possible
impacts of marine aggregate dredging. Historically, Dulcey Dock at the base of Speeton cliffs was
quarried for chalk up until the middle of the last century.
4.9.2
Management
The seabed between the Minimum Low Water Mark (MLWM) and the limit of Territorial Waters in
most cases forms part of the Crown Estates. All mineral rights, except coal, oil and gas, are vested in
the Crown under the management of the Crown Estate Commissioners. It licences marine minerals
dredging on a commercial basis but will only issue such licences if the Government first issues a
favourable “Government View” (GV) on the environmental acceptability of the proposed dredging
operations. The Crown Estate currently licence marine minerals dredging, but consultation is
currently ongoing which proposes that future licensing would be undertaken by the Secretary of State
for Communities and Local Government (DCLG).
4.9.3
Part IV (Regulations 47 to 85) of The Conservation (Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 cover plans and
projects in relation to European Sites. The advice given under Regulation 33(2) of The Conservation
(Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 for the Flamborough Head European Marine Site describe the
sensitivity and vulnerability of marine interest features to the effects of operations. Proposals for
aggregate dredging in adjacent marine areas should take into account presence of a European Marine
Site when looking at the possible impacts, which may include smothering, increased turbidity and
physical removal.
The SSSI designation, for its botanical interests, seabirds and geology, identifies Potentially
Damaging Operations for which legal owners/occupiers must obtain consent from Natural England if
they, or third parties, wish to undertake such activities within the designated area.
4.9.4
Future Management
The extraction of non-living resources within or adjacent to the Flamborough Head European Marine
Site could have a significant effect on the interest features and integrity of the site. DCLG should be
aware of the presence and ecological importance of the Flamborough Head European Marine Site
when considering applications for either prospecting or production licences.
4.9.5
Issue: The extraction of non-living resources
The extraction of non-living resources within or adjacent to the Flamborough Head European Marine
Site could have a significant effect on the interest features and integrity of the site.
adopted: -
4.16
Policy
Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government should be aware of the presence and
ecological importance of the Flamborough Head European Marine Site when considering applications
for either prospecting or production licences.
Activity &
location
Intensity
Seasonal/
Temporal
Existing
management
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Effects
No current activity
4.17
4.10
Planning and Development – Designated Sites and Landscape Protection
4.10.1 Background Information
The coastline forming the inner boundary of the European Site is divided administratively between
North Yorkshire and the East Riding of Yorkshire. The northern part is primarily of an undeveloped
nature. Agricultural land extends close to the top of the coastal slope, which is itself largely
unmanaged. The coastal zone to the north of the SAC boundary has however been the subject of more
intensive development, primarily for holiday accommodation, which extends sporadically up the coast
towards the small tourist resort of Filey.
The area of Flamborough Head within the East Riding of Yorkshire includes the chalk cliffs at
Bempton and Buckton. The area is largely agricultural in character with areas of prominent tourism
development, especially around the village of Flamborough.
4.10.2 Management
Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) for Yorkshire and Humberside is contained in RPG12 that was
published in 1996. Work is currently underway on the replacement of the RPG, with The Regional
Spatial Strategy (RSS) to be adopted early 2007. The East Riding of Yorkshire Council is currently
working on the Local Development Framework (LDF) this plan sits under the RSS and defines
development control policy for the council area. Both plans have statutory status.
Previously, the East Riding of Yorkshire was covered by the Humberside County Structure Plan
(adopted in 1987 with amendments in 1993). Local Development Frameworks (LDF) will replace
these structure plans, as a result of the new planning system (Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act,
2004). The core strategy for the LDF will be taken from the policies of the Joint Structure Plan for
Kingston upon Hull and the East Riding of Yorkshire, due 2007. General land use policies are
contained in the East Yorkshire Borough Wide Local Plan (adopted 1997).
In North Yorkshire the strategic planning policy, as with the East Riding of Yorkshire was contained
in a County Structure Plan that was originally approved in 1980. However as a result of the Planning
and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 the County Council is no longer required to prepare a County
Structure Plan, so instead a Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) will replace it. Until this replacement, the
County Structure Plan will continue to form part of the statutory development plan for the North
Yorkshire County. Within Scarborough Borough, local planning policy is currently contained in the
Scarborough Borough Local Plan (adopted 1999) but again work is ongoing to replace this with a
Local Development Framework.
Normal planning regulations only extend as far as the low water mark. Beyond this point new
development on the seabed is subject to the statutory consents of Defra (FEPA licence), DETR (Coast
Protection Act consent) and/or DETR (Transport and Works Act 1992 procedures). The Crown Estate
will also be involved in their capacity as landowner.
4.10.3 Management for nature conservation
The draft RSS requires development plans to identify and protect areas important to the conservation
of biodiversity and protection of landscape. All the Development Plans for the area recognise its
special qualities due to the designations that exist at Flamborough Head. The Structure Plan, to be
replaced by the LDF gives priority to the conservation of the Flamborough Head Heritage. The
Scarborough Borough Local Plan contains a specific policy (E9) for International Nature
Conservation Sites such as this, which is restrictive of new development that is not necessary to the
management of the site or will have any adverse effects. The terrestrial part of the SAC/SPA also falls
within the Flamborough Headland Heritage Coast and the wider locally designated Coastal Zone.
Policy E2 requires special attention to be given to protecting the nature conservation interest, wildlife
4.18
value and marine environment of the Heritage Coast. The Minerals Local Plan also states that
proposals, which affect European Sites, will be subject to the most rigorous examination, while the
Waste Local Plan states that proposals, which affect European Sites, will only be permitted where
there is no unacceptable effect on the nature conservation interest.
The East Yorkshire Borough Wide Local Plan includes policy EN8 which states that in relation to
internationally designated sites proposals will only be permitted where they are directly connected
with or necessary to the management of the site or together with other proposals they will not
adversely affect the integrity of the site. Policy CZ1 refers to the Heritage Coast where proposals will
only be permitted where they are compatible with the objective of retaining an unspoilt coastline.
The Habitats Regulations 1994, part IV, set out the procedures for dealing with plans and projects
with respect to European Sites.
4.10.4 Future management
It is considered that the planning regime that is in place is largely adequate to handle any development
pressures likely to occur in or near the European Site, and to provide adequate protection for both
landscape and the internationally important nature conservation resource at Flamborough Head.
However, during the implementation and consultation of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local
Development Frameworks, it should be ensured that specific protection is incorporated for the
Flamborough Head SAC. Local authorities are also required to undertake a review of all extant
consents under the Habitats Regulations.
4.10.5 Issues and Management Plan policies
adopted, however there are no direct issues related to planning and development.
Policies
Ensure that coastal landscape protection policies are contained within the Regional Spatial Strategy,
East Riding of Yorkshire Local Development Framework and Scarborough Borough Council Local
Development Framework.
To work with developers to maximise opportunities for landscape improvement in new developments.
To encourage the retention / enhancement of historic structures.
Activity &
location
Coastal
development
Intensity
Low
Seasonal/
Temporal
Usually
permanent
Existing
management
Planning consent
from LPA for
development above
LWM.
Defra/DCLG main
regulators of
development below
HWM.
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Increased activity.
Physical disturbance.
Physical loss.
Effects
None
recorded
4.19
4.11
Water Quality
The water quality of the sea around the coast of the UK is dependent on many variables, both natural
(weather and ocean currents) and those due to human influences (primarily the dumping and
discharge of sewage). Healthy, clean waters are essential to the shellfish/fish industry, and similarly to
local tourism and recreation that rely on the use of these bathing waters around Flamborough Head.
There are five sites in the area measured for bathing water quality, including Bridlington North and
South sands, Flamborough North and South Landing, and Danes Dyke. In England & Wales the
quality of bathing waters is monitored by the Environment Agency (EA) against standards laid down
in the bathing water regulations (SI1991/1597), which comes from the EC Bathing Water Directive
(76/160/EEC).
4.11.2 Management
The EA are responsible for assessing the quality of bathing beaches to ensure compliance with the
strict European standards.
4.11.3 Management of nature conservation
Bathing waters are monitored and the level of coliform bacteria and faecal streptococci are counted,
which indicate traces of human sewage. Sampling begins two weeks before the start of the bathing
season (15 May to the 30 September) and 20 weekly samples are taken from each bathing water site.
Yorkshire Water (YW) ensures that their assets, which could impact on bathing water quality, operate
as they should to ensure that this happens an active monitoring program is in place including bacteria
monitoring, before and after the bathing season.
4.11.4 Future Management
Improvements in bathing water quality are largely due to investment by water companies. The EA
have been working with them to improve the quality of their sewage discharges. These improvements
should continue to be implemented.
The EA and YW also work closely with each other, sharing information on bacteria and faecal
streptococci monitoring. The EA are responsible to the 20 samples per season at the designated sites
that they share with YW and the respective councils on a weekly basis.
Water quality at Flamborough, North Landing has in the past and more recently been prone to poor
bathing water quality, work is currently underway by the EA with the help of the Improving Coastal
and Recreational Waters Project (ICREW), to confirm if the poorer bacterial quality is due to human
or avian influences.
adopted, however there are no direct issues related to water quality.
4.20
Policies
Opportunities should be taken to improve water quality at all the recreational sites around the
headland in order that these sites comply with EC Bathing Water Directives, Water Framework
Directive and OSPAR standards.
Ensure that up to date water quality information is easily assessable at all bathing beaches.
Activity &
location
Intensity
Seasonal/
Temporal
Existing
management
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Effects
No current
activity
4.21
4.12
Recreation and Tourism
The natural and cultural heritage of the site, recognised by its Heritage Coast status, make the area a
popular site for a range of interests and hence an economically important area for recreation and
tourism. Both the cliff top and the marine areas are extensively used. Most activities such as bathing,
watercraft and scuba diving, show a marked seasonality, although some activities attract users all year
round, such as walking and bird watching. A number of private businesses relating to the recreation
and tourism sector, such as golf clubs and caravan parks, also own or manage land in or adjacent to
the European Site.
4.12.2 Management
Local authorities and harbour authorities may use byelaws to regulate recreation, particularly in
relation to safety. However, national representatives of various interest groups, sports and
conservation organisations, largely promote management in relation to these activities and their effect
on both the environment and other users, through voluntary codes. The RSPB contribute to tourism
and visitor management in the area through the implementation of their Reserve Management Plan
covering 5.2 km of cliff top and the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust have a significant stretch of cliff top for
the purposes of managing it as a nature reserve (see 4.8).
Development associated with recreation and tourism is controlled through planning legislation and
guidance notes (see 4.10).
Various organisations have legal responsibility or are involved in initiatives that contribute to the
benefit of the sites environmental and landscape interest, these are for example:
British Marine Industries Federation: Navigate with Nature
British Sub Aqua Club/ Professional Association of Diving Instructors/ Sub Aqua Association: codes
of practice
Defra: Environmental Stewardship Scheme available for land managers
English Nature: Site management statements with legal owner/occupiers of SSSIs, Condition
Assessment of SSSI, SAC and SPA, provision of nature conservation advice to owners and occupiers
Encams: Seaside award schemes for rural and undeveloped coasts
Environment Agency visually inspects litter levels and monitor water quality at North and South
Landing during the period April-September (as per EC Bathing Waters Directive)
Marine Conservation Society: ‘Adopt-a-beach’ scheme, co-ordinated by East Riding of Yorkshire
Council through the Countryside Service
Marine Conservation Society: Seashore code
National Federation of Sea Anglers: codes of conduct
RSPB Bempton Cliffs Reserve Management Plan promotes sustainable visitor enjoyment and wildlife
conservation
Yorkshire Wildlife Trust: Management of Flamborough Head Nature Reserve
Flamborough Community Action Group
East Riding of Yorkshire Council: Management of Local Nature Reserves
Current levels of recreational and tourism related activities need to be assessed in relation to the
condition of the site’s interest features. These internationally important features are also the principal
asset supporting this sector. Information gathering on recreational and tourism activities will also be
important to a variety of organisations involved in seeking to develop this economic sector. The
4.22
Yorkshire Tourist Board has a research department that collects information on visitor numbers and
profiles.
There is little or no information on ‘operational limits’ of activities within the site. Therefore, the
precautionary approach should be adopted when looking to develop new recreational opportunities or
expanding on existing activities, either within or adjacent to the site. It is recommended that relevant
authorities and user groups should attempt to further quantify site usage in partnership over the next
reporting period. A possible way forward is to use the Forum group as a means of alerting the SAC
Management Group to any significant change in trends of usage at the site through an annual meeting.
Users of the European Site should be made aware of the potential effect of their activities on the
interest features and/or encouraged to participate in user-based monitoring. This can be achieved
through supporting and/or promoting the work of national sport representatives. Identifying user
levels will help target resources for the collection of data in particular locations or particular times of
the year. It will also inform the decision-making process when assessing any potential changes that
may be identified as a result of site condition monitoring.
Issue: Marketing of tourism needs to be co-ordinated
There is a need to co-ordinate marketing of the coast for tourism. A strategic approach to marketing
may have benefits to all operators, encouraging sustainable development and improving
communication between local authorities and user groups.
Tourism is an important part of the economy and provides many jobs. One of the government’s aims
through its UK sustainable development strategy is to live within environmental limits whilst
achieving a sustainable economy. With tourism from traditional areas seeming to be on the decline, it
is important that the management plan identifies policies that deliver environmental and social
benefits at the same time, by developing new markets such as ‘green tourism’ e.g. promoting facilities
which enhance opportunities for wildlife and inform people about their environment whilst still
allowing income to flow into the economy.
adopted: Policies
Attract new groups of people to sustain the local economy, and encourage ‘green’ tourism, drawing
more on the areas landscape, wildlife and historic qualities.
Encourage visitors to come outside peak periods, or visit other areas, to draw people away from
‘honey-pot’ areas, such as the lighthouse. This will then control the volume of visitors.
Support diversification schemes that assist with promoting tourism and maintain employment.
Support local community initiatives that initiate small-scale tourism projects, which respect to the
environment and promote local culture and skills.
Recreational and tourism opportunities, consistent with the sites natural and landscape character
should be promoted.
Encourage the development and exploration of access opportunities for as wide a range of the public
as possible.
Link to the Bridlington regeneration plans, encouraging sustainable tourism.
4.23
Issue: Impact of Recreation and Tourism on the natural environment
Concerns were raised that recreation could potentially damage the marine environment. Some clubs
or individuals may be unaware of the sensitivity and importance of the marine wildlife present.
There was also concern that the promotion of tourism around the headland could lead to greater
visitor pressure in the peak season at certain honey-pot locations, such as the lighthouse and Danes
Dyke.
adopted: Policies
Opportunities shall be undertaken to minimise impact on the marine environment from recreation
and/or tourism.
Ensure tourism development and visitor pressure does not damage the assets on which future industry
depends.
Support initiatives that enable wide understanding of the heritage of the area.
Activity &
location
Intensity
Seasonal/
Temporal
Existing
management
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Effects
CanoeingSouth Landing
to Filey Bay
Low
Yes/No
No organised
facilities.
British Canoe Union
nesting seabirds.
Not assessed
Cliff/shore
angling- whole
site
Med
Yes/Yes
RSPB code of
conduct for cliff top
fishing
Entanglement in gear and
discarded gear,
particularly seabirds
Not assessed
Hang/ParaglidingBempton cliffs
Low
Yes/No
None
Disturbance to nesting
seabirds
Not assessed
Powered
aircraftHeadland &
Bempton cliffs
Low
Yes/No
None
breeding seabirds during
nesting season
Not assessed
Personal
watercraft/
motor boatsWhole marine
site
Med
Yes/Yes
None
PWA/BMIF
nesting seabirds.
Cumulative anchor
damage to reefs
Not assessed
SailingWhole marine
site
Low
Yes/No
None
RYA/BMIF
Cumulative anchor
damage to reefs
Not assessed
Scuba divingWhole marine
site
Med
Yes/No
None
BSAC/PADI/SAA
Selective extraction of
species
Not assessed
Walking/
general
recreationCliff tops, shore
access
Med
Yes/Yes
Abrasion/deterioration in
variety of cliff and
intertidal communities
Not assessed
Land management
based on individual
owner/occupiers.
4.24
4.13
Research and Education
The natural and historical assets of both the coastal and marine habitats at Flamborough Head are an
important educational resource. The site is regularly used by a variety of educational establishments
from schools to universities as well as for educational events on an ad hoc basis. Access to the shores
is generally limited to several key areas due to the sheer cliffs and tides. These include Sewerby Steps,
Danes Dyke, South Landing, Selwicks Bay, North Landing, Thornwick Bay and at Reighton Sands.
A number of relevant and competent authorities undertake statutory monitoring, mainly in relation to
public health issues, specific surveys and national programmes. The balance of evidence now points
to human influence in climate change. Over the last 100 years the East Coast of Yorkshire has
experienced a 2-2.5 mm rise in sea level per year, relative to the land levels. In the future global
warming is expected to become more pronounced and so rates of sea level rise are expected to
increase significantly. There is also a view that global warming will lead to an increase in storm
frequency. Climate change can influence marine biota by a combination of direct and indirect effects,
mediated by biotic interactions or marine currents (PMNHS 1999). It is very difficult to estimate what
impact this would have on social and economic sectors. It is possible that changes in sea temperature
(if this occurs) could affect the fish and shellfish stocks (both in a negative and a positive way). The
effects of this on the SAC are uncertain. However, an increase in sea level may lead to increased
erosion and a reduction in the time that the rock platform is exposed at low tide. With changes to
exposure, rocky shore and intertidal sea cave communities might migrate. It is important, therefore,
that the Management Group establishes links with academic institutions to encourage research into
these issues and their potential impact on Flamborough Head.
4.13.2 Management
No formal management identified. No formal co-ordination of research identified. Individual
organisations and establishments organise own work programmes. The RSPB implement operational
limits on groups of visitors to minimise disturbance e.g. school groups are limited to 80 per annum.
Managing climate change is primarily a governmental and global issue. Input to policy is largely
obtained from all agencies, authorities and non-government bodies.
Promote awareness in order that contractors/educational/scientific activities are undertaken in a
manner that takes into account the sensitivity of the internationally important interest features of the
site.
A pragmatic approach should be adopted when balancing the long-term benefits of increased
awareness against any potential effects on the interest features. The internationally important features
are the principal asset supporting this sector and make this an exceptional educational resource.
Relevant authorities should attempt to raise awareness of the site’s importance, wherever possible.
This may be achieved in partnership with the Forum and/or existing initiatives.
Issue: Promotion of wildlife designations and the conservation importance of the area
Concerns were raised that many local people and visitors to the area are vaguely aware of its
designations and the importance of the marine area for conservation. With little public information
4.25
and interpretation of the marine area. It is hoped that by providing more information about the area it
will lead to greater appreciation of the coast and its wildlife features.
adopted: Policies
Seek to identify opportunities for raising public awareness, encouraging a better understanding of the
Headland, Heritage Coast and the marine and terrestrial ecology and issues relevant to their
sustainable management.
Support the production of archaeological and historical interpretation.
Issue: Information Database
A great deal of information exists about the area, through work carried out by relevant authorities,
local groups and organisations and individuals. However a lot of this work goes unrecognised, with
many not fully knowing what information is already available about the area.
adopted: Policies
Co-ordinated educational/research initiatives help achieve effective use of resources.
A system shall be put in place to make the range of information about Flamborough Head easily
accessible to all.
Activity &
location
Intensity
Seasonal/
Temporal
Existing
management
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Effects
Climate change
Low
No/Yes
None identified
Distribution of reef
communities
None
recorded
Educational
activitiesrestricted to
access points
Med
Yes/No
None identified
Physical disturbance to
reef communities
Not assessed
Research and
contract surveys
Low
No/Yes
None identified
Dependent upon scale
and nature of activity
None
recorded
4.26
4.14
Shipping, navigation and deposits at sea
Bridlington is primarily a fishing port, although a significant proportion of its activities relate to the
tourism and recreational sector. The only permanent moorings are within Bridlington harbour, which
is subject to maintenance dredging. Dredge spoil, from maintenance dredging of Bridlington Harbour,
has been disposed of at a site approximately 3 km east of the harbour and 2 km south of Beacon Hill,
for over 20 years. Material accumulates within the harbour as a result of the tidal processes, derived
largely from erosion of the Holderness coast and a very small input from the Gypsey Race. The work
is carried out to ensure that Bridlington Harbour can operate effectively, acting as a major economic
resource for both the fishing and tourism industries in the area.
North Landing has limited facilities for a number of traditional Yorkshire fishing cobles only, whilst
there are Local Authority boat launching sites at Bridlington South Beach, South Landing and Filey,
to the north of Flamborough Head.
A lighthouse and fog station on the Headland serves to warn maritime users about the hazards of this
coastline, whilst a buoy marks the northern end of the Smithic Bank. Aids to navigation are the
responsibility of, and are maintained by, Trinity House Lighthouse Service.
4.14.2 Management
DFT has central responsibility for ports and by the Department for Environment Food and Rural
Affairs (Defra) has responsibility for fishery harbours. Local administration for Bridlington and
Flamborough & North Landing is the responsibility of the Bridlington Harbour Commissioners and
Flamborough & North Landing Harbour Commissioners respectively. The local authority launch sites
are the responsibility of the relevant local authorities. Facilities available include waste reception and
boat maintenance, whilst Bridlington Harbour also operates to an agreed Waste Management Plan,
which is produced under the guidance of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA).
In the event of a wreck in the European Marine Site, Trinity House Lighthouse Service is responsible
for ensuring safe navigation by marking the wreck with a buoy or buoys and/or undertaking wreck
removal or dispersal operations.
An annual consent, issued (Defra), allows the Harbour Commissioners to dispose of up to 20,000
tonnes at the disposal site. Over the last 20 years between 2,080 and 28,160 tonnes disposed of
annually. Disposal of the dredged material takes place all year round, but has traditionally taken place
over the period October to March and only at certain times of the tide. At the time spoil is dumped,
due to the circulation of the water in the bay, the fine material in suspension is initially carried in an
easterly direction, away from the key features of the SAC, with suspended material carried offshore.
The sediment that settles on the seabed does not necessarily follow the same course, moving only
when currents exceed a certain threshold. However, data suggests (Bullen Consultants, 1995) that the
strongest currents in the immediate vicinity of the disposal site are predominately eastward, it is
therefore presumed that the sediment initially moves in the same direction.
With regard to the longer term destination of the material, sediment exchange between Smitic Sands
and Filey Bay has been identified in Shoreline Management Plans for this region, with the tidal gare
(circulation) at Smithic Sands causing sediment accumulations at the sandbank.
The principal regulatory body associated with disposal to the seabed is Defra. Licences are issued
under the Food and Environment Protection Act 1985 Part II (as amended).
4.27
A Waste Management Plan is produced by Bridlington Harbour, which was recently reviewed in
March 2006.
Defra carried out an appropriate assessment of the potential effects of the dredge disposal on the
European Marine Site in 2001. This assessment was supported by CEFAS report AA001. The
assessment concluded that the disposal operations do not have an adverse impact upon the integrity of
the site. As a precautionary measure conditions are attached to the consent to minimise any potential
harmful effects arising from the disposal of the dredged material, these include:
• Parts of the harbour being designated as ‘no dredge’ areas, in view of the amounts of
contaminants that are bound within sediments;
• Samples of dredge spoil are periodically analysed for the presence of contaminants;
• Total annual quantity for disposal at the site is limited to 20,000 tonnes per year
• Defra, CEFAS and Natural England should be notified of any changes to the method of
disposal;
• Continued monitoring of the dredge disposal by Natural England and the Management Group.
The main problems potentially affecting the European Site interest features, and which are associated
with shipping, are often from outside the site. The North Sea is recognised as a ‘Special Area’ under
the international Marpol agreement. However, if the effects of such activities are recorded then
relevant/competent authorities and users should seek to minimise their impact, wherever possible.
Mariners should also be informed where possible about location of Marine Environmental High Risk
Areas (MEHRA’s). 32 locations around the UK coast have been identified as MEHRA’s,
Flamborough Head being one of them. The primary purpose of them is to inform mariners of areas
with high environmental sensitivity where there is a real risk of pollution from shipping.
The inter-relationships between the disposals of dredge spoil; the Smithic bank and adjacent subtidal
faunal turf reef communities are not well understood. Defra have committed to review the
appropriate assessment of the dredge disposal in 2006, this work is currently underway.
adopted, however there are no direct issues related to shipping, navigation and deposits at sea.
Policies
To maintain a viable and cost effective harbour at Bridlington the operation of which is compatible
with the interest features of the European Marine Site.
Harbours and launch sites provide cost-effective services to both fishery and tourism related sectors.
Navigation aids are functioning correctly and well-maintained and inshore waters safe for maritime
users.
4.28
Activity &
location
Intensity
Seasonal/
Temporal
Existing
management
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Effects
Waste disposal- in
European Marine
Site
Low
No/Yes
Waste reception
facilities at launch
sites/harbours
Litter can be ingested
(toxic) or lead to
entanglement, affecting
both seabird and
intertidal communities.
Not
assessed
Accidental
spillageWithin or adjacent
to site
Low
Yes/Yes
Emergency
Contingency Plans
Smothering, toxic
contamination. Effects
dependent upon season
and sensitivity of feature.
Can be
severe.
Dredge spoil
disposal54 05.10N
00 08.00W
Med
Yes/No
Annual FEPA
licence.
Sample monitoring.
‘No dredge’ area.
Potential smothering of
reef communities
Mobilisation of
contaminants i.e. TBT
antifouling
Short-term increased
turbidity
Altered substrate type
Assessed –
No adverse
effect
(2001) to be
reviewed
2006
4.29
4.15
Shoreline management
Flamborough Head projects out into the North Sea and therefore plays an important part in
determining the movement of sediment and the shape of the coast by influencing coastal processes in
the region. Coastal erosion varies along the length of the European Marine Site and adjacent stretches
of coastline. It is dependent on underlying rocks and exposure to wind and wave action. The north
facing cliffs are moderately exposed to wave action whilst the south facing shores are relatively
sheltered. The coastline here recedes comparatively slowly as a series of occasional landslides,
resulting from both wave action to the base of the chalk cliff and surface water lubricating the softer
glacial till (overlying boulder clay) above.
Coast protection structures around the headland are few and isolated. Their main role has been to
stabilise the vegetated cliffs on the southern side. Other man made structures have been built to
improve fishing and lifeboat access at North and South Landing and protect access at Sewerby steps.
The seafront at Bridlington, south of the European Marine Site, is entirely protected by seawalls,
whilst there are no structures to the north in Filey Bay until the resort of Filey.
4.15.2 Management
Shoreline Management Plans (SMPs) provide a strategic framework for the management of coastal
defences for a specified length of coast, for which DEFRA has policy responsibility. Maritime
Authorities involved are identified in the Coast Protection Act 1949.
Flamborough Head is situated at the boundary of two distinct sediment cells and is therefore covered
by two SMPs, although it does not form an absolute boundary to sublittoral drift. Scarborough
Borough Council leads the SMP covering Huntcliffe, in the north, to Flamborough Head, (North
Eastern Coastal Authorities Group Shoreline Management Plan), whilst the Humber Estuary Coastal
Action Group (HECAG) led by the East Riding of Yorkshire covers the area to the south. The SMP
north of Flamborough Head is currently under review. Local authorities predominantly carry out
design, construction, maintenance and operation of defence measures within these two SMPs. The
funding for such works from DEFRA is subject to three criteria being met, one of which is
environmental acceptability.
The preferred strategic coastal defence options highlighted in the two SMPs recognise the importance
of maintaining the natural processes, international conservation importance, and marine and landscape
resources of the site.
SMPs provide the necessary forum for addressing coast protection issues within the area. Although
given that the European Marine Site straddles two SMPs, collaboration between the two groups
should be maintained in order to ensure that the international importance of this site is maintained and
that natural processes are allowed to operate.
4.30
Activity &
location
Intensity
Cliff protection
Low
structures- isolated
Seasonal/
Temporal
No/Yes
Existing
management
Maritime Authority
Possible effect on
feature(s)
Effects
Physical loss of or disruption
to physical processes
affecting, nesting seabird
habitats, vegetated sea cliff
or rocky shore communities.
Isolated loss
(NECAG SMP II
and HECAG SMP
– propose no
additional
defences on
Flamborough
Head)
4.31
5.0
Action Plan for the Flamborough Head European Marine Site
This section details the actions to be undertaken by the relevant authorities to ensure
compliance with the Habitat Regulations over the next 5 years
5.1
Introduction
This section details the actions to be undertaken by the individual relevant authorities, either working
alone or in partnership, to manage the Flamborough Head European Marine Site and adjacent
internationally important coastal interest features.
The Action Plan has been divided into three:
Action Plan to deliver the management measures and objectives (see section 5.3.1)
The contents of this action plan are derived from a consideration of the existing management of the
area (Section 4) in relation to its interest features, English Nature’s Regulation 33 advice package and
public consultation workshops. As far as possible these link to existing activities and plans, e.g. the
Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plan, both to avoid duplication of effort and to emphasise the
linkages that already exist between the relevant authorities. This approach is consistent with the
management objectives for the plan, as set out in English Nature’s Regulation 33 advice package,
Annex IV.
Action plan for the review and revision of the management plan (see Section 5.3.2)
These actions are those that are necessary for the running of the management plan and to support the
process of review.
Action plan for survey and monitoring of the condition of interest features (see Section 5.3.3)
This table lists the survey and monitoring requirements, to abstain whether or not the features are in
favourable condition. The information is based upon the favourable condition tables, as set out in the
Regulation 33 advice package for the Flamborough Head European Marine Site and those for the
internationally important coastal features.
5.2
Action plan structure
Each action plan lists the management actions for the Relevant Authorities and where appropriate,
other partners and sets out a period for undertaking them.
The table is formatted as follows:
Column 1: Management Rationale
The management rationale has been derived from Section 4 and often represents an amalgamation of
different categories of activities. For practical purposes, ‘Activities’ in this Management Plan include
those that are subject to any licences, consents or permissions in addition to those not regulated.
Column 2: Management solutions
Management solutions have been identified for relevant/competent authorities and where appropriate,
other partners. The ‘F List’ (Table 5), indicates the general management approach to be adopted
through identifying the types of response to any factor, appropriate to different circumstances. The
action plan defines more clearly the type of management solution selected.
5.1
Table 5: ‘F list’ assessment of activities and the management approach to be taken
F score
Activity
Management solution
Example
F1
Activity is a natural process.
Surveillance.
Coastal erosion.
F2
There is no known mechanism for the
activity to affect the feature, and no
evidence that it is having an effect.
There is a known mechanism for the
activity to have an effect, but insufficient
information to suggest that it is having a
significant effect at present.
There is evidence of a significant effect but
the activity and/or mechanism is unknown.
Not considered further.
There is evidence to suggest that an
activity is having or could have a
significant effect and the mechanism is
known.
The activity constitutes a plan or project.
Implement management
measures (voluntary or
statutory), with operational limits
as appropriate.
Apply Habitats Regulations and
maintain audit trail of decisions.
These are activities/issues,
which may have been raised
but are not happening on site.
The presence of marine litter
within the site – no evidence to
suggest that it is having a
significant effect at present
Some forms of recreation are
suspected of disturbing EMS
features but little is known on
the effects if the disturbance
and how best to manage the
activities.
The impact of trampling on the
SAC vegetated sea cliffs.
F3
F4
F5
F6
Obtain further information on
activity e.g. location and
intensity, and/or site condition.
Investigative studies/trial
management including
operational limits.
Activities requiring planning
permission or consent
Column 3: Targets and measures
This column details the targets that each relevant/competent authorities and where appropriate, other
partners should be achieving to complete the suggested management solution.
Column 4: Responsibility for action
For each management solution, a number of relevant authorities may be responsible for implementing
it, in addition to other partners. The abbreviations used in the table are listed below:
BAP
BHC
Defra
DFT
DTI
DCLG
EA
EH
ERYC
ESS
FRCA
HECAG
JNCC
LA
LDF
LPA
MCA
MCEU
MFA
NE
Biodiversity Action Plan
Bridlington Harbour Commissioners
Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Department for Transport
Department of Trade and Industry
Department of Communities and Local Government
Environment Agency
English Heritage
East Riding of Yorkshire Council
Environmental Stewardship Scheme
Farming and Rural Conservation Agency
Humber Estuary Coastal Action Group
Joint Nature Conservation Committee
Local Authority
Local Planning Authority
Maritime and Coastguard Agency
Marine Consents and Environmental Unit
Marine Fisheries Agency
Natural England
5.2
NECAG
NESFC
NYCC
SAC Mgt Grp
SBC
SMA
SMP
SNETG
YHA
YWS
YWT
North East Coastal Action Group
North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee
North Yorkshire County Council
Flamborough Head SAC Management Group
Scarborough Borough Council
Sensitive Marine Area
Sustainable Natural Environment Task Group
Yorkshire and Humber Assembly
Yorkshire Water Services
Yorkshire Wildlife Trust
Column 5: Time period
The time period covers the financial years 2006/2007 to 2011/2012. The EU requires that each
Member State report back on the favourable conservation status of its designated habitats and species
every 6 years. This Management Plan indicates the timescales in which these actions are to be
initiated/completed and are consistent with the JNCC’s timescale for reporting back to the EU on
behalf of DCLG.
Key to Action Plan
✔
➜
Represents a benchmark i.e. for which a report should be produced or
time for which action should be completed by.
Indicates that the action is ongoing. The process for dealing with this
activity/ies is explained in Section 5.3.
Key Actions: A number of actions are considered to be key, to the successful delivery of the plan,
these are highlighted in red throughout the action plan table (5.3.1). Those actions highlighted, with
an * have resulted from the completion of the management effectiveness scorecard and are considered
as key to the successful management of the area; see Section 5.3 for more detail.
5.3
Reporting and Reviewing
The Habitats Directive requires the site to be monitored to ensure favourable condition status and to
indicate any changes at the earliest possible stage. Monitoring of the site will continue, more detailed
information can be found within the Regulation 33 advice package, Annex IV.
Relevant Authorities will meet twice a year to discuss any problems and will form the focal point for
assessing all the information that individual Relevant/Competent Authorities may be responsible for
collating on both natural and human factors, which will inform the need for adjusting any future
management decisions within the Management Plan, in consultation with the Flamborough Head
Maritime Forum (see Section 2.10.2). Written reports will be submitted to the management group on a
yearly basis at which point the action plan will be reviewed and its effectiveness assessed, with the
possibility of revisions to the contents.
The purpose of producing a brief written report is to record the progress of implementing the agreed
actions. For Natural England and the Environment Agency the report will also include an update of
research findings and site monitoring.
Every other year, along side the yearly review of the action plan, a management effectiveness
scorecard will be completed. The scorecard is a self-assessment tool and will help the management
group identify which areas are succeeding, whilst addressing management gaps. The scorecard will be
5.3
used to track progress of the EMS over time, the overall objective being to identify actions that could
improve management. The framework of the scorecard is based around the idea that good protected
area management follows these 6 distinct stages: 1. Context – Where are we now, including designation information for the area;
2. Planning – Where do we want to be? Assessment of site design and planning;
3. Inputs – What do we need? Assessment of resources needed to carry out management;
4. Processes – An assessment of the way in which management is conducted;
5. Outputs – An assessment of management programmes and actions;
6. Outcomes – Have the resulted outcomes, achieved the objectives?
The main part of the assessment is a series of questions, all of which fall into one of the above
categories. The scorecard was completed for the first time during the review period and a number of
actions have resulted from this, highlighted in red, with an * in the action plan (5.3.1).
In addition to the annual and biennial reporting on the Action Plan, the Management Plan should be
reviewed, initially, at the end of the next 6 yearly cycle, 2011/2012, to take into account the reporting
on favourable condition to the JNCC and subsequent reporting to EU on favourable conservation
status.
Any future review of the Management Plan will need to take into account amended or new plans and
initiatives, potential changes to site usage through consultation with the Flamborough Head Maritime
Forum and continue to take a more long term approach to management.
Two forms of monitoring which will continue to be put in place by the Management Plan are:
Compliance Monitoring
This is to ensure that all Relevant Authorities are abiding by the management plan. Each Relevant
Authority is responsible for monitoring the activities under their remit, to ensure this happens each
Authority has a number of actions within the action plan, which identifies existing and new
management measures. Relevant Authorities report on all of their actions contained in the action plan
on an annual basis. Such monitoring can identify whether or not there is a need to modify the Action
Plan, making sure the Flamborough Head European Marine Site stays in favourable condition.
Condition Monitoring
Environmental, or condition, monitoring of a number of physical and biological attributes relating to
the European Marine Site has been established, as part of the Regulation 33 advice package. Such
monitoring is needed to help identify any long-term changes at the site that may require action in the
Management Plan or act as a trigger for undertaking further investigative studies.
The detailed monitoring programme for the site can be seen in the action plan.
NOTE: On 2 October 2006 English Nature, the Rural Development Service and parts of the
Landscape Access and Recreation functions of the Countryside Agency merged to form a new
body called Natural England – this change is reflected in the actions attributed to organisations
in the Action Plan.
5.4
5.3.1 Action plan to deliver management measures and objectives
Management rationale
Management solutions
(Activities not in priority)
See ‘F’ list
1. Collection
Quantify the current levels of site
usage and raise awareness of
potential impacts.
2. Energy industries
Currently offshore.
Targets/measures
Implementation
2006/
2007
F3- Obtain baseline information on extent
of and monitor trends for bait collection
from rocky shores.
Report on findings to SAC Mgt Grp.
NESFC lead
Forum
F3- Assess above against reef conservation
objectives and Reg33 advice.
Use condition monitoring and favourable
condition table for rocky shore
communities.
NE
2007/
2008
2008/
2009
2009/
2010
2010/
2011
2011/
2012
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
NE
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
Audit trail of decisions for applications
affecting site to be maintained.
DTI
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
DTI lead
JNCC
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
F3- Obtain baseline information on extent Report on findings to SAC Mgt Grp.
of and monitor trends for fossil collection
from maritime chalk habitat.
NE lead
Forum
F3- Assess above against vegetated sea
cliffs/reef conservation objectives.
condition table for vegetated sea
cliff/rocky shore communities.
F6- Apply Habitats Regs to any new
developments affecting site within 12
nautical miles.
F6- Apply Habitats Regs to any new
developments affecting site outside 12
nautical miles (territorial waters).
F5- Ensure the Emergency planning team
are aware of the Flamborough Head
management plan and understand the
implications of it in relation to their work
Emergency Contingency Plan in event of
pollution incident. Planning team to report
annually of any incidents effecting the
marine site and activities undertaken.
Period
SBC
ERYC Emergency
Planning Team
Inform review of plans of international
importance and of any incidents within
or around the EMS.
ERYC Emergency
Planning Team
5.5
See ‘F’ list
3. Fishing and aquaculture
Use existing baseline information,
where available, to develop an
ongoing monitoring programme in
order to identify any impact on reef
interest features within the site.
Targets/measures
Implementation
Period
2006/
2007
2007/
2008
2008/
2009
2009/
2010
2010/
2011
2011/
2012
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
F3- Continue to monitor changes in fishing
type, e.g. potting, trawling, and intensity in
site based on Report II (Senior, R. 1999),
through patrol vessel sighting records and
use the developed GIS based monitoring
tool to identify the location of potential
impacts on reef interest features.
Use to review ongoing fisheries
management and site condition
requirements. Triennial review of report
to be made available to SAC Mgt Grp.
NESFC
F3- Monitor and record surface markers,
and overlay with the above and digital
habitat information.
Use to inform management decisions to
gain an accurate idea of static gear effort.
NESFC
objectives and Reg 33 advice.
condition table for reef communities.
NE
F6- Assess the potential impact of demersal
trawling.
Establish a baseline design-monitoring
programme.
NE, NESFC and
trawling industry
of and monitor trends for sea angling from
licensed boats.
Report on findings to SAC Mgt Grp.
BHC lead Forum
NE
F4- Investigate viability of environmentally
sensitive and sustainable fishing methods.
Report on findings of the MSC Lobster
Conservation Project to SAC Mgt Grp.
NESFC
Defra/NE
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
F6- Apply Habitats Regs to all licensed
Fisheries.
to be maintained.
NESFC and Defra
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
* F3- Establish fisheries liaison group to
discuss fisheries issues at Flamborough
Head
Establish Group and host meetings when
required
NESFC/NE and
fisheries
stakeholders
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
✔
✔
✔
✔
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
✔
5.6
See ‘F’ list
Targets/measures
Implementation
Period
2006/
2007
2007/
2008
2008/
2009
2009/
2010
2010/
2011
2011/
2012
4. Industrial activity and
consented discharges
As a competent authority the EA will
comply with the EU Birds &
Habitats Directives in planning and
carrying out all of its regulatory and
operational activities.
F6- Review of existing consents as under
the Habitats Regs.
Timescale set for process.
EA
➜
➜
✔
➜➜
➜➜
➜✔
F6- Application of the Habitats Regs to
plans and projects requiring Agency
authorisation.
affecting site to be maintained. Draft
procedures and guidelines set out in
policy number 183-01 version 5.
EA
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
5. Land management
Work with landowners/ managers to
safeguard adjacent internationally
important coastal habitats and
monitor effects of activities in order
to determine they are consistent with
conservation objectives for vegetated
sea cliffs.
F5- Use land management agreements and
site condition assessments to meet statutory
targets.
Meet all SSSI owner/occupiers 2 times in
6 years. Assess site condition against
conservation objectives.
NE
➜
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
F5-Use land management agreements and
Report to SAC Mgt Grp on extent of
monitoring to meet non-statutory targets e.g. positive land management through CSS
CSS and ESS and maritime cliff & slope
and ESS for coastal strip.
priority BAP habitat.
NE
* F3 Establish land management liaison
group to assess feasibility of progressing
integrated approach to the use of Agrienvironment Schemes at Flamborough Head
Establish group and progress actions:
•
Ecosystem based scheme
targeting
•
Close working with farmers
and interest parties
NE
F5- EA to Implement the Corporate
Strategy for Yorkshire and Humberside
2006-2011 to minimise effects of diffuse
sources of pollution from agricultural
practices.
Report to SAC Mgt Grp
EA
➜
➜
✔
➜
F3- Produce a comprehensive site condition
assessment of the terrestrial environment,
to assess the impact of access on the
Headland in line with conservation
objectives.
Report findings to SAC Mgt Grp
NE
➜
➜
➜
✔
5.7
See ‘F’ list
Targets/measures
Implementation
Period
2006/
2007
2007/
2008
2008/
2009
2009/
2010
2010/
2011
2011/
2012
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
of and monitor trends for quad biking
around the Headland.
Carry out joint working to reduce
impacts of motorised vehicles at Danes
Dyke. Report findings to SAC Mgt Grp
Forum, ERYC –
Countryside
Access Team,
local police.
F3- Assess above against conservation
objectives and Habitats Regs.
condition table for sites interest features.
NE
F2- Joint working with partners to protect
and enhance Biodiversity Action Plan
habitats at Flamborough Head
Meet with East Riding SNETG and
Scarborough BAP groups.
ERYC –
Sustainable
development
Team/ER NETC/
Scarborough BAP
groups
6. Mineral extraction
F6- Apply Habitats Regs to plan or project
affecting site.
DCLG (Crown
Estate)
➜
➜
➜
7. Planning and development
As competent authorities the LPAs
will comply with the EU Birds &
Habitats Directives in planning and
carrying out all of their regulatory
and operational activities.
F6- Review of extant consents as under the
Habitats Regs.
Timescale indicated for process.
LPAs
➜
➜
✔
F6- Application of the Habitats Regs to
plans and projects requiring consent.
LPAs
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
F5- Use management plan to inform The
Yorkshire and Humber Regional Spatial
Strategy, to replace the Regional Planning
Guidance Note 12.
Inform policies affecting international
sites. YHA have acknowledged the EMS
in the RSS, to be completed 2007/2008
and reviewed in 10 years.
YHA
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
F5- Use management plan to inform SBC
and ERYC Local Development Framework.
Inform policies affecting international
sites.
SBC and ERYC
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
5. Land management,
Continued
5.8
See ‘F’ list
8. Water Quality
9. Recreation and tourism
Quantify the current levels of site
usage and assess against
conservation objectives. Raise
awareness of potential impacts,
consistent with SMA and Heritage
coast objectives.
10. Research and education
Raise awareness of site’s importance
to visiting research and educational
groups.
Targets/measures
Implementation
Period
2006/
2007
2007/
2008
2008/
2009
2009/
2010
2010/
2011
2011/
2012
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
F3 – Management measures currently
applied:
•
Assess water quality in compliance
with the Bathing Waters Directive.
20 samples per season to be taken at the
designated sites.
EA
F3 – Obtain baseline information on the
level of nutrient enrichment.
Report findings to SAC Mgt Grp
EA and NE lead
YW offer support
of and monitor trends for water-based
activities affecting site.
Report on findings to SAC Mgt Grp/
Forum.
LAs lead
BHC/ Forum
NE
of and monitor trends for land-based
activities affecting site.
Report on findings to SAC Mgt
Grp/Forum.
LAs lead Forum
F3- Assess above against site conservation
NE
* F1- Identify user groups to develop
collaborative monitoring programmes which
also support production of user-based
‘codes of conduct’.
Report on findings to SAC Mgt
Grp/Forum.
SAC Mgt Grp/
Forum
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
* F3- Provide information on the
importance of the site using existing
mechanisms, wherever possible, and/or new
initiatives e.g. website, leaflets.
Report to SAC Mgt Grp/Forum on
methods used.
SAC Mgt Grp lead
Forum
➜
✔
➜
✔
➜
✔
➜
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
✔
➜
➜
✔
✔
5.9
See ‘F’ list
11. Shipping, navigation and
deposits at sea
Identify monitoring programmes to
assess any potential impacts on
interest features as part of ongoing
activity.
Targets/measures
Implementation
of and monitor trends for maritime litter
affecting site.
Provide information obtained from
‘beach-clean surveys’.
ERYC –
Countryside
Access Team /
Forum
F3- Assess above against site conservation
NE
F5- Within duties seek to provide waste
reception facilities, promotion of ‘codes of
conduct’ and meet agreements under
international conventions.
Target user groups of site, e.g. leaflets or
notice boards, to raise awareness of
facilities and potential impacts of their
activities.
BHC/ LA launch
sites/ Forum
F5- Emergency Contingency Plan in event
of pollution incident.
Inform review of plans of international
importance.
BHC
Period
2006/
2007
2007/
2008
2008/
2009
2009/
2010
2010/
2011
2011/
2012
➜
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
✔
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
✔
✔
➜
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
SBC
ERYC
✔
F6- Review of consent to dispose of harbour
dredgings under Habitats Regulations.
Report to EN on ‘likely significant
effect’ and ‘adverse affect on integrity.’
Defra
F5- Management measures currently
applied;
•
Monitor samples of dredge spoil for
contaminants;
•
Record and log volumes of dredge spoil
disposed of per annum;
Report to SAC Mgt Grp and DEFRA on
site usage.
Assess against guideline ‘Action Levels’.
BHC
CEFAS
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
Record against figures set within FEPA
licence.
BHC
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
F5- Management measures currently
applied;
•
Operational procedures to mitigate for
potential effects on adjacent reef
communities
Dredgings disposed of on ebb tides - All
year round.
BHC
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
✔
✔
NE
5.10
See ‘F’ list
12. Shoreline management
Integration of adjacent SMP policies
and review against conservation
objectives/ Habitats Regulations.
Targets/measures
Implementation
Period
2006/
2007
2007/
2008
2008/
2009
2009/
2010
2010/
2011
2011/
2012
F6- NECAG SMP review of management
objectives
Report to SAC Mgt Grp results of review
Lead by SBC
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
F6- HECAG SMP review of management
objectives
Report to SAC Mgt Grp results of review
Lead by ERYC
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
F6- Apply Habitats Regs to plans and
projects within or adjacent to the site
affecting site to be maintained
ERYC/SBC lead
Defra
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
5.11
5.3.2
Action plan for the review and revision of the management plan
Action for review and revision of management plan
Implementation
Period
2006/
2007
Produce and launch final version of Management Plan
Standard report on the delivery of
actions to be completed annually in
Management Group meeting November.
twice a year. To include
Report on condition monitoring
Formal mid-term review of the
action plan
Organise meetings and act as secretariat
Management effectiveness scorecard
Meeting with wider stakeholders every year (Flamborough Head
Maritime Forum and interest groups)
Review of Management Plan
2007/
2008
2008/
2009
2009/
2010
2010/
2011
2011/
2012
All RA's
9
Collate information
All RA's
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
Collate information
EN/NE/EA/NESFC
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
Review
All RA's
➜
➜
9
➜
➜
➜
Liaison
Project Officer
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
Review
All RA’s
Liaison
All RA's
Review
All RA's
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
9
5.12
5.3.3
Action plan for survey and monitoring of the condition of interest features
Monitor and review
Condition monitoring
Site condition monitoring
of internationally
important reef habitats,
as set out in favourable
condition table.
Attribute
Actions /Targets
Lead
Monitor changes in extent of reef
features for whole site.
Area of the sublittoral reef to checked, based
on established baseline, and assessed in
relation to rocky shore information.
NE
Sub-feature rocky shores
Distribution and range of all
intertidal and characteristic
biotopes.
Establish baseline map and monitoring
transects.
Using monitoring transects above record any
change.
NE
Sub-feature kelp forest
Distribution and range of kelp
biotopes, presence and
abundance of composite and
characteristic species.
Using baseline acoustic maps and water
quality information identify monitoring sites.
NE/ EA
Sub-feature subtidal faunal turf
communities
Distribution and range of
subtidal faunal turf, biotopes,
presence and abundance of
composite and characteristic
species.
Using baseline acoustic maps and site usage
information identify monitoring sites.
NE/SAC
mgtgrp
Using monitoring sites above record any
change.
NE
Water quality variables.
Develop dataset based on turbidity and
temperature variables recorded at fixed
locations 4 times per year.
NESFC
NE
NE
change.
Period
2006/
2007
2007/
2008
2008/
2009
2009/
2010
2010/
2011
2011/
2012
➜
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
5.13
5.3.3
Monitor and review
Attribute
Actions /Targets
Lead
Period
2006/
2007
of internationally
important sea cave
habitats, as set out in
favourable condition
table.
Monitor changes in extent of sea
cave features for whole site.
Sub-feature microalgal and
lichen communities
Establish baseline map and monitoring sites.
NE
✔
change.
NE
➜
As above.
NE
✔
➜
2007/
2008
2008/
2009
2009/
2010
2010/
2011
2011/
2012
➜
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
Distribution of intertidal chalk
cave and lichen communities.
Sub-feature faunal cushion and
crust communities
As above.
NE
✔
➜
Distributions of intertidal chalk
cave biotopes.
of internationally
important vegetated sea
cliff habitats, as set out in
favourable condition
table.
Monitor changes in extent of
vegetated sea cliff features for
whole site.
NE
change.
NE
Sub-feature vegetation
communities
NE
Species composition of
characteristic maritime/
paramaritime/seabird/chalk/
boulder clay and wet flush
influence.
change.
NE
✔
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
5.14
5.3.3
Monitor and review
Attribute
Actions /Targets
Lead
Period
2006/
2007
of internationally
important breeding
seabird habitats, as set
out in favourable
condition table.
Monitor changes in extent of
suitable cliff habitat for
breeding seabirds and
populations.
2007/
2008
2008/
2009
2009/
2010
2010/
2011
2011/
2012
➜
➜
➜
✔
➜
➜
➜
✔
✔
Establish baseline information on extent and
monitoring sites.
NE
change.
NE
➜
➜
Use results of periodic seabird surveys e.g.
‘Seabird 2000' and assess against 1987
counts.
RSPB/
JNCC/
NE
➜
✔
Use annual productivity of key species e.g.
kittiwake and gannet, as an indicator of
breeding success.
RSPB/
NE
➜
➜
5.15
6.0
Sustainable development and the Ecosystem Approach
The section describes how sustainable development and the Ecosystem Approach will be applied
to the management of Flamborough Head and the surrounding area
6.1
Introduction
It is now widely accepted that to ensure a better quality of life for future generations and ourselves we
must make sure that we achieve a healthy and sustainable economy, environment and society. This is
the essence of sustainable development. Several definitions exist the most frequently cited being that
of the United Nations Brutland Report (1987), ‘development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ 1 . The UK
Government’s sustainable development strategy sets out five key guiding principles for sustainable
development; these are (HM Government, 2005 2 ):
• Ensuring a strong, healthy and just society;
• Living within environmental limits;
• Achieving a sustainable economy;
• Promoting good governance;
• Using sound science responsibly.
The UK Government is committed to introducing a Marine Bill to help to deliver the vision of ‘clean,
healthy, safe, productive and biologically diverse ocean and seas’. As such, the proposed Marine Bill
will contain measures to produce a more efficient and effective regulation of UK marine waters, to
streamline the present system of licences, which control the use of marine resources, and to achieve
the sustainable and wise use of those resources. Living within environmental limits is the central
principle for sustainable development. The primary way of achieving this is through the Ecosystem
Approach. This is ‘a strategy for integrated management of water and living resources that promotes
conservation and sustainable use in an equitable way’ 3 . The approach centres on the ability of the
marine environment to provide ecological and societal goods and services and that it has a capacity to
allow human activities but only up to a certain level beyond which the system will be degraded. In
other words making sure that our economies and society operate within the capacity of the
environment to support those activities. This places an emphasis on managing human activities that
affect ecosystems rather than managing ecosystems themselves. The sustainable management of the
marine ecosystem means achieving solutions which follow the 7 tenets outlined by Elliott et al
(2006) 4 that solutions have to be environmentally sustainable, economically viable, technologically
feasible, socially desirable or tolerable, administratively achievable, legally permissible, and
politically expedient. In principle this means rather than adopting a reductionist approach to
management which considers individual species and habitats, managers need to adopt a broad ranging
approach where issues are considered within the capacity of the ecosystem to support them and where
humans are considered as an integral part of that system. In particular, this requires the ability to
maintain a set of critical marine processes against a background of natural change and human uses.
(Elliott, M., Burdon, D. & K. Hemingway, 2006. Marine ecosystem structure, functioning, health and
management and potential approaches to marine ecosystem recovery: a synthesis of current
understanding. Report by the Institute of Estuarine & Coastal Studies (IECS), University of Hull to
CCW. CCW Policy Research Report No. 06/05.)
1
From ‘Our Common Future (The Brutland Report)’ – Report of the 1987 Worlds Commission on Environment and Development.
Her Majesty’s Government UK Sustainable Development Strategy. (2005)
3
Convention on Biological Diversity, 1998. Report of the Workshop on the Ecosystem Approach, Lilongwe, Malawi, 26 - 28 January 1998
– available from http://www.biodiv.org/doc/meetings/cop/cop-04/information/cop-04-inf-09-en.pdf
4
Integrated marine management and administration for an island state - the case for a new Marine Agency for the UK. Marine Pollution
Bulletin, 52(5) 469-474): Elliott, M, S.J. Boyes & D. Burdon (2006)
2
6.1
6.2
Ecosystem Approach implementation
The implementation of the Ecosystem Approach is guided by 12 key principles, as follows: • The objectives of the management of land, water and living resources are a matter of societal
choice;
• Management should be decentralised to the lowest appropriate level;
• Ecosystem managers should consider the effects (actual or potential) of their activities on
adjacent and other ecosystems;
• Need to manage the ecosystem in an economic context;
• Conservation of ecosystem structure and functioning, in order to maintain ecosystem services,
should be a priority target of the Ecosystem Approach;
• Ecosystems must be managed within the limits of their functioning;
• The Ecosystem Approach should be undertaken at appropriate spatial and temporal scales;
• Recognising the varying temporal scales and lag-effects that characterise the ecosystem
process, objectives for ecosystem management should be set for the long term;
• Management must recognise that change is inevitable;
• The Ecosystem Approach should seek the appropriate balance between, and integration of,
conservation and use of biological diversity;
• The Ecosystem Approach should consider all forms of relevant information including
scientific and indigenous local knowledge, innovations and practices;
• The Ecosystem Approach should involve all relevant sectors of society and scientific
disciplines.
The Ecosystem Approach is guided by the above principles, but the following characteristics are also
important for successful implementation (Turner, 20045):
• The development of a Management Plan;
• Good stakeholder involvement;
• Good public awareness;
• Good co-operation amongst stakeholders and agencies;
• Good communication amongst stakeholders;
• Good information sharing;
• Adequate personnel resources;
• Adequate funding;
• The availability of Scientific Information;
• Subsequent changes in management activities.
6.3
The Ecosystem Approach at Flamborough Head
Sustainable development has always featured within the management scheme, the objective of the
scheme being to protect the environment but (implicitly rather than explicitly) within a sustainable use
of the marine resources by the local community. However, previously, the Flamborough Head
European Marine Site management scheme focused on a limited range of species and habitats that
occur within the area including the;
• Vegetated sea cliffs;
• Sea caves;
• Reefs;
• Seabirds, including puffins, kittiwakes and razorbills.
This approach to management, although simple and cost effective, resulted in a number of problems,
which made management of the site harder and arguably less effective. For example stakeholders
wished to discuss all issues relevant to the management of the wildlife, landscape and access resource
of the site rather than just the designated wildlife features. This made it hard for stakeholders involved
in the Scheme to understand its remit. By adopting an approach that takes a broad approach to the
6.2
wildlife, landscape and access resource at Flamborough and, integrates this with the social and
economic needs of people that use the site, it is intended that better more informed and therefore
sustainable decisions about management will be made.
This current review has given the management group the opportunity to assess the previous scheme
against the principles of the Ecosystem Approach and the principles of good practice criteria to
identify areas for improvement.
As a starting point to this process the previous management scheme for the European Marine Site was
assessed against the 12 Criteria as defined by the IUCN and the characteristics that are important for
successful implementation. This information is contained within the following table.
6.4
Table Structure
Column one lists the 12 key Ecosystem Approach principles. These principles are then individually
evaluated against current management measures. Each principle is then discussed in more detail, to
explain why current management may or may not be fulfilling the principle in question. The final
column suggests future proposals, to bring management closer to the Ecosystem Approach.
6.3
Table 6: Review of current management at the Flamborough Head European Marine Site against the 12 principles of the Ecosystem Approach
1
Ecosystem Approach
Principle
The stakeholder dialogue and current management
scheme
Discussion
The objectives of management
of land, water and living
resources are a matter of
societal choice.
Societal choice has been made at different levels:
Integrated management is the focus of
the Ecosystem Approach, with the
movement away from a fragmented
approach that focus on particular
species or habitats. The approach
depends on the ability of define the
'goods and services' which society
wants from the area. It also depends on
the clarity with which the objectives
have been defined.
European: Selecting particular habitats and species
worthy of protection under the Directives
National: Selection of Flamborough as a Special Area
of Conservation (SAC)
Local: Decide how human activities can be managed to
minimise effects on the habitats and species
Socio-economic benefits that do not compromise the
environment should be consistent and actively
promoted
This concurs with ‘societal choice’ at
the local level. Local people expressed
frustration over why there are so many
schemes. Expressing that the future
scheme should have a broader remit,
focusing on all features of importance
including archaeological significance,
heritage coast designations and nature
reserves.
The process used to complete the
review engaged local people who
represented a wide range of interests.
2
Management should be
decentralised to the lowest
appropriate level
A stakeholder process that engaged a wide range of
local and national stakeholders was used to decide the
content of the management plan.
3
Ecosystem managers should
consider the effects (actual or
potential) of their activities on
adjacent and other ecosystems
Appropriate assessments currently only consider
impacts on the features of interest within the European
Marine Site.
•
Future assessments should
consider wider ecosystem
level implications of
management (both onshore in
the coastal zone and offshore)
Proposals – what needs to be done to
bring management closer to the
Ecosystem Approach
Future management will:
• Define the ecological and societal
goods and services required by the
site;
• Reflect ‘societal choice’ and will
be extended to included all parts of
the ecosystem and include those
habitats and species which are key to
the functioning of the system; as well
as those valued for other reasons at
local, national and European level;
• Management of the environment
would continue to engage positively
to promote sustainable use, including
recreation and tourism, which
underpin the local economy.
Principle 2 is in place within the plan.
Through the process of stakeholder
participation and consensus building.
This would continue to be used in
future management decisions.
•
•
•
Identify and define this ecosystem
Identify adjacent or other
ecosystems
Include consideration of the effects
of management on these systems in
6.4
Ecosystem Approach
Principle
scheme
Discussion
•
4
Need to understand and
manage the ecosystem in an
economic context
Work needs to be carried out
to improve understanding of
the Ecosystem at Flamborough
Head and its interaction with
the wider North Sea. This
information can then be used
to inform management
decisions.
Site management decisions need to take
account of socio-economic factors.
Ecosystem Approach
•
the review process
Insert an extra line in the
management tables to summarise
findings.
Identify and offset where possible
socioeconomic effects of management
decisions
Initiatives that derive economic
benefits from sustainable use of
environmental resources should
support. [Reinforce the goods and
services approach]
5
Conservation of ecosystem
structure and function to
provide ecosystem services
should be a priority
Previously the management scheme itself was narrowly
focused on the features for which the site was
designated. The decision making process however had
a broader remit, seeking to look for outcomes that
deliver environmental, social and economic benefits.
Despite a broader approach being
taken, assessment of the effects of
human activities focused on particular
interest features rather than looking to
see if the human activities were having
an unsustainable impact on the
ecosystem’s ability to provide goods
(i.e. nutrient cycling or fish stocks).
Future work will need to look to define
what services are provided by the site
at Flamborough (fish stocks, nutrient
cycling etc) and make decisions about
the best way to minimise impacts to
these services.
• Consider the environment from
both perspectives, i.e. the effects of
humans on the environment and the
effect of the environment of societal
systems, including:
• The ability of the current
structure and function to provide
sustainable ecosystem services over
the long term;
• Identify the key ecosystem
services provided by the marine and
coastal ecosystems at Flamborough
Head, for example the interaction
between nutrients and kelp.
6.5
6
Ecosystem Approach
Principle
scheme
Discussion
Ecosystem must be managed
within the limits of their
functioning
The potential or actual effects of current human
activity on the protected habitats and species are
assessed and discussed throughout the plan. Where
data were available, i.e. from baseline data studies,
they were used to form a view about the likely
significance of the activity. Through this process any
problems in ecosystem function will be identified.
However ecosystem function is not specifically
considered.
Current unsustainable fishing practices in the North
Sea are a threat to the site as they target species which
are a component of the reef biota (i.e. Cod) and hence
part of the feature.
Management is focused on protecting
habitats and species, but keystone
species (those which have a key role in
an ecosystem), or sensitive indicator
species (providing information on
ecological changes) are not identified.
Management of SAC and SPA often
concentrates on ecosystem structure,
e.g. the number of species present,
rather than the functioning (as rate
processes). As a result these would not
necessarily pick up the health of the
ecosystem function, or pick up subtle
declines.
Monitoring of site needs to consider
ecosystem functioning as well as
ecosystem structure as a parameter for
assessment and understand how this
interacts with human management at
different spatial scales.
7
The approach should be taken
at the appropriate spatial and
temporal scales
Decision-making was made at a local scale, engaging a
wide range of local stakeholders.
Some decisions relating to policy were made at a
national and international level.
8
Process and objectives for
ecosystem management
should be set for the long term
The Management Scheme prior to review had no longterm objectives established.
Ecosystem Approach
Future management will develop an
improved understanding of the
structure and functioning of the
ecosystem:
o Its relationships and processes
(e.g. energy flow and natural
change);
o Identify keystone species;
o Identify indicator species of
ecosystem function and
establish limits;
• Evaluate existing monitoring to
find out to what extent it indicates
ecosystem functioning;
• Include human processes as part of
the functional systems;
• Extend evaluation of human use to
included direct and indirect effects on
all features of conservation interest
The process by which the scheme was
reviewed involved innovative
stakeholder participation in the decision
making for protecting site management
and integrating that with social and
economic interests.
The process adopted for the review
fulfils this principle, and will be used
for future management.
Management plan will seek to
influence national and international
decision making where appropriate
The decision making process used long
term objectives and goals of 20 years
and manages these through a 5 year
action plan. The objectives have to set
correctly (i.e. as SMART objectives) so
that their attainment can be determined.
• Take into account sea level rise
and the effect of other long term
processes in considering long term
objectives and how these could be met;
6.6
Ecosystem Approach
Principle
9
10
Management must recognise
that change is inevitable
scheme
Natural England advice on conservation objectives for
the site acknowledges that interest features will be
subject to natural change.
Seek the appropriate balance
between integration,
conservation and use of
biodiversity
Achievement of this objective will come through
refinement of management, monitoring and the
application of adaptive management.
11
Decision-making should
consider all forms of relevant
information (scientific,
indigenous and local)
This was achieved through stakeholder dialogue and
the actions listed in the management plan.
12
Involve all relevant sectors of
society and scientific
disciplines
Dialogue with stakeholders and academic institutions
have improved through the review of the management
plan. However this needs to be maintained to establish
working relationships and gain trust.
Discussion
Climate change should be regarded as
an exogenic-unmanaged pressure
which cannot be managed but which
requires its consequences to be
managed.
Ongoing process. To some extent
defined in the 20 year vision statement.
Further discussions are needed with all
stakeholders about what the
‘appropriate balance is’ when detailed
management decisions are taken.
The current plan does consider various
forms of relevant information but
improvements can be made. A
historical and oral histories review
would provide valuable information
about the area, which could aid in
future management decisions.
Issues such as fisheries have
highlighted the need for closer
management.
Ecosystem Approach
• Include long term objectives not
only for the features but for ecosystem;
• Include the likely long-term effect
(and sustainability) of short-term
management actions.
Management Plan does acknowledge
that natural change is inevitable.
The degree to which anthropogenic
activities and natural change influence
the site needs to be looked at in further
detail
Continued stakeholder dialogue
Environmental monitoring but this,
because of budgetary constraints, has to
be at a low level and focussed.
Application of adaptive management
Future management will do the same
again, with further consideration to the
Ecosystem Approach. While not all
features of the site can be monitored, it
is more cost-effective to monitor
activities rather than the natural
physical and biological features. If the
latter change but there has been no
change in the anthropogenic activities
then it can be concluded that the
changes are natural or outside the local
control.
Broad dialogue between managers,
stakeholders and academic institutions
should be maintained into the future.
6.7
6.5
Conclusions
Generally the results confirmed that the Management Scheme fits reasonably well with the 12
Principles of the Ecosystem Approach and the principles for successful implementation. However the
assessment highlighted a number of areas of improvement for the future Management Plan for
Flamborough Head. These essentially fell into four categories, which were:
Science: Working with academic institutions and stakeholders to improve understanding of the site's
ecology and how this relates to the wider North Sea ecosystem and the evolution of societal uses at
the site. This work should focus on defining which ecosystem goods and services Flamborough Head
provides and establishing functional limits for the exploitation of these resources. Requirement to
develop a monitoring programme that monitors interest features, human activities and the provision of
ecosystem and recreational services and relates this to site management (i.e. fish stocks, bathing water
quality, improved understanding of effects of human activities on the site ecology).
Economics: To ensure the 7 tenets are met, management decisions must take account of economic
considerations. The Management Plan should support the sustainable use of environmental resources.
Decision-making and communication: A key factor in the implementation of the Ecosystem
Approach is the involvement of stakeholders in decision-making. The Management Group have
agreed via the project officer to hold annual meetings with the Flamborough Head Forum and
establish a land management and fisheries focus group.
Adopting a holistic approach to management: This is needed in order to manage the ecosystem at
Flamborough Head within its limits; the services that this ecosystem provides to humans need to be
understood and to make sustainable decisions about its management a broad based understanding and
approach to management of the site is required. Integrating the Flamborough Head Management
Scheme and the Heritage Coast Strategy is an important step towards establishing this holistic
framework.
Management plan resources: A key to progressing these improvements is the maintenance of
adequate resources for the site. This will be achieved through the project officer post. Some core
funding will come from relevant authorities; additional resources will be acquired through project
grants from external funds, which will be used to progress projects from a diverse portfolio of funds.
While the project office can only facilitate, encourage, cajole others to carry out management actions,
these aspects are vital as a coordinating influence.
These results were used to inform the review and influence the final output. A number of issues
highlighted by this assessment such as stakeholder involvement in the plan, were discussed as topics
during the workshops. The plan will be reviewed in six years time against these same criteria to
monitor progress towards implementation of the Ecosystem Approach.
6.8
7.0
Projects
This section details the projects which will contribute to achieving the 20 year vision
that can be delivered through the management plan
7.1
Introduction
As part of the review a number of project suggestions were proposed and formulated from the
information collated from those involved. The following section outlines the projects that the
management group feel can be delivered though the Management Plan and support the delivery of an
integrated approach to management of the environment at Flamborough Head.
All the projects are listed in the table below, with an explanation of the purpose of the project, how
and when the project will be completed and who is responsible for its implementation.
It is hoped that these projects will be completed along side the actions of the management plan, with
the guidance of a project officer.
Table 7: Project outlines and implementation
Project
Purpose
Taking the Project
forward
Responsibility for
implementation
Timescale
for delivery
Funding
A feasibility
study into the
possible
extension of the
Yorkshire
Wolds Way.
To extend the Wolds
Way from the current
end at Filey Brigg to
Flamborough Head.
The project would be
lead by North York
Moors National Park
Authority, with support
from the management
group, other relevant
competent authorities
and wider stakeholders.
PO to work with the
National Trails
Officer to ensure
completion.
Start 2006
External
funding –
Currently being
researched.
Update and relaunch the
Management
Plan web site.
To have a dedicated
web page for the plan
with links to other
groups e.g., The
Flamborough
Community
Environmental Action
Group and local
universities.
Work with the
Management Group and
the Flamborough Head
Maritime Forum to
create a web site.
PO
Start 2006
Completion
2007
Through the
Management
Group
The following projects are linked and are concerned with improving access and interpretation on the Headland
Access and
Interpretation
audit.
To conduct an audit of
the current condition of
access and
interpretation facilities
at Flamborough. In
partnership with ERYC
Public Rights of Way
the audit will be
developed into an
implementation plan
that will be used to bid
for funds for
improvements to access
facilities and
interpretation panels.
Approach ERYC Public
Rights of Way to help
produce an access plan
or seek external
funding. Work with
other organisations and
community groups such
as the RSPB and YWT,
to learn from their
experience and
knowledge.
PO
Start 2007
A funding
strategy will be
agreed
Cont.
7.1
Project
Purpose
Taking the Project
forward
Responsibility for
implementation
Timescale
for delivery
Interpretation
signs and
leaflets.
To produce high quality
leaflets for
Flamborough head and
develop interpretation
materials to improve
visitor experience and
raise awareness of
environmental,
landscape and cultural
assets at Flamborough.
Voluntary
Codes of
Conduct.
Funding
Approach all Local
Authorities to gain
baseline information on
visitor numbers, and
what information may be
needed at each ‘Honeypot’ area; external
funding may be needed.
When conducting this
project it is important
that the visual impact of
any interpretation and
the effect it may have on
the local area is
considered.
PO
Start 2007
Finish 2009
External
funding from
The Marine
Stewardship
Fund and
SITA.
To raise public
awareness whilst
encouraging a better
understanding of the
area and why it is
important (to be
combined with the
above project).
Approach all Local
Authorities and user
groups to develop a user
based Code of Conduct.
PO
Start 2007
Finish 2009
External
funding from
The Marine
Stewardship
Fund and
SETA.
Maintenance
Plan
This links with the
Access plan to improve
ditches and hedgerows
PO
Start 2007
A funding
strategy will be
agreed.
Develop a
Marketing
Policy
document.
To gain a better
understanding of site
usage and to improve
relationships between
local groups and
organisations.
Approach ERYC public
rights of way to help
produce an access plan
or seek external funding.
Work with Local
Authorities and user
groups to pool baseline
information that already
exists and create a
Marketing Plan,
detailing objectives and
areas for promotion.
PO
Start 2007
A funding
strategy will be
agreed.
The monitoring
and gathering of
baseline
information, in
keeping with the
Ecosystem
Approach
To gain a better
understanding of the
area, so more informed
decisions can be made
about factors which
may affect the
sustainability of the site.
Work with all Relevant
Authorities
PO
Start 2007
Internal and
External
funding.
Marine
Stewardship
Council
Accreditation
The aim of this project
is to promote
sustainable fisheries
and raise the national
and global profile of
Yorkshire Coast
fisheries.
Work with North
Eastern Sea Fisheries
Committee to help
ensure the requirements
needed for accreditation
are met. This may also
involve seeking external
funding.
NESFC.
Start 2007
Finish 2010
External
funding.
Lobster
Conservation
To monitor stock
movements and the
interaction between
offshore and inshore
stock. The data gathered
will then be used to aid
in effort management
options.
NESFC, NE and the PO
will work together to
monitor the outputs of
the project.
NESFC, NE and the
PO.
Start 2007
Finish 2009
NESFC, NE,
The Langled
Partnership,
European
Fisheries Fund,
SSE.
7.2
Project
Purpose
Taking the Project
forward
Responsibility for
implementation
Timescale
for delivery
Land
Management
Initiate discussion on
how best to use farming
to deliver
environmental,
landscape and access
improvements at
Flamborough Head to
improve farming
incomes in the area.
Work with the local
farming community,
Natural England, RSPB,
YWT and interested
parties.
PO to co-ordinate the
meetings
Start 2007
Through the
Management
Group.
Data Collation
To pool information
which individuals and
groups have about the
area, including any
survey work, and input
or link work into a
central database, which
can be accessed
through the internet.
Seek external funding
and work with all local
organisations, groups
and individuals.
PO
Start 2008
External
funding
Collate baseline
information on
all Offshore
Development
surrounding the
headland.
To map where all the
offshore development
is taking place around
the European marine
site.
Work with The Crown
Estate and all other
offshore companies to
map where development
is taking place and any
possible developments in
the future.
PO
Start 2008
External –
Marine
Stewardship
Fund
Oral histories
project
To inform site
management. Place
management of the site
in a historic context.
Interview key
stakeholders who have
long-term history of the
site, including divers,
fishermen and farmers.
PO, producing
historical maps,
transcripts and
conclusions.
Start 2007
NESFC North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee
RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of Birds
YWT Yorkshire Wildlife Trust
NE
Natural England
Funding
PO Project Officer
SSE Scottish and Southern Energy
7.3
8.0
Conclusions of the review and future delivery of the plan
The overarching objective for the review of the Management Scheme is to ‘ensure that human
activities are managed in ways that are compatible with the wildlife features of the European Marine
Site and to seek opportunities to improve these assets and the human activities that depend
upon them’. Overall the review process identified that there was a high degree of support from
stakeholders and relevant authorities for delivering this objective.
It was felt that the ‘boom and bust’ cycle of projects at Flamborough had made many stakeholders
cynical about the long-term commitment of some authorities to the area; this problem may have been
reinforced by lack of clarity about project objectives and outcomes. Concern was expressed during
the review about the ambitious nature of the reviewed Plan and it was felt many of the issues raised
during the consultation had been voiced at similar events as long as twenty years ago. It was
generally felt that these issues (e.g. monitoring and access management) had not been resolved, and
there was a desire from those involved in the review to see the re-invigoration of the Heritage Coast
Strategy and see continued and sustained progress with regards to the management of the site.
The assessment of the previous scheme under the IUCN criteria for ecosystem approach and the
criteria for successful implementation highlighted a number of areas for improvement, as follows:
• Improved use of science on the site;
• Developing links between site management and potential economic benefits;
• Improved communication between stakeholders and relevant authorities;
• Adopting a holistic approach to management;
• Management Plan resources.
The Ecosystem Approach review identified that there was both a practical and scientific merit in
integrating the Flamborough Head Management Scheme and Heritage Coast Strategy under one plan.
It was felt that this would improve access to financial resources, facilitate ecosystem-based
management and improve stakeholder involvement in the management of Flamborough Head. In
order to deliver the broader remit of this Plan it was felt that additional sections would needed to be
introduced to ensure that all issues identified through the review could be addressed. The main
sections of the reviewed Plan that will deliver actions on the ground are now:
•
•
•
Action plan (delivers relevant authority legal obligations under the Conservation (Habitats
&c.) Regulations 1994);
Site Management and associated policies;
Projects.
The Policies section (Section 4) outlines management areas by activity and defines policies for these
areas where relevant; these will be delivered though the core functions of the Relevant Authorities.
The Habitats Regulations action plan (Section 5) delivers relevant authority legal obligations under
the Conservation (Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 and will largely be delivered by the Relevant
Authorities and their core functions, with some actions being progressed through the project officer
when funds are made available. The Projects section (Section 7) identifies projects required to deliver
the 20-year vision for Flamborough Head and will largely be delivered by the project officer. These
actions will be progressed as and when funds become available.
In order to maintain contact with the stakeholder groups consulted during the review, the Management
Group has committed to the following activities:
• Hosting an annual/biannual meeting with the Forum;
• Establishment of a fisheries liaison group for the European Marine Site;
• Establishment of a land management liaison group for Flamborough Head.
8.1
Some Relevant Authorities felt that even with a reviewed Management Plan for Flamborough Head
established, the Plan remained isolated and financially vulnerable. To offset this risk options to work
with the East Riding Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plan (ICZM) and the North Yorkshire and
Cleveland Coastal Forum (NYCCF) are being considered, to ensure long-term sustainable funding
streams are developed. To secure these funding streams a number of actions will be progressed
through the Flamborough Head Management Plan. These are:
• Develop a broad portfolio of projects that can access different funding streams;
• Joint working with coastal forum (ICZM and NYCCF);
• External bids to deliver projects;
• Development of a Memorandum of Agreement for the Relevant Authorities Group to outline
the future of Management Plan delivery.
This reviewed Plan presents an important opportunity to trial integrated working on a local scale to
protect the natural environment for the benefit of local communities and the country as a whole.
Using the previous successful and statutorily underpinned Flamborough Head Management Scheme
the Management Group have used the review as an opportunity to extend the effective working
practices previously established. With extensive communication during the review, contact has been
improved between managers and stakeholders, opening up a wide range of opinions and expertise that
can be made available to help management of the environment at Flamborough Head.
Despite the well-received and positive work carried out during the review of the Management
Scheme, a number of risks remain to the delivery of this revised Plan. The financing of the project
officer is one of the main challenges and the continuation of the post is a priority to the Plan. The
management group do however feel that this plan sets out the best available framework for delivery
given current funding systems in place for coastal management in England. The scientific basis for
management is another complex and difficult area to implement particularly with regard to fisheries
management and will require close working between Relevant Authorities and stakeholders.
Although these risks remain there is a significant degree of shared interest in the sustainable future of
Flamborough Head. The next phase for the Flamborough Head Management Plan is for the
Management Group in partnership with all stakeholders to drive the delivery of this Plan. This will be
a challenging task and it is the strength of this partnership and the common interests that it represents
that will define whether the plan succeeds over the years to come.
8.2
Annex I
Glossary of terms, acronyms and useful references
Glossary of terms
Advisory Group
The body of representatives from local interests, user groups and
conservation groups, formed to advise the management group. The
Flamborough Head Maritime Forum fulfils this role.
Annex I habitat(s)
A natural habitat(s) listed in Annex I of the Habitats Directive for
which Special Areas of Conservation can be selected.
Annex II species
A species listed in Annex II of the Habitats Directive for which
Special Areas of Conservation can be selected.
Biodiversity
The total variety of life on earth. This includes diversity within
species, between species and of ecosystems.
Biotope
The physical habitat with its biological community; a term which
refers to the combination of physical environment and its distinctive
assemblage of conspicuous species.
Circalittoral
The rocky subtidal zone below that dominated by algae (Animal
dominated subtidal zone)
Community
A group of organisms occurring in a particular environment,
presumably interacting with each other and with the environment,
and identifiable by means of ecological survey from other groups.
Competent authority
Any Minister, government department, public or statutory
undertaker, public body or person holding a public office that
exercises legislative powers.
Conservation objective
Statement of the nature conservation aspirations for a site, expressed
in terms of the favourable condition that statutory nature
conservation agencies wish to see the species and/or habitats for
which the site has been selected to attain. Conservation objectives for
European marine sites relate to the aims of the Habitats Directive.
Ecosystem
A dynamic complex of plant, animal, and micro-organism
communities and their non-living environment interacting as a
functional unit.
Ecosystem Approach
A strategy for the integrated management of land, water and living
resources that promotes conservation and sustainable use in an
equitable way.
European marine site
A European site (SAC or SPA), which consists of, or in so far as it
consists of, marine areas.
Favourable condition
A range of conditions for a natural habitat or species at which the
sum of the influences acting upon that habitat or species are not
adversely affecting its distribution, abundance, structure or function
within an individual Natura 2000 site in the long term. The condition
in which the habitat or species is capable of sustaining itself on a
long-term basis.
An.I.1
Favourable conservation
status
A range of conditions for a natural habitat or species at which the
sum of the influences acting upon that habitat or species are not
adversely affecting its distribution, abundance, structure or function
throughout the EU in the long term. The condition in which the
habitat or species is capable of sustaining itself on a long-term basis.
GIS
Geographical Information Systems. A system for capturing, storing,
checking, integrating, manipulating, analysing and displaying digital
data which are spatially referenced to a geographical region.
Habitat
The place in which a plant or animal lives.
Habitats Directive
The abbreviated term for Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May
1992 on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna
and Flora. It is the aim of this Directive to promote the conservation
of certain habitats and species within the European Union.
Holistic
Considering the whole system rather than just concentrating on
individual components.
Infralittoral
The subtidal zone in which upward erect algae, typically kelps,
dominate facing rocks.
Integrity
The coherence of the site’s ecological structure and function, across
its whole area, that enables it to sustain the habitat, complex of
habitats and/or levels of populations of the species for which it was
designated.
Interest feature
A natural or semi-natural feature for which a European site has been
selected. This includes any Habitats Directive Annex I habitat, or
specific component of their fauna and flora, or any Annex II species
and any population of a bird species for which a SPA has been
designated under the Birds Directive. Any habitat of a species for
which the site has been selected, or typical species of an Annex I
habitat are also considered to be interest features.
Maintain
The action required for an interest feature when it is considered to be
in favourable condition.
Management Group
The body of relevant authorities formed to manage the European
marine site.
Management scheme
The framework established by the relevant authorities at a European
marine site under which their functions are exercised to secure, in
relation to that site, compliance with the requirements of the Habitats
Directive.
Marine Protected Area
Is an area of sea especially dedicated to the protection and
maintenance of biodiversity, and of natural and associated cultural
resources, and managed through legal or other effective means.
Monitoring
Surveillance undertaken to ensure that formulated standards are
being maintained. The term is also applied to compliance monitoring
against accepted standards to ensure that agreed or required measures
are being followed.
An.I.2
Natura 2000
The European network of protected sites established under the Birds
Directive and the Habitats Directive.
Operations which may
cause deterioration or
disturbance
Any activity or operation taking place within, adjacent to, or remote
from a European marine site that has the potential to cause
deterioration to the natural habitats for which the site was designated
or disturbance to the species and its habitats for which the site was
designated.
Plan or project
Any proposed development that is within a relevant authority’s
function to control, or over which a competent authority has a
statutory function to decide on applications for consents,
authorisations, licences or permissions.
Precautionary principle/
approach
The assumption that where there are real threats of serious damage to
the environment, lack of full scientific information should not be
used as a justification for postponing measures to prevent such
damage occurring.
Reef
Marine rocky surfaces colonised by biological life.
Relevant authority
The specific competent authority which has powers or functions
which have, or could have, an impact on the marine environment
within, or adjacent to, a European marine site.
Restore
The action required for an interest feature when it is not considered
to be in a favourable condition.
Sensitivity
The intolerance of a habitat, community or individual species to
damage or disturbance from an external force.
Site of Special Scientific
Interest (SSSI)
An area of land or water notified by the Nature Conservancy Council
or its successor country agencies under the Wildlife and Countryside
Act 1981, as being of special nature or geological conservation
importance.
Special Area of
Conservation (SAC)
A site of Community importance designated under the Habitats
Directive by the Member States where the necessary conservation
measures are applied for the maintenance or restoration, at a
favourable conservation status, of the habitats and/or species for
which the site is designated.
Special Protection Area
(SPA)
A site designated under the Birds Directive by the Member States
where appropriate steps are taken to protect the bird species for
which the site is designated.
Sub-feature
An ecologically important sub-division of an interest feature.
Sustainable development
Development that meets the needs and aspirations of the current
generation without compromising the ability to meet those of future
generations.
Vulnerability
The likelihood of a habitat, community or individual of a species
being exposed to an external factor to which it is sensitive.
An.I.3
Acronyms
BAP
BHC
DEFRA
DFT
DTI
DCLG
EA
EH
EN
ER NETG
ERYC
ESS
FRCA
HECAG
JNCC
LA
LDF
LPA
MCA
MCEU
MFA
NE
NECAG
NESFC
NYCC
RDS
SAC Mgt Grp
SBC
SMA
SMP
YWS
YWT
Biodiversity Action Plan
Department of Environment, Transport and Rural Affairs
Department for Transport
Department of Trade and Industry
Department of Communities and Local Government
Environment Agency
English Heritage
English Nature
East Riding Natural Environment Task Group
Environmental Stewardship Scheme
Farming and Rural Conservation Agency
Humber Estuary Coastal Action Group
Joint Nature Conservation Committee
Local Authority
Local Planning Authority
Maritime and Coastguard Agency
Marine Consents and Environmental Unit
Natural England
North East Coastal Action Group
Rural Development Service
Flamborough Head SAC Management Group
Sensitive Marine Area
Yorkshire Water Services
Key sources of information relating to European marine sites
Anon. 1994. The Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations. Statutory Instrument No. 2716.
London, HMSO.
Anon. 1981. The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, Chapter 69, London, HMSO.
Brown, A.E., Burn, A.J., Hopkins, J.J. & Way, S.F. 1997. The Habitats Directive: selection of Special
Areas of Conservation in the UK. (JNCC Report No. 270). Peterborough, Joint Nature
Conservation Committee.
Council of the European Communities. 1979. Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979: on the
conservation of wild birds. Official Journal of the European Communities.
Council of the European Communities. 1992. Council Directive 92/43/EEC: on the conservation of
natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Official Journal of the European Communities,
L206/7.
Department of the Environment. 1994. Planning Policy Guidance No. 9: Nature Conservation.
London, HMSO.
An.I.4
Department of the Environment. 1995. Planning Policy Guidance No. 20: Coastal Planning London,
Department of the Environment.
Department of the Environment, Scottish Office & Joint Nature Conservation Committee. 1995. The
Habitats Directive: how will it apply in Great Britain. London, Department of the
Environment.
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions, Welsh Office. 1998. European Marine
Sites in England and Wales. A guide to the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations
1994 and to the Preparation and Application of Management Schemes. London
English Nature. 1994. European wildlife sites in England, Peterborough, English Nature.
EN, SNH, EHS (DOE(NI)), CCW, JNCC & SAMS. 1998. Natura 2000: European marine sites:
Guidance relating to statutory conservation objectives and operations which may cause
deterioration or disturbance. Peterborough, English Nature.
Joint Nature Conservation Committee. 1995. A list of possible Special Areas of Conservation in the
UK. Peterborough, Joint Nature Conservation Committee.
Nature Conservancy Council. 1990. Protecting internationally important bird sites, a review of the
EEC Special Protection Areas network in Great Britain. Peterborough, Nature Conservancy
Council.
SNH, EN, EHS (DOE(NI)), CCW, JNCC & SAMS. 1997. Natura 2000: European marine sites: an
introduction to management. Perth, Scottish Natural Heritage.
An.I.5
Annex II
List of relevant authority contacts for the Flamborough Head European Marine Site
and other useful addresses, local organisation and group information.
Relevant authorities:
Harbour Master
Gummers Wharf
West End
Bridlington
East Yorkshire YO15 3AN
(01262) 670148
Chief Fisheries Officer
Town Hall
Bridlington
East Yorkshire YO16 4LP
(01482) 393515
Principal Sustainable Communities and Coastal
Management Officer
County Hall
Beverley
East Yorkshire HU17 9BA
(01482) 391718
Head of Countryside Service
Business and Environment Department
County Hall
Northallerton
North Yorkshire DL7 8AH
(01609) 780780
Conservation Officer
Natural England
North and East Yorkshire Team
Genesis 1
Science Park
Heslington
York YO10 5ZQ
(01904) 435500
Director of Technical Services
Town Hall
Scarborough
North Yorkshire YO11 2HG
(01723) 232323
Environment Manager East
Environment Agency
1 Viking Close
Great Gutter Lane
Willerby
Hull
HU10 6DE
08708 506506
Legal and Insurance Manager
Trinity House Lighthouse Service
Trinity House
Tower Hill
London EC3N 4DH
(020) 7481 6913
Team Leader, Biodiversity
Environment Agency
Phoenix House
Global Avenue
Leeds
LS11 8PG
(0113) 2134872
Coastal Projects Manager
Yorkshire Water
Waste Water East
Naburn WWTW
Naburn Lane
York
YO19 4RN
Flamborough and North Landing Harbour
Commissioners
West Kapelle
Woodcock Road
Flamborough
East Yorkshire YO15 1LL
Advisory Group contact:
Mr George Traves
Flamborough Head Maritime Forum
20 George Street
Bridlington
East Yorkshire
YO15 3PN
An. II.1
Flamborough Head European marine site Management Scheme
Local Community Group Addresses:
Flamborough Community Environmental Action
Group - Secretary
New Cottage
High Street
Flamborough
East Yorkshire
YO15 1JT
www.flamboroughuk.net
RSPB - Bempton Cliffs Nature Reserve
11 Cliff Lane
Bempton
Bridlington
East Yorkshire
YO15 1JD
(01262) 851179
www.rspb.org.uk
1 St George's Place
York
YO24 1GN
(01904) 659570
info@ywt.org.uk
For meeting information please contact
David Woodmansey, secretary to the group
(01377) 267694
Useful Websites:
http://www.flamboroughuk.net/group.html
Useful addresses:
The European Commission
Environment DG
Information Centre
Office: BU-9 01/11
B - 1049 Brussels
Belgium
http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/nature
/home.htm
Department for Environment, Food & Rural
Affairs
Nobel House
17 Smith Square
London
SW1P 3JR
(020) 7238 6000
http://www.defra.gov.uk
The Department for Transport
Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DR
(020) 7944 8300
http://dft.gov.uk
The Yorkshire and Humber Assembly
18 King Street
Wakefield
WF1 2SQ
(01924) 331555
http://www.yhassembly.gov.uk
MFA
3-8 Whitehall Place
London
SW1A 2HH
(020) 7270 8328
http://www.mfa.gov.uk
Natural England
Northminster House
Northminster Road
Peterborough
PE1 1UA
(01733) 455000
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk
The Joint Nature Conservation Committee
Monkstone House
City Road
Peterborough
PE1 1JY
(01733) 562626
http://www.jncc.gov.uk
An. II.2
Local organisation and group information
The Flamborough Community Environmental Action Group
The Flamborough Community Environment Action Group was formed in 2000, and has four main
aims:
• To assist in the promotion, enhancement, improvement and conservation of the area of
Flamborough, through projects of environmental improvement or heritage conservation.
• To advance the education of people resident in Flamborough through the provision of
training courses relating to the heritage and preservation of the area of Flamborough.
• To promote, organise, carry on and encourage the education of children and young people
in natural conservation history and all subjects concerning the environment.
•
To advance the education of the general public in the history and heritage of Flamborough.
The group has been involved in setting up a number of projects since it was first set up 6 years ago,
including; the Young Roots Group, which engaged teenagers in learning about their local heritage,
involving them in the production of sculptures for the sculpture trail at South Landing, with the
overall aim of producing a booklet called 'Unlocking Flamborough's Treasure'. The Action Group has
developed a web site, www.flamboroughuk.net, which receives approximately 2,500 visitors a month.
The site provides a good source of information for locals and wider audiences, displaying local
information, history and events. The group also supports other local projects, and has recently been
involved with an archaeological survey of Danes Dyke.
The group holds monthly meetings on the first Wednesday of every month, in the upstairs room of the
Ship Inn, Flamborough, at 7.30pm and everyone is welcome.
The Yorkshire Wildlife Trust
Yorkshire Wildlife Trust (YWT) has worked for sixty years to protect vulnerable wildlife of all types,
animals, birds and plants, and the places where they live. The work that the YWT does helps towards
securing the future of many important habitats and species, which might otherwise be lost.
Flamborough Cliffs Nature Reserve was purchased by YWT in 1999 and consists of 27.6ha of land,
both to the north and south of north landing car park. The reserve starts at mean high water mark and
grades through the chalk cliffs up to cliff top grassland into grazed semi-natural grassland fields. The
chalk cliffs on the reserve show many erosion formed features, headlands and bays, arches and caves.
As well as supporting important communities of algae and lichens, these cliffs on the reserve support
around 20% of the breeding seabirds that use the headland. Cliff top grassland shows influences from
the chalk bedrock underneath and the salty seaside habitat, with harebell and pyramidal orchid
growing alongside thrift and sea plantain. Further back from the cliff tops, fenced grasslands are
grazed by sheep to help improve their biodiversity.
An. II.3
The YWT trust holds meeting twice a year at the Flamborough WI Hall, and have practical workdays
throughout the year on the reserve, to become an YWT volunteer in the area, please contact the head
office and speak to the local nature reserve officer Caroline Thorogood (details above).
The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB)
The RSPB Bempton Cliffs nature reserve extends to 5.22km and on average 86m high with 45ha of
sheer cliff face; these are the largest chalk sea-cliffs in Eastern Britain, supporting over 200,000
breeding seabirds. Cliff top grassland supports farmland birds of conservation concern at all times of
the year.
The main management aims at the Bempton Cliffs nature reserve are as follows:
• Maintain the sea bird colony as a breeding site for internationally and nationally important
numbers of breeding seabirds;
• Manage 11.28 hectares of cliff top grassland and scrub to increase the abundance of
invertebrates and small mammals for the benefit of breeding and feeding passerines,
particularly skylark, tree sparrow, linnet an Manage the reserve as a national promotion site to
cater for up to 60,000 visitors per annum d corn bunting also wintering short-eared owls;
• Present relevant coastal and marine issues to key decision makers and other land-users;
• Monitor the breeding populations and productivity of key seabird species including; gannet,
kittiwake and guillemot.
The reserve and visitor centre is open all-year-round offering a range of events and activities for
everyone to be involved in. For further information on the annual reserve events programme, the
seabird-monitoring programme or the reserve, please see the contact information above (An II.2).
An. II.4
Annex III
Information gathered form the three Stakeholder consultation workshops
Flamborough Head European Marine Site
Stakeholder Meeting – Tuesday 31 January 2006
7.00-9.00pm, The Flamborough WI Hall
Reviewing the Management Scheme
Summary of discussions and flip charts
What is your 20-year vision for Flamborough: Summary of post-it notes
Access
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Make sure the coastal path is retained bearing erosion in mind
Ramblers suggest new inland footpath to Bempton
Better transport
Maintain cliff access to anglers
Better access at stacks, poor repair
Rights of way access maintained and improved
Keep open all public access to the beach walk ways etc
No dilution of local rights of access
Look after the rights given to Flamborough villagers over the years
Improved paths and access, Danes to Bempton allowed?
More bridle paths, cycle tracks please
Better foot paths on cliff walks, more lights at north landing
Bike bus e.g. Hornsea
ERYC not helping to change footpaths, 5yrs with legal department – north of Holmes Gut
(around bungalows)
Working Together
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Greater local participation
Local population still involved and considered
Involve local residents in decision making
More input of local people
Improved communication between all involved
Prevent dilution of local interests/ way of life
‘Government’ of Flamborough Head more local – not from Beverley or Scarborough
Work more closely with local and other partners
More decision making at local level
Tourism
•
•
All local hotels B & Bs etc should know what’s on their doorstep and promote it for us
No more tourism development (caravan sites)
An. III.1
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Concerns over high tourist number during summer park and ride control on cars
Interpretation across all areas
The introduction of an inland footpath bridleway network
Too much tourism will take the areas value away
Tourism
Promotion and increase the area and heritage in East Yorkshire i.e. Headland
Less interference signs etc but there has to be control over tourism
Improvement of honey-pot areas
Wider use - Increased use of the North side of the Head
Increase visitor attraction
Better public transport and connection to the main centre in Bridlington
Increase tourism related to wildlife, diving and bird watching
Visitor centre reflecting local environment and run by locals
Improved foot access to whole headland
A really integrated marketing policy re tourism and economies (ICZM must in 20? years
succeed). ERYC must promote activity
Restrict impact of visitors by regular repairs and maintenance
Sustainable tourism
Protect the area for local people, sustainable tourism
Keep the areas as they are. Ensure no access
Maintain and improve tourist caring attitude
Increase promotion of the uniqueness of Flamborough Head
Promote to wide audience via boat trips - RSPB and Bridlington Cruises
Use of media to promote importance of site for tourism and economic support
Promote tourism to the area
Fisheries
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Fishing
Healthy fishery
No restriction with bait collecting
Keep/improve traditional work/skills e.g. fishing farming
Fishing
Increase fishing
Crabbing
Re-establishing of plaice fishery on Smithic Bank
Local industry survives
Maintain fishing at Flamborough to maintain heritage
Less fishing effort in the Flamborough area than there has been in the last 50 years
A sustainable recreational fishery
Protection and conservation for local fishermen
Stronger control measures for fish stocks in North Sea
Plaice stocks recovery dependent on trawling restriction
Viable fishing industry
Restrict bass catches to maintain a high population to attract anglers. Increase in size limit
Maintain a viable fishing industry
Limit dredging or drilling
Environment
•
•
Protect cliffs from fossil collectors
Protection of cliffs – fossils etc
An. III.2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Increase and make a better healthy environment
Biodiversity must be maintained and sustained
Increased biodiversity in general
Protect key breeding environment for breeding birds e.g. cliff sites for sea birds
Stronger protection measures at sea and on land – closer monitoring and policing
Protection in wildlife
Increased sea birds populations
Encourage farm diversification (but not always building)
Healthy environment
Wildlife protected both marine and on coastline
Enhance habitat for birds on migration NB water levels reclamation of ‘former’ wetlands
Bird life increased – sea and farmland species
Improvement in ditches/hedge grows
Protect wildlife and local industry
Trees and hedgerows managed
Education
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Full interpretation of the key interests of the site via signage etc
Increase awareness of birds of conservation concern on land (Red List spp) promote to
farmers encourage countryside stewardship
Increase educational opportunities at all sector level comp, post 16, I & E, ACC
Better information about the archaeology
Local expertise is great and very powerful – all data should be well coordinated with BAPs
Development that encourages and includes local people and at all levels
More public information
Continue to actively promote the unique features of Flamborough Head
Make full and proper use of all data available
Lack of information available
Promotional plan in place
Wider national international recognition of all aspects of headland
Get local user groups to work together
Create a database for access to all regarding flora, fauna, wrecks etc
Increase awareness of the public by “education” aimed at all age groups
All children should be taught their own heritage – or Steven Spielberg will do it first. E.g.
John Paul Jones
Education Schemes to both young people and old
Wider education of marine environment
Development
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Ensure no building in Danes Dykes i.e. Old Farm
Housing for local people
No signs – reduced evidence of people
Quiet
Caravan sites improved visually
Keep it natural and not too much regulation. No major building
Strict planning controls regarding caravan sites and any commercial development
Not too many new buildings to go up!
Minimize pollution
Building or property for need only not specific building
Pressure from new housing
An. III.3
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Protect local industry and create new opportunities – but that are sustainable
Protection of traditional buildings e.g. castle, farm buildings etc
A limit to Residential Building – Keep a green belt
No more street lamps – less light pollution
Needs for local affordable housing to keep the info structure
Local facilities – especially schools and for the aging population
No wind farms on the head
Prevent over development/reduction of public spaces
Funding
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Well Funded and sustained – heritage coast
Funding to be provided for footpath improvements
More funding to research into environmental issues
Community action group to grow with funding for new projects
Funding stream to ensure continuity of projects and future
Better funding
Local schools (ERYC) should not be put off visiting the area due to insurance -funding for
visits should be found
Money
Ones which didn’t fit into a category
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bays - Too much change, will go but in a given period will return (population will drop) will
still be here 20 years time
Seemingly a lot of problems seem to come from EYC (Directives) are ME.Ps aware!
Increase tele working for community keep expertise in Flamborough
Trip for all project staff and volunteers on Yorkshire Belle
To many different bodies in the organisation
Take into account Health and Safety issues to all users on site
Don’t just do this again again and produce static document. Make it real to everyone living
here and working on the Head
Leave it alone x5
No change leave it alone
If it isn’t broken, don’t try to mend it
Don’t see any reason for any drastic changes in the next 20years
Keep various shopping within village
Barriers – What’s stopping us from achieving this vision: Summary
of post-it notes
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Paid jobs in conservation loses volunteer interest if not handled and continuity
Financial/funding constraints
Finance v. conservation
Lack of finance
Short term funding – lack of continuity
Lack of staff on the ground to manage issues
‘Authorities’ can be patronising
Workshop fatigue!
Fatigue of ‘new’ guanos
ICZM - Who is leading?
Influx of new villages – ageing population
An. III.4
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Conflict of interest ICZM/Management plans/volunteers – who does what, how to involve
local community
Business interest versus local people
Policing, Enforcement e.g. cycling
Some issues are difficult to police e.g. wreck diving, fossil hunting
Health and Safety constraints
Apathy – Why are all SPCC here e.g. Bempton/Buckton is it perceived as Flamborough
‘thing’
Many local people not interested
Confusion! – Too many bodies
Fear of legislation impacting on local industry (bait collecting)
Lack of recognition of existing work – e.g. community groups
Marketing issue promotion
Need someone to promote ESS on Headland
Blinkered approach from ERYC, Parish Council
Technology – to be used effectively – e.g. Text to mobiles for under 25s
Visitors like to see boats being pulled out of the sea
Continuity
Changes that will occur following global warming
Bad communication
Using existing groups – bridge building already in place e.g. Richard Baines work
Communication issues – what is best way to connect to audience
Workshop feedback information
25 people where involved in the first workshop and gave the following feedback: Did you find this process worthwhile?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Yes, but it has been done many times before
As long as it produces results where appropriate
Yes x 15
Yes, allowed various groups to talk which may not normally be in one room at the same time
Yes, very interesting
Yes, for both management strategy process and my work within RSPB
Very good
Yes, quite worthwhile
Do you think there is anything we can do to improve the running of future workshops?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Train facilitators who know the area well and the history of heritage coast etc – so they speak
the language of the community
Need to know the scope of the powers of the relevant authorities
No x 6
Perhaps inform people of agenda before hand so can think about the issues before they arrive
It was well organised but would have been useful to have opportunity to ask questions
Seems ok
Explain link between different groups and what use this workshop will be for future
development
Seemed to work well – you’re the experts
Possible bigger venue
Better community and publicise event more
An. III.5
•
•
•
•
•
Ensure backup on points raised
More information regarding projects etc
Preliminary/background information should be supplied to delegates prior to workshop
participation
No, excellent
No – went really well – facilitated process was excellent and mix of representatives
Any other comments
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Well done to all who organised it
Include all headland e.g. Reighton, Speeton, Bempton, Sewerby
I would like to receive any available information i.e. maps etc
Looking forward to more workshops and involvement
No x 2
Talking to each other is the only way forward for sustainable results
Good meeting, good to see and hear supportive participants, very nice food
Slide presentation perhaps too technical – too much conservation jargon – quite a few blank
faces
I’d recommend more of a community angle and then introduce the technical stuff
Good opportunity to air our views on our village
Thank you
Looking forward to next event
An. III.6
Stakeholder Meeting – Tuesday 26 April 2006
Comments on proposed policies; actions and projects intended to
deliver the 20-year vision; Summary of post-it notes
Fisheries
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Spend 20 years to develop a methodology to monitor sea habitat within SAC as way of
collecting information in order to form correct decision on any limitation on trawling and
potting. The SAC will only work with full support of Local Community i.e. Localness
No database exists on offshore fauna and until one exists no restrictions of fishing should take
place
Work with existing fishermen to ensure no expansion of effort
Not to damage existing fisherman lively hoods
I don’t agree with stopping Trawling and the knock on effect on lobster potting
Marine Stewardship Council has no information base. It relies on doubtful scientific data
Extension of Bass Net Permitting into Filey Bay
Environment
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Muntons Outface
Health and Safety policy needed
Need to undertake Cliff stability survey and develop monitoring methodology
Information Leaflet. Information Boards. Website
Will be useful for YWT to relate how we manage our small part of the headland to how the
rest of it is managed and to work together
Highlight the limits of the SSI to site visitors
Researchers at local universities have much research data on Yorkshire and Yorkshire coasts.
Some may not be published
Tourism
•
•
•
The Bridlington Hotel and Guest House Association would be happy through members
meetings – to make guests aware of the environment and the safety aspects. We would
welcome your attendance at a general meeting of our members to discuss the matter
Educate visitors of the dangers of rock falls to the base of the cliffs
Encourage rail visits and sign for ramblers from stations
Development
•
•
Flamborough Head Management Scheme. Information Boards at lighthouse, North Landing.
Bempton RSPB Park
Extend the Dinosaur Coast Initiative to cover Flamborough and Bridlington
An. III.7
Access
•
•
•
Very Interested in improving people’s under-standing of the sites European importance –
Misuse, when it occurs, is often out of ignorance rather than malice
• Codes of conduct an excellent idea
It may be possible to produce a pamphlet on the local geology of the site via the geological
society
Promote non-car access – Cycle, Buses, and trains. Incorporate cycle route from train station
etc
Education and Awareness
•
•
Develop a Flamborough website with information pooled and photos to make it popular
Develop Health and Safety policy for any visiting educational groups
19 people where involved in the second workshop and gave the following feedback: Did you find this process worthwhile?
•
•
•
Definitely
Yes it gave an insight into the consultation process
Yes x 4
•
•
•
•
•
Seem to have got everything correct – perhaps more?
The format worked well
Involve local representatives to deliver short presentation on their interest/work areas
No x 2
More knowledge
Any other comments
•
•
•
Very informative – as we are going through a number exercise we are looking to promote
yours and work in with you and the fisheries
For advice on Geological issues I recommend discussion with other local group chairs
Our association would be willing to assist in any way – we will be able to pass information on
to our members so they can educate the guests who use the Flamborough facilities etc
Great improvement in my knowledge of the scheme and its aims
An. III.8
Stakeholder Meeting – Wednesday 19 July 2006
Comments on the draft scheme; Summary of post-it notes
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Be careful of the use of acronyms
Document is very technical
Executive summary required
Document is for two very different audiences
Not very easy to find points people have on personal interest
Fewer chapters would be better
Broad based document covering many aspects
No real attempts to address marine heritage? Wrecks?
Need for more communications with fishing communities
Difficulty in determining impact of fishing on habitat/species
Improved communication
Projects
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Interpretation – good but not overkill
Codes of conduct – good
Criticism of previous practical projects, especially access, recreation sites
NB: when funding runs out – maintenance goes
Tourism opportunity – caves
Bus route to Headland before 22nd July. Would be beneficial to tourism
Stronger educational use
Business opportunity – potential is high – bus service; cycle hire
Traditions are changing/being lost
Monitoring – Long period to determine changes
Greater detail
Ability to include anecdotal evidence
Natural variation vs. other influences
Incorporating monitoring from other sources e.g. schools, universities
Impacts on local community – proportionality of management
Right management for local issues
Coastal erosion b/c of paths, heritage coast
Consider types of material for pathways
Heritage coast loss perceived as negative
Preferred project options
•
•
•
Any that raises the profile
Awareness raising
Website has to be key
An. III.9
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Holiday spending is consistently down (equity on property has been sent)
Question regarding importance of farming on headland
History is plentiful
Concentrate on getting people here – rather than interpretation once they have found
Flamborough Headland
Mix between cafes and museums/information
Oral history project – good potential:
- E.g. local dialect; phrases
- E.g. CD for schools
Extending Wolds Way – supported
Education – stating at schools, leaflets? Code of conduct (kids), litter issues
Appropriate litter bins
Leaflets made available in prominent spaces
Advertising –media
Information boards/access as whole project including underwater
‘Passionate about Planting’ scheme as educational tool
Code of conduct i.e. geological sampling
Monitoring information education litter control
Tourism Problem
•
One off funding for walks leaflets. ………Popular run out
What did you think of the review process; Summary of points
•
•
•
•
•
Excellent management
A range of people invited, fishermen, farmers, hoteliers, small businesses
Methods of communication used to inform people of the workshops was satisfactory
Two way discussion worked well
Facilitation is a good method to us
The future, meetings and structure; summary of points
•
•
•
•
•
Use of local gala, fete show to re-enforce Flamborough spirit
Better use of communications – E.g. press releases via tourist information centre
Improved dialogue especially for fisheries issues, NESFC, English Nature and Fishermen
Better undertaking and consultation with fishermen
Monitoring must feedback into management and forum
Future meetings
•
•
•
•
•
Local experts putting their case/story
6 month preferred to 1 year
Humber case study – every 4 months (matters less if someone misses one)
• Have a speaker e.g. EN, fisheries
Newsletter supported by all
Venue (WI Hall) – perfect
An. III.10
18 people where involved in the third workshop and gave the following feedback: Did you find this process worthwhile?
•
•
•
•
•
Yes x 10
Very much
Yes, involvement of user group, consultation
Yes – interesting to see how Flamborough Management Scheme has progressed
Interesting exercise
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Always room for improvement but this meeting was a good two way discussion
No x 4
Not really – process worked very good
Bring a few school teachers into group
No – just get them there
Newsletter
Increase participation – younger people (school children)
Perhaps raise questions before the meeting so have time to think about input etc
Concentrate on essential points
Encourage positive actions to improve management, which are achievable
Any other comments
•
•
•
•
•
Well organised workshop
Feedback – very interesting
Meetings gave good feed – back
Well done – moving forward and being developed
Thanks
An. III.11
Flamborough Head
English Nature’s advice given under Regulation 33(2) of the
Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994
14 January 2000
Issued 14 January 2000
English Nature’s advice for the Flamborough Head European marine site
given under Regulation 33(2) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.)
Regulations 1994
Contents
Preface
1.
Introduction....................................................................................................................5
1.1
Natura 2000........................................................................................................5
1.2
English Nature’s role .........................................................................................5
1.3
The role of relevant authorities ..........................................................................6
1.4
Activity outside the control of relevant authorities............................................6
1.5
Responsibilities under other conservation designations ....................................7
1.6
Role of conservation objectives .........................................................................7
1.7
Role of advice on operations..............................................................................7
2.
Identification of interest features under the EU Habitats and Birds Directives.............8
2.1
Introduction........................................................................................................8
2.2
Interest features under the EU Habitats Directive .............................................8
2.3
Interest features under the EU Birds Directive ..................................................8
3.
European marine site interest features .........................................................................10
3.1
Reefs ................................................................................................................10
3.1.1 General description ..............................................................................10
3.1.2 Importance of reefs ..............................................................................10
3.1.3 Sub-features of reef habitats at Flamborough Head ............................11
3.2
Sea caves..........................................................................................................15
3.2.1 General description ..............................................................................15
3.2.2 Importance of sea caves.......................................................................16
3.2.3 Sub-features of sea cave habitats at Flamborough Head .....................16
4.
Conservation objectives for all interest features..........................................................19
4.1
The conservation objective for the reefs..........................................................19
4.2
The conservation objective for the submerged or partially submerged sea
caves.................................................................................................................19
5.
Favourable condition table...........................................................................................20
6.
Advice on operations ...................................................................................................26
6.1
Purpose of advice.............................................................................................26
6.2
Methods for assessment ...................................................................................26
6.2.1 Sensitivity assessment..........................................................................27
6.2.2 Exposure assessment............................................................................27
6.2.3 Vulnerability assessment .....................................................................27
6.3
Format of advice ..............................................................................................28
6.4
Update and review of advice............................................................................28
6.5
Summary of advice on operations....................................................................29
6.5.1 Reefs ....................................................................................................29
6.6
6.7
6.8
6.5.2 Sea caves..............................................................................................29
Plans and Projects ............................................................................................30
Review of consents ..........................................................................................31
Interest feature and sub-feature specific advice...............................................31
6.8.1 Reefs ....................................................................................................31
6.8.2 Sea caves..............................................................................................37
7.
Bibliography ................................................................................................................39
8.
Glossary .......................................................................................................................42
Appendix I
Appendix IIa
Appendix IIb
Appendix III
List of relevant authorities for the Flamborough Head European marine site.45
Map of Flamborough Head candidate SAC.....................................................47
Map of the Flamborough Head and Bempton Cliffs SPA ...............................48
Summary of key biotopes recorded in the Flamborough Head European
marine site........................................................................................................49
Appendix IV Matrix of relative vulnerability ........................................................................53
Appendix V English Nature’s Habitats Regulations Guidance Note 1: The Appropriate
Assessment (Regulation 48) The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.)
Regulations 1994 .............................................................................................54
List of figures, tables and boxes
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Location map for the Flamborough Head European marine site
Map to illustrate the extent of reefs in the Flamborough Head European
marine site
Map to illustrate approximate extent of sea caves in the Flamborough
Head European marine site
Sublittoral chalk habitats off the northern side of Flamborough Head
(Wood 1988), illustrating the importance of sublittoral topography on
community structure
Box 1
Glossary of terms used in favourable condition table
Table 1
Favourable condition table for the Flamborough Head European marine
site
Operations which may cause deterioration or disturbance to the
Flamborough Head European marine site interest features at current
levels of use
Sensitivity and vulnerability matrix for the Flamborough Head European
marine site interest features
Exposure assessment of interest features of the Flamborough Head
European marine site based on current levels of usage at the site
Table 2
Table 3a
Table 3b
Preface
This document provides English Nature’s advice to other relevant authorities as to (a) the
conservation objectives, and (b) any operations which may cause deterioration of natural
habitats or the habitats of species, or disturbance of species for the Flamborough Head
European marine site. This advice is being prepared to fulfill our obligations under
Regulation 33(2) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994.
The Flamborough Head European marine site is part of a candidate Special Area of
Conservation. It is Government policy that such sites should be protected as if they were
already designated and, where appropriate, it is desirable to establish voluntary management
schemes at an early stage, before the formal statutory obligations apply, and to act in the
spirit of the Directive in the meantime (DETR & The Welsh Office 1998). In light of this
policy, we have worked with many of you to develop this advice in advance of statutory
obligations applying.
European marine sites are defined in the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations
1994 as any part of a European site covered (continuously or intermittently) by tidal waters or
any part of the sea in or adjacent to Great Britain up to the seaward limit of territorial waters.
European sites include Special Areas of Conservation under the Habitats Directive, which
support certain natural habitats and species of European importance, and Special Protection
Areas under the Birds Directive which support significant numbers of internationally
important wild birds.
This ‘Regulation 33 package’ is designed to help relevant and competent authorities, who
have responsibilities to implement the Habitats Directive, to:
understand the international importance of the site, underlying physical processes and the
ecological requirements of the habitats and species involved;
develop a management scheme to ensure that the ecological requirements of the site’s interest
features are met; and
set the standards against which the condition of the site’s interest features can be determined
and compliance monitoring undertaken to establish whether they are in favourable condition.
In addition, the Regulation 33 package will provide a basis to inform the scope and nature of
‘appropriate assessment’ required in relation to plans and projects (Regulations 48 & 50 and
by English Nature under Regulation 20). English Nature will keep this advice under review
and may update it every six years or sooner, depending on the changing circumstances of the
European marine site. In addition, we will provide more detailed advice to competent and
relevant authorities to assess the implications of any given plan or project under the
Regulations, where appropriate, at the time a plan or project is being considered. If during the
European Union’s moderation process qualifying interest features are added to this European
marine site, English Nature will add to this advice, as appropriate.
Tim Bines
English Nature
14 January 2000
English Nature’s advice for the Flamborough Head European marine site
given under Regulation 33(2) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.)
Regulations 1994
1.
Introduction
1.1
Natura 2000
The European Union Habitats1 and Birds2 Directives are international agreements which set
out a number of actions to be taken for nature conservation. The Habitats Directive aims to
promote the maintenance of biodiversity, taking account of economic, social, cultural and
regional requirements, and sets out measures to maintain or restore, natural habitats and
species of European Union interest at favourable conservation status3. The Birds Directive
protects all wild birds and their habitats within the European Union, especially migratory
birds and those that are considered rare or vulnerable.
The Habitats and Birds Directives include requirements for the designation of conservation
areas. In the case of the Habitats Directive these are Special Areas of Conservation (SACs)
which support certain natural habitats or species, and in the Birds Directive, Special
Protection Areas (SPAs) which support wild birds of European Union interest. These sites
will form a network of conservation areas to be known as ANatura 2000". Where SACs or
SPAs consist of areas continuously or intermittently covered by tidal waters or any part of the
sea in or adjacent to Great Britain up to the limit of territorial waters, they are referred to as
European marine sites.
Further guidance on European marine sites is contained in the Department of the
Environment Transport and Regions/Welsh Office document: European marine sites in
England & Wales: A guide to the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 and
to the preparation and application of management schemes.
1.2
English Nature’s role
The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 translate the Habitats Directive
into law in Great Britain. It gives English Nature a statutory responsibility to advise relevant
authorities as to the conservation objectives for European marine sites in England and to
advise relevant authorities as to any operations which may cause deterioration of natural
habitats or the habitats of species, or disturbance of species for which the sites have been
designated. This information will be a key component of any of the management schemes
which may be developed for these sites.
1
Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora
2
Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds
3
A habitat or species is defined as being at favourable conservation status when its natural range
and the areas it covers within that range are stable or increasing and the specific structure and
functions which are necessary for its long term maintenance exist and are likely to continue to exist
for the foreseeable future.
5
This document is English Nature’s advice for the Flamborough Head European marine site
issued in fulfilment of Regulation 33(2) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.)
Regulations 1994 (the ‘Regulation 33 package’). Copies of key references quoted in this
document are held at the English Nature local office. In addition to providing such advice, the
Regulation 33 package will inform the scope and nature of ‘appropriate assessment’ which
the Directive requires to be undertaken for plans and projects (Regulations 48 & 50 and by
English Nature under Regulation 20). In the future, English Nature may also provide more
detailed advice to competent and relevant authorities to assess the implications of any such
plans or projects.
1.3
The role of relevant authorities
The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 require relevant authorities to
exercise their functions so as to secure compliance with the Habitats Directive. The
management scheme which the relevant authorities are drawing up under Regulation 34 for
the Flamborough Head European marine site will provide the framework through which this
will be done and it should be based on the advice in this package. In this respect, relevant
authorities must, within their areas of jurisdiction, have regard to both direct and indirect
effects on an interest feature of the site. This may include consideration of issues outside the
boundary of the European marine site.
Relevant authorities should ensure that all plans for the area integrate with the management
scheme for the European marine site. Such plans may include Shoreline Management Plans,
Local Environment Agency Plans, SSSI management plans, local Biodiversity Action Plans
and sustainable development strategies. This must occur to ensure that there is only a single
management scheme through which all relevant authorities exercise their duties under the
Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994.
Relevant authorities also need to have regard to changing circumstances of the SAC and SPA
and may therefore need to modify the management scheme and/or the way in which they
exercise their functions so as to maintain the favourable condition of interest features
concerned in the long term. There is no requirement for relevant authorities to take any
actions outside their statutory functions.
Under certain circumstances, where another relevant authority is unable to act for legal
reasons, or where there is no other relevant authority, English Nature is empowered to use its
byelaw-making powers for Marine Nature Reserves (MNR) for use in European marine sites.
1.4
Activity outside the control of relevant authorities
Nothing within this Regulation 33 package will require relevant authorities to undertake any
actions or ameliorate changes in the condition of interest features if it is shown that the
changes result wholly from natural causes4. This also applies if the changes, although causing
deterioration or disturbance to the interest features, are the result of human or natural events
outside their control. Having issued Regulation 33 advice for European marine sites, English
Nature will work with relevant authorities and others to agree, within a defined time frame, a
4
Determination of what constitutes natural change will be based on the best available information
and scientific opinion at the time.
6
protocol for evaluating all observed changes to baselines and to develop an understanding of
natural change and provide further guidance as appropriate and possible.
On the Flamborough Head European marine site a SAC Management Group, consisting of
relevant authorities (Appendix I), and an advisory group, the Flamborough Head Maritime
Forum consisting of interest groups, have already been set up and should be used to alert
English Nature to such issues so that they may be assessed and any appropriate measures
taken. This does not, however, preclude relevant authorities from taking action to prevent
deterioration to the interest features, for example by introducing or promoting codes of
practice through the Management Group.
1.5
Responsibilities under other conservation designations
In addition to its candidate SAC status and SPA status, parts of Flamborough Head are also
designated and subject to agreements under other conservation legislation (eg SSSIs notified
under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended 1985). The obligation of relevant
authorities and other organisations under such designations are not affected by the advice
contained in this document.
1.6
Role of conservation objectives
Section 4 of this document sets out the conservation objectives for the Flamborough Head
European marine site. They are the starting point from which management schemes and
monitoring programmes are to be developed as they provide the basis for determining what is
likely to cause a significant effect, and for informing on the scope of appropriate assessments
of plans or projects. The conservation objectives set out what needs to be achieved and thus
deliver the aims of the Habitats Directive.
1.7
Role of advice on operations
The advice on operations set out in Section 6 provides the basis for discussion about the
nature and extent of the operations taking place within or close to the site and which may
have an impact on its interest features. It is given on the basis of the working assumption that
sites have been generally presumed to have been in favourable condition at the time they
were identified. This assumption will be tested during the 2000 - 2006 reporting period. The
advice should also be used to identify the extent to which existing measures of control,
management and use are, or can be made, consistent with the conservation objectives and
thereby focus the attention of relevant authorities and surveillance to areas that may need
management measures.
This operations advice, when issued, will need to be supplemented through further detailed
discussions with the management and advisory groups in formulating and agreeing a
management scheme, where required, to agreed timescales for the European marine site.
7
2.
Identification of interest features under the EU
Habitats and Birds Directives
2.1
Introduction
Flamborough Head is a candidate Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Flamborough
Head and Bempton Cliffs is a Special Protection Area (SPA). The boundaries of these two
sites are illustrated in Appendix II.a and II.b respectively. The marine components of both
sites qualify as European marine sites, as defined by the Regulations. Accordingly, the advice
in this document covers only the habitats and species, within the boundary of the
Flamborough Head European marine site (Figure 1).
Where the habitats and species occur within the European marine site they are referred to as
interest features. Sub-features have also been identified to highlight the ecologically
important components of each interest feature. The interest features and sub-features for the
Flamborough Head European marine site are discussed in Section 3 in more detail and are
mapped at Figures 2 and 3 to show their distribution and extent. The boundary of the
Flamborough Head European marine site is illustrated in Figure 1.
2.2
Interest features under the EU Habitats Directive
Flamborough Head qualifies as a candidate SAC for the following Annex I habitats as listed
in the EU Habitats Directive:
•
•
Reefs
Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
The Flamborough Head SAC also qualifies for the Annex I habitat vegetated sea cliffs of the
Atlantic and Baltic coasts. This does not however, occur within the European marine site,
and therefore within this document, as it occurs above Highest Astronomical Tide. Objectives
to maintain vegetated sea cliffs in favourable condition are found within English Nature’s
conservation objectives for the relevant SSSI within the SAC boundary and will be dealt with
through procedures outlined in the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994.
Relevant authorities will need to have regard to such adjacent European interests within the
management scheme for the European marine site, as they might be affected by activities
taking place within, or adjacent to the European marine site.
2.3
Interest features under the EU Birds Directive
Flamborough Head and Bempton Cliffs qualifies as a SPA for its internationally important
breeding population of kittiwake Rissa tridactyla and nationally important breeding
populations of guillemot Uria aalge, razorbill Alca torda and puffin Fratercula arctica which
nest on the cliffs. The habitat required for these species to nest does not however, occur
within the European marine site as it occurs above Highest Astronomical Tide. Objectives to
maintain the bird interests in favourable condition are found within English Nature’s
conservation objectives for the relevant SSSI within the SPA boundary and will be dealt with
through procedures outlined in the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994.
Relevant authorities will however, need to have regard to such adjacent European interests
within the management scheme for the European marine site, as they might be affected by
activities taking place within, or adjacent to the European marine site.
8
9
3.
European marine site interest features
The UK has 75% of the chalk reefs in Europe and Flamborough Head accounts for nearly 9%
of European coastal chalk exposure (English Nature 1994). Flamborough Head also
represents the most northerly outcrop of coastal chalk in the UK and the most southerly area
of extensive bedrock in the North Sea. The site is characterised by high chalk cliffs (covering
a distance of about 16 km), over 200 caves and numerous stack and arch formations. Rich
communities of seaweeds and invertebrates occur on these shores and on the chalk reefs
offshore, some of them not found on similar chalk sites elsewhere in England. The area is
exceptional in the distance that the chalk is found offshore. Flamborough Head is also located
close to the biogeographical boundary between two North Sea water bodies and it supports a
wide range of marine species. The qualifying interest features of the Flamborough Head
European marine site, the reefs and the sea caves, are described in more detail below.
3.1
Reefs
3.1.1
General description
Reefs are rocky marine habitats or biological concretions that arise from the sea bed (Brown
and others 1997). They are generally subtidal but may extend as an unbroken transition into
the intertidal zone, where they are exposed to the air at low tide. The types of reef habitat
which characterise this interest feature include vertical rock walls, horizontal ledges, broken
rock and boulder fields. The species assemblage is characterised by attached algae and
invertebrates, usually associated with a range of mobile animals, including invertebrates and
fish. The specific communities that occur vary according to a number of factors. Rock type,
for example, is particularly important, with distinct communities associated with chalk and
limestone rock resulting in a restricted distribution in accordance with the distribution of the
rock type. There may be further variety associated with features such as gullies, outcrops and
rockpools. The greatest variety of communities is typically found where coastal topography is
highly varied, with a wide range of exposures to wave actions and tidal streams.
3.1.2
Importance of reefs
The reefs at Flamborough Head are important due to the substrate type, their biogeographic
position and the influence of hydrodynamic processes on reef topography and community
structure. The chalk reefs at Flamborough Head extend further into deeper water than at other
comparable chalk sites in the UK, up to 6 km offshore and into waters 30 m or more in depth
(Davies & Sotheran 1995; Brazier and others 1998), giving one of the most extensive areas of
sublittoral chalk in Europe (Brown and others 1997). The diversity and composition of
biological communities on the reefs around Flamborough Head are a direct result of variation
in habitat type and a number of key ecological factors.
Flamborough Head lies at the western end of a recognised boundary between oceanographic
cells characterised by a strong offshore frontal system, the ‘Flamborough Front’, which
results in a distinct temperature gradient between the waters north and south of the headland
(Pingree & Griffiths 1978) . The front is caused by the meeting of colder, deeper, stratified
waters of the northern North Sea and warmer, shallower, well-mixed waters of the southern
North Sea. The presence of the front contributes to the diverse and unusual range of marine
species at Flamborough Head, some of which are at their southern or northern limit of North
Sea distribution. Where these two distinct water bodies meet, mixing of the waters leads to
10
increased plankton growth and secondary productivity (Institute of Estuarine and Coastal
Studies 1992).
The wide variety of reef habitats at Flamborough Head is the result of both geological
differences between the chalk and the different hydrodynamic regime on the northern and
southern sides of the headland.
The reefs on the northern side are harder and slightly more exposed than those on the
southern side of the headland and as a result, they support a different range of species. The
north and east facing coast is characterised by extensive stepped ‘scars’ that are dissected to
form outcrops and gullies (Figure 4). Compared with the softer chalk on the southern side of
the headland, the harder, more erosion resistant nature of the sublittoral chalk on the northern
side, has resulted in the presence of many sublittoral overhangs and vertical faces, uncommon
at similar chalk reef sites in the UK.
Figure 4. Sublittoral chalk habitats off the northern side of Flamborough Head (Wood
1988), illustrating the importance of sublittoral topography on community structure
Along the south-facing side of the headland, the intertidal rocky shores are characterised by
wide wave-cut platforms where the softer chalk cliffs have been eroded, which are often used
by juvenile kittiwake as roosting sites at low tide. In the subtidal, the bedrock is made up of
terraces which then grade into patches of boulders and cobbles.
The relatively soft nature of chalk compared with other types of rock, enables some species
of animal and plant to bore into it. The presence of these species increases the diversity of the
communities found on chalk. Some species are also unique to chalk shores and are
consequently rare in England.
3.1.3
Sub-features of reef habitats at Flamborough Head
Rocky shore communities - The rocky shores of Flamborough Head are noted for their high
number of intertidal biotopes due to the wide variety of habitats and physical conditions
around the headland (Appendix III; Brazier and others 1998). More than 110 species of
11
seaweed, and over 270 species of invertebrates have been recorded from the rocky shores at
Flamborough Head, some notable to this area (George and others 1988). The rich and varied
shores are of considerable conservation value since they make a significant contribution to
the structure and diversity of the site as a whole. Rocky shores also have an important
functional role, forming a link between marine and terrestrial environments.
Wave exposure has a significant structuring effect on the type and distribution of rocky shore
communities around the headland. At the highest tidal levels around the headland, green and
red microalgal species unique to chalk can be found (Brazier and others 1998), whilst on the
more exposed sides to the north and east, there are a number of chalk-boring lichen species,
such as Eugomontia sacculata (Tittley 1988). Exposed northern and eastern shores of
Flamborough Head tend to be dominated by marine animals such as limpets Patella spp. and
barnacles Semibalanus balanoides. The chalk-boring wrinkled rock borer Hiatella arctica,
the oval piddock Zirfaea crispata and worms of the Polydora spp. are also commonly found
boring into the chalk. The sheltered southern shores, such as at South Landing and Sewerby
Rocks, are dominated by the brown algal wracks Fucus serratus and F. vesiculosus
interspersed with smaller green Enteromorpha spp. and red algae Ceramium spp.
Rockpools, crevices, steps in the rock platforms and boulder communities of the intertidal
rocky shores around the headland all enhance the species richness of the site. They provide
ideal habitats for Fucus spp., red algae Porphyra spp., pink coralline crusts, coral weed
Corallina officinalis, the less common china limpet Patella ulyssiponensis, kelps Laminaria
spp., and shannies Lipophrys pholis.
Flamborough Head is important for Callithamnion sepositum, an algal species not found
further south on the North Sea coast (English Nature 1994), and Sea mare’s tail Halurus
equisetifolius, recorded at South Landing, which is not found further north on the east coast.
Kelp forest communities - Kelp forests are highly productive ecosystems found in the
shallow subtidal and are the major primary producers in the coastal waters of the UK. It is
estimated that 90% of kelp production enters the detrital food webs of coastal areas,
supporting a wide range of habitats in addition to the kelp beds (Birkett and others 1998).
Kelp forests are also of considerable conservation value because they harbour a wide variety
of plants and animals. For example a single kelp holdfast may be home to several thousand
small animals, the stipe may be covered in numerous foliose red algae and invertebrates,
whilst the habitat also plays a significant role as a nursery area for a wide variety of species.
Other important mobile species also occur in the kelp forests, particularly fish such as the
ballan wrasse Labrus bergylta and the cuckoo wrasse Labrus mixtus. These kelp communities
are therefore considered to be key structural and functional components of the reefs at
Flamborough Head.
The composition of the kelp forest communities and associated biotopes around Flamborough
Head (Appendix III; Brazier and others 1998) varies in response to changes in wave
exposure, sublittoral topography and depth. Upward facing outcrops and moderately exposed
bedrock on the north and east sides of the headland are dominated by Laminaria hyperborea
kelp forest with a rich understorey of red algae. The infralittoral on the south side is
characterised by kelps L. hyperborea and by L. saccharina on the seasonally mobile cobbles
and boulders, usually with a reduced richness of red algae. At Flamborough Head, the natural
turbidity of the water restricts kelp forest communities of Laminaria spp. and red algae to a
maximum depth of 5-8 m below the lowest tide (Davies & Sotheran 1995). The water clarity
12
influences the depth at which algal species grow in the nearshore, by affecting light
availability.
The kelp-dominated infralittoral zone at Flamborough Head is particularly important since
major components of the flora, such as the ‘northern’ species of red seaweeds Lomentaria
clavellosa, L. orcadensis, Haraldiophyllum bonnemaisonii, Odonthalia dentata and Ptilota
gunneri, are not found further south in the North Sea (Brazier and others 1996; English
Nature 1994). Several seaweed species also reach their northern limit of distribution on the
east coast at Flamborough Head, including the red algae Schottera nicaensis and
Calliblepharis ciliata, and the brown alga Taonia atomaria (English Nature 1994). In
addition a scarce species of sea squirt, Perophora listeri has been recorded on sublittoral rock
and boulders amongst the kelp forest at Flamborough Head (Brazier and others 1998).
Fig.2
13
14
Subtidal faunal turf communities - ‘Faunal turfs’ are diverse assemblages of attached
animals growing on subtidal hard substrata. They range from low encrusting forms, such as
sea mats and sponges, to tall erect forms, such as soft corals and sea fans. These communities
also include prominent mobile organisms associated with the attached fauna such as decapod
crustaceans, echinoderms, molluscs and fish, which may play important structuring roles in
the community (Hartnoll 1998). By definition, faunal turf communities are animal dominated,
although there will be foliose and crustose red algae present in the upper regions which
overlap with the shallower infralittoral zone. In contrast to intertidal substrata, zonation of
subtidal communities is very much broadened and space is less frequently monopolised by
single dominant species.
Subtidal faunal turf communities at Flamborough Head make up a significant proportion of
the reef resource (Figure 2), extending below 2 m depth (Brazier and others 1998), and are
therefore an important component of the reefs. The extent (Davies & Sotheran 1995) and
diversity of circalittoral biotopes (Brazier and others 1998) is a result of the hydrographic
regime, substrate type and seabed topography.
Flamborough Head is situated in a current-swept area which brings with it a different set of
conditions and therefore results in different biota to that of nearby areas that lack such
movement. Increased water movement is important for the benthic communities on the reefs
at Flamborough Head. It increases the provision of suspended food for filter feeders,
contributes to effective larval dispersal/ recruitment of many marine species and limits the
settlement of silt, which leads to the clogging of gills and feeding organs from smothering.
The relatively soft sublittoral chalk at Flamborough Head also provides a wide variety of
habitats, such as vertical faces, overhangs and boulder fields, for marine species to attach or
burrow into.
The ‘living turf’ at Flamborough Head is characterised by molluscs, sea-firs, sea mats, sea
squirts and sponges, some of which are fragile or slow growing, as well as numerous mobile
species, some of which are commercially important. Some heavily sand-influenced habitats
on the north-facing coast have small reefs of the polychaete Sabellaria spinulosa tubes
constructed out of sand particles on bedrock (Wood 1988). Horse mussel Modiolus modiolus
and common mussel Mytilus edulis beds, to the east of the headland (Brazier and others
1998), are bound together by byssus threads which in turn create specialist habitats for other
species to grow on or in.
Flamborough Head represents the northern limit of distribution for both the ‘southern’
species of ascidian Archidistoma aggregatum and yellow sponge Polymastia boletiformis,
whilst the bottle-brush hydroid Thuiaria thuja reaches its southern limit of distribution in
England here (Brazier and others 1996). The nationally rare hydroid Diphasia alata and the
bryozoan Smittina affinis have also been recorded at Flamborough Head (Barnes & Robson
1995).
3.2
Sea caves
3.2.1
General description
The UK has the most varied and extensive sea caves on the Atlantic coast of Europe (Brown
and others 1997). Sites have been selected to encompass the range of structural and
ecological variation of sea caves and cover their geographic range. Cave systems with
15
extensive areas of vertical and overhanging rock, and those that extend deeply into the rock,
are likely to support a wider range and higher diversity of plants and animals.
Cave communities vary considerably depending on the structure and extent of the cave
system, their degree of submergence and of exposure to scour and surge, and the nature of
their geology. Caves can vary in size, from only a few metres to more extensive systems,
which may extend hundreds of metres into the rock. There may be tunnels or caverns with
one or more entrance, in which the vertical and overhanging rock faces provide the principal
marine habitat. Caves are typically colonised by encrusting animal species but may also
support shade-tolerant algae near their entrances
Caves in the intertidal and shallow sublittoral are frequently subject to conditions of strong
wave surge and scour by coarse sediment. This rapid change in physical conditions from cave
entrance to the inner parts of the cave often leads to a marked zonation in the communities
present. The type of bedrock in which the cave is formed has a significant influence on its
shape and qualities as a substrate for its associated communities.
3.2.2
Importance of sea caves
There are larger numbers and a wider range of cave habitats at Flamborough Head than at any
other chalk site in Britain (Brown and others 1997). This site, on the east coast of England,
represents caves of the North Sea coast cut into soft rock exposures. There are over 200 caves
(Tittley 1988) at Flamborough Head, particularly around the headland and on the north facing
cliffs (Figure 3) where weaknesses associated with faulting and jointing in the chalk are
exposed to wave action.
The largest caves are known to extend for more than 50 m from their entrance on the coast.
The caves at Flamborough Head provide shelter to a variety of bird species, including the
internationally important kittiwake.
The chalk rock facilitates the attachment of specialist plant and animal communities, some
unique to this substrate, making them of high conservation value due to the rarity of this
habitat. The site is important for its specialised encrusting and filamentous algal
communities, including abundant Hildenbrandia rubra, Pseudoendoclonium submarinum,
Sphacelaria nana and Waerniellina lucifuga (George and others 1988).
The variation in cave topography and exposure to physical conditions are key determinants in
the distribution and type of cave communities at Flamborough Head. Some of the caves are
partly submerged at all stages of the tide, others dry out during low water and some lie above
the high water mark but are heavily influenced by wave splash and salt spray from the sea.
These intertidal cave communities can be described in two broad categories, the upper zone
of the caves being characterised by lichen and specialist algal communities and the lower
shore dominated by faunal turf communities.
3.2.3
Sub-features of sea cave habitats at Flamborough Head
Microalgal and lichen communities - These specialist communities are important subfeatures of the caves at Flamborough Head because of their rarity. The distribution of these
communities and zonation within caves has been described in Tittley (1988), Fowler &
16
Tittley (1993) and Brazier and others (1998). Additional information on these communities
has been collected through a detailed sea cave survey (Howson, in prep.).
The distribution of these communities is in response to exposure to wave action and light
availability, largely determined by the depth and shape of the cave. They are therefore good
indicators of the variety of sea cave habitats at Flamborough Head. The specialist algal and
lichen communities are also considered to be sensitive to a number of external factors and
therefore good indicators of changes in the marine environment.
Faunal cushion and crust communities - The faunal cushion and crust communities are an
important structural component of the caves, particularly in the lower shore. The variety of
these biotopes at Flamborough Head is a result of exposure to scouring, wave surge and
degree of immersion.
Above the sand-scoured rock in the lower parts of the caves at Buckton Cliffs and Thornwick
Bay, the breadcrumb sponge Halichondria panicea and Clathrina coriacea, the beadlet
anemone Actinia equina, spirorbid polychaetes and the tubeworm Pomatoceros triqueter
completely cover the vertical and overhanging walls. Where scour is not so great, crevices
and pits in the caves are inhabited by the common mussel Mytilus edulis, with the barnacle
Semibalanus balanoides and dogwhelk Nucella lapillus. Upper walls and ceilings of the
caves are colonised by the barnacle Semibalanus balanoides and spirorbid polychaetes
(Brazier and others 1998).
Caves at the eastern end of the headland are particularly notable for being rich in certain
sublittoral species. The bedrock floors of the caves are characterised by abundant Sabellaria
alveolata and sponges such as Leucosolenia spp. or the chalk-boring yellow sponge Clionia
celata and Polydora spp. worms, characteristic of the chalk habitats.
17
18
4.
Conservation objectives for all interest features
Under Regulation 33(2)(a) of The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994,
English Nature has a duty to advise other relevant authorities as to the conservation
objectives for the European marine site. The conservation objectives for the Flamborough
Head European marine site are provided below and should be read in the context of other
advice given in this package, particularly:
•
•
•
the attached maps showing the extent of the various interest features and sub-features;
summary information on the interest of each of the features; and
the favourable condition table, providing information on how to recognise favourable
condition for each of the features and which will act as a basis from which the
monitoring programme will be developed.
4.1
The conservation objective for the reefs
Subject to natural change, maintain the reefs in favourable condition 5, in particular:
•
•
•
Rocky shore communities
Kelp forest communities
Subtidal faunal turf communities
4.2
The conservation objective for the submerged or partially submerged
sea caves
Subject to natural change, maintain the submerged or partially submerged sea caves in
favourable condition5, in particular:
•
•
Microalgal and lichen communities
Faunal cushion and crust communities
5
For a detailed definition of how to recognise favourable condition see Section 5 (Table 1)
19
5.
Favourable condition table
The favourable condition table is supplied as an integral part of English Nature’s Regulation
33 advice package. It is intended to supplement the conservation objectives only in relation to
management of established and ongoing activities and future reporting requirements on
monitoring the condition of the site and its features. The table does not by itself provide a
comprehensive basis on which to assess plans and projects as required under Regulations 20
and 48-50, but it does provide a basis to inform the scope and nature of any ‘appropriate
assessment’ that may be needed. It should be noted that appropriate assessments are, by
contrast, a separate activity to condition monitoring, requiring consideration of issues specific
to individual plans or projects. English Nature will provide more detailed advice to competent
and relevant authorities to assess the implications of any given plan or project under the
Regulations, where appropriate, at the time a plan or project is being considered.
The favourable condition table is the principle source of information that English Nature will
use to assess the condition of an interest feature and as such comprises indicators of
condition. On many terrestrial European sites, we know sufficient about the preferred or
target condition of qualifying habitats to be able to define measures and associated targets for
all attributes to be assessed in condition monitoring. Assessments as to whether individual
interest features are in favourable condition will be made against these targets. In European
marine sites we know far less about habitat condition and find it difficult to predict what
favourable condition may look like. Individual sites within a single marine habitat category
are also all very different, further hampering the identification of generic indicators of
condition. Accordingly, in the absence of such information, condition of interest features in
European marine sites will be assessed against targets based on the existing conditions, which
may need to be established through baseline surveys in many cases.
The assumption that existing interest features on European marine sites are in favourable
condition will be tested in the 2000 - 2006 reporting period and the results subsequently fed
back into our advice and site management. Where there is more than one year’s observations
on the condition of marine habitats, all available information will need to be used to set the
site within long-term trends in order to form a view on favourable condition. Where it may
become clear that certain attributes are a cause for concern, and if detailed studies prove this
correct, restorative management actions will need to be taken to return the interest feature
from unfavourable to favourable condition. It is the intention of English Nature to provide
quantification of targets in the favourable condition table during the 2000 - 2006 reporting
period.
This advice also provides the basis for discussions with management and advisory groups,
and as such the attributes and associated measures and targets may be modified over time.
The aim is to produce a single agreed set of attributes that will then be monitored in order to
report on the condition of features. Monitoring of the attributes may be of fairly coarse
methodology, underpinned by more rigorous methods on specific areas within the site. To
meet UK agreed common standards, English Nature will be committed to reporting on each
of the attributes subsequently listed in the final version of the table, although the information
to be used may be collected by other organisations through agreements.
The table will be an important, but not the only, driver of the site monitoring programme.
Other data, such as results from compliance monitoring and appropriate assessments, will
also have an important role in assessing condition. The monitoring programme will be
20
developed as part of the management scheme process through discussion with the relevant
authorities and other interested parties. English Nature will be responsible for collating the
information required to assess condition and will form a judgement on the condition of each
feature within the site, taking into account all available information and using the favourable
condition table as a guide.
Box 1
Glossary of terms used in the favourable condition table
Feature
The habitat or species for which the site has been selected.
Sub-feature An ecologically important sub-division of the feature.
Attribute
Selected characteristic of an interest feature/sub-feature which provides an
indication of the condition of the feature to which it applies.
Measure
What will be measured in terms of the units of measurement, arithmetic nature
and frequency at which the measurement is taken. This measure will be
attained using a range of methods, from broadscale to more specific, across the
site.
Target
This defines the desired condition of an attribute, taking into account
fluctuations due to natural change. Changes that are significantly different
from the target will serve as a trigger mechanism through which some further
investigation or remedial action is taken.
Comments
The rationale for selection of the attribute.
21
Table 1 Favourable Condition Table for the Flamborough Head European marine site
NB- Many of the attributes will be able to be monitored at the same time or during the same survey. The frequency of sampling for many
attributes may need to be greater during the first reporting cycle in order to characterise the site and establish the baseline. For more detailed
information on abbreviated biotopes in Measure and Comments columns, refer to Glossary and Appendix III.
Interest
feature
Reefs
Reefs
Sub-feature
Rocky shore
communities
Attribute
Measure
Target
Comme nts
Extent
Area (hectares) of the reefs,
measured once per reporting
cycle
No decrease in extent from an
established baseline based on
Davies & Sotheran (1995),
subject to natural change
Extent is an attribute on which reporting is required by the
Habitats Directive. The extent of reef will not change
significantly over time unless due to some human activity
but nevertheless needs to be measured periodically
Water clarity
Average light attenuation
measured during the summer
season annually throughout the
reporting cycle
Average light attenuation
should not decrease
significantly from a baseline
to be established, subject to
natural change
Water clarity is important for maintaining extent and
density of algal dominated communities, such as kelp
forest, and thus the structure of the feature. Clarity
decreases through increases in amounts of suspended
organic/inorganic matter. Siltation may also lead to
smothering of biota and substrata affecting the structure of
the interest feature by causing a reduction in feeding
efficiency and colonisation
Water density
Average water temperature,
measured during
winter/summer seasons
annually throughout the
reporting cycle
Distribution
and range of
all intertidal
biotopes
Distribution of intertidal rocky
shore communities, using
littoral extent, in particular
those biotopes listed at
Appendix III. Measured during
summer, twice during reporting
cycle
Average seasonal water
temperatures for north and
south sides of the headland
should not deviate
natural change
No decrease in littoral extent
and range of biotopes from
the established baseline
(Brazier and others 1998),
The temperature difference between the north and south
sides is characteristic of the overall hydrography of the
area, in particular the Flamborough Front. Changes in
temperature influences the presence and distribution of
species (along with recruitment processes and spawning
behaviour), providing supporting information when
assessing condition of interest features
Flamborough Head intertidal is notable for its high
number of biotopes. The relative distribution of rocky
shore biotopes is an important structural aspect of the
European marine site. Changes in extent and distribution
may indicate long term changes in the physical conditions
at the site
22
Interest
feature
Sub-feature
Kelp forest
communities
Reefs
Kelp forest
communities
Attribute
Measure
Target
Comme nts
Distribution
of
characteristic
rocky shore
communities
cliff algal and lichen biotopes
Chr; Bli;UloUro. Measured in
summer months twice during
report cycle
Distribution should not
deviate significantly from the
established baseline (Tittley
1988), subject to natural
change
Presence of Chr; Bli; UloUro are a structural component
of the reef, but are particularly important due to their
rarity. Also suggested that they may be useful indicators
and therefore changes in extent and distribution may
indicate long term changes in physical conditions at the
Distribution
and range of
kelp biotopes
Distribution of kelp dominated
infralittoral communities
measured using extent, in
particular those biotopes listed
at Appendix III. Measured
during summer, twice during
reporting cycle
No decrease in sublittoral
extent and range of biotopes
from the established baseline
(Davies & Sotheran 1995;
Brazier and others 1998),
Extent and distribution of kelp biotopes is an important
structural (composition) and functional (productivity)
aspect of the European marine site. Changes in extent and
distribution may indicate long term changes in the
physical conditions at the site.
Species
composition
of
characteristic
biotopes
Presence and abundance of
composite species from biotope
LhypFt. Measured during
summer, twice during reporting
cycle
composite species should not
deviate significantly from a
baseline to be established,
LhypFt is a major component of the kelp forest at
Flamborough Head. Species composition is an important
contributor to the structure of LhypFt and therefore the
reef as a whole. The presence and relative abundance of
characterising species gives an indication of the quality of
LhypFt and change in composition may indicate cyclic
change/ trend in reef communities
Characteristic
speciespresence and
abundance of
Ptilota
gunneri and
Odonthalia
dentata.
Presence and abundance of red
feathery seaweed Ptilota
gunneri and red alga
Odonthalia dentata. Measured
during summer, once during
report cycle
these species should not
established baseline (Brazier
and others 1996; 1998),
Characteristic species of red algae; Ptilota gunneri and
Odonthalia dentata are regionally important. Species
selected are ‘northern species’ and not found further south
on UK’s east coast. They therefore act as indicators of
changes in water circulation and temperature patterns,
associated with the meeting of colder water body of the
northern North Sea and warmer southern North Sea at the
Flamborough Front
23
Interest
feature
Sub-feature
Subtidal
faunal turf
communities
Reefs
Subtidal
faunal turf
communities
Attribute
Measure
Target
Comme nts
Characteristic
speciespresence and
abundance of
Calliblepharis
ciliata,
Halurus
equisetifolius,
and Taonia
atomaria.
Distribution
and range of
circalittoral
biotopes
algal species Calliblepharis
ciliata, Halurus equisetifolius,
and Taonia atomaria.
Measured during summer, once
during report cycle
established baseline (Brazier
and others 1996; 1998),
Characteristic species of algae; Calliblepharis ciliata,
Halurus equisetifolius, and Taonia atomaria are
regionally important. Species selected are ‘southern
species’ and not found further north on UK’s east coast.
They therefore act as indicators of changes in water
circulation and temperature patterns, associated with the
meeting of colder water body of the northern North Sea
and warmer southern North Sea at the Flamborough Front
Distribution of circalittoral
communities measured using
extent, in particular those
biotopes listed at Appendix III.
Measured during summer,
twice during reporting cycle
No decrease in the
distribution and range of
biotopes from the established
baseline value (Davies &
Sotheran 1995), subject to
natural change
Flamborough Head subtidal is noted for the number and
range of biotopes because they make up a significant
proportion of the reef resource at this site. Relative
distribution and number of circalittoral biotopes is an
important structural and functional aspect of the European
marine site. Changes in extent and variety may indicate
long term changes in the physical conditions at the site
Species
composition
of
characteristic
biotopes
composite species from FluFlu;
StoPaur; AlcByH.Hia.
Measured during summer
months, twice during reporting
cycle
composite species should not
FluFlu; StoPaur; AlcByH.Hia, are major components of
the subtidal faunal turf reef communities at Flamborough
Head. Species composition is an important contributor to
the structure of FluFlu; StoPaur; AlcByH.Hia, and
therefore the reef as a whole. The presence and relative
abundance of characterising species of these biotopes is
being used as an indicator of the health of the reef as a
whole. Change in composition may indicate cyclic
change/ trend in reef communities as a whole
24
Interest
feature
Sub-feature
Attribute
Measure
Target
Comme nts
Characteristic
speciespresence and
abundance of
Archidistoma
aggregatum
and
Polymastia
boletiformis
Characteristic
speciespresence and
abundance of
Thuiaria
thuja
Presence and abundance of the
ascidian Archidistoma
aggregatum and the yellow
sponge Polymastia
boletiformis. Measured once
during report cycle
Characteristic species Archidistoma aggregatum and the
yellow sponge Polymastia boletiformis are of regional
importance. Species selected are ‘southern’ and not found
further north on UK’s east coast. They therefore act as
indicators of changes in water circulation and temperature
patterns, associated with the meeting of colder water body
of the northern North Sea and warmer southern North Sea
at the Flamborough Front
Presence and abundance of the
bottle-brush hydroid Thuiaria
thuja Measured once during
report cycle
the species should not deviate
natural change
Extent
Number and location,
measured once during reporting
cycle
Specialist
lichen and
algal
communities
Distribution
of
characteristic
sea cave
communities
cave algal and lichen biotopes
RhoCv; Chr; Bli;UloUro.
Measured during summer, once
during reporting cycle
No decrease in extent from a
baseline to be established
(Howson in prep.), subject to
natural change
natural change
Faunal
cushion and
crust
communities
Distribution
of
characteristic
rocky shore
communities
cave biotopes. Measured
during summer, once during
reporting cycle
Characteristic species Thuiaria thuja is regionally
important. Species selected is ‘northern’ and not found
further south on UK’s east coast. Therefore it acts as
indicator of changes in water circulation and temperature
patterns, associated with the meeting of colder water body
of the northern North Sea and warmer souther North Sea
at the Flamborough Front
Extent is an attribute on which reporting is required by the
Habitats Directive. The extent may alter as a result of
natural erosion and collapses as well as a result of human
activity, hence the need for periodic measurement
Distribution of RhoCv; Chr; Bli; UloUro are an important
structural component of the chalk sea caves of
Flamborough Head, and are particularly important due to
their rarity. Changes in extent and distribution may
Distribution of animal dominated biotopes within the sea
caves at Flamborough Head is an important structural
component. Changes in extent and distribution may
Sea
caves
natural change
NB .Extreme events (such as storms, reducing or increasing salinities, exceptionally cold winters or warm summers) also need to be recorded as
they may be critical in influencing ecological issues at Flamborough Head and may well be missed by routine monitoring.
25
6.
Advice on operations
English Nature has a duty under Regulation 33(2)(b) of the Conservation (Natural Habitats
&c.) Regulations 1994 to advise other relevant authorities as to any operations which may
cause deterioration of natural habitats or the habitats of species, or disturbance of species, for
which the site has been designated. Information on how English Nature has developed this
advice is given in section 6.2, and on how it may be reviewed and updated in the future, in
section 6.4.
The advice is provided in summary form in Table 2 and section 6.5, and with more detail in
Tables 3a & 3b and section 6.8, including advice in relation to specific interest features and
sub-features.
6.1
Purpose of advice
The aim of this advice is to enable relevant authorities to direct and prioritise their work on
the management of activities that pose the greatest potential threat to the favourable condition
of interest features on the Flamborough Head European marine site. The advice is linked to
the conservation objectives for interest features and, once issued, will help provide the basis
for detailed discussions within the management group to formulate and agree a management
scheme to agreed timescales for the site. The advice given here will inform on, but is without
prejudice to, any advice to be given subsequently under Regulation 48 or Regulation 50 on
operations that qualify as plans or projects within the meaning of Article 6 of the Habitats
Directive.
6.2
Methods for assessment
To develop this advice on operations English Nature has used a three-step process involving:
•
•
•
an assessment of sensitivity of the interest features or their component sub-features to
operations;
an assessment of the exposure of each interest feature or their component subfeatures to operations; and
a final assessment of current vulnerability of interest features or their component
sub-features to operations.
This three-step process builds up a level of information necessary to manage activities in and
around the European marine site in an effective manner. Through a consistent approach, this
process enables English Nature to both explain the reasoning behind our advice and identify
to competent and relevant authorities those operations which pose the most current threats to
the favourable condition of the interest features on the European marine site.
All the scores of relative sensitivity, exposure and vulnerability are derived using best
available scientific information and informed scientific interpretation and judgement. The
process uses sufficiently coarse categorisation to minimise uncertainty in information,
reflecting the current state of our knowledge and understanding of the marine environment.
Information has been gathered from a range of sources including reports such as ABP
Research & Consultancy (1999).
26
6.2.1
Sensitivity assessment
The sensitivity assessment used is an assessment of the relative sensitivity of the interest
features or the component sub-features of the Flamborough Head European marine site to the
effects of broad categories of human activities. In relation to this assessment, sensitivity has
been defined as the intolerance of a habitat, community or individual (or individual colony)
of a species to damage, or death, from an external factor (Hiscock 1996). As an example, kelp
communities may be sensitive to increased turbidity resulting from suspended solids because
it affects growth by reducing light penetration, which prevents adequate photosynthesis.
The sensitivity assessments of the interest features or their component sub-features of the
Flamborough Head European marine site are based upon a series of scientific review
documents. These include reports produced for the UK Marine SACs LIFE Project (Birkett
and others 1998; Hartnoll 1998; Hill and others 1998; Gubbay & Knapman 1999; Saunders
and others 1998) and the Marine Habitats Reviews (Jones and others in prep.).
The sensitivity assessments are based on current information but may develop with
improvements in scientific knowledge and understanding. In particular, English Nature and
Scottish Natural Heritage have commissioned the Marine Biological Association of the UK,
through its Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) to provide detailed sensitivity
information to underpin this advice, over the next three years, and made available to all over
the World Wide Web (www.marlin.ac.uk).
6.2.2
Exposure assessment
This has been undertaken for the Flamborough Head European marine site by assessing the
relative exposure of the interest features or their component sub-features on the site to the
effects of broad categories of human activities currently occurring on the site. For example,
the exposure of interest features within the site to changes in the thermal regime as a result of
human activities is negligible but exposure of some of the interest features to organic
enrichment is moderate.
The assessment of exposure has been derived using information collated from relevant
authorities and marine stakeholder groups during the Sensitive Marine Area (SMA) Project
1994- 1998 (Bayliss 1995a, 1995b; Howard 1998), see Table 3b. The SAC Management
Group and Flamborough Head Maritime Forum, an advisory group in the SAC process, are
represented by a significant number of the same organisations and interest groups previously
involved in the SMA Project. Additional information relating specifically to the fishing
industry has been produced in two reports (Senior 1999a; 1999b) as a result of a joint North
Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee and English Nature project.
6.2.3
Vulnerability assessment
The third step in the process is to determine the vulnerability of the interest features or their
component sub-features to operations. This is an integration of sensitivity and exposure. Only
if a feature is both sensitive and exposed to a human activity will it be considered vulnerable.
In this context therefore, ‘vulnerability’ has been defined as the exposure of a habitat,
community or individual (or individual colony) of a species to an external factor to which it is
sensitive (Hiscock 1996). For example, kelp forest is moderately sensitive to changes in
salinity, but within the Flamborough Head European marine site, their exposure to this
27
category of operation, at the current time, is low and hence its vulnerability is also currently
low. The process of deriving and scoring relative vulnerability is provided in Appendix IV.
6.3
Format of advice
The advice is provided within six broad categories of operations which may cause
deterioration of natural habitats or the habitats of species, or disturbance of species. This
approach therefore:
•
enables links to be made between human activities and the ecological requirements of
the habitats or species, as required under Article 6 of the Habitats Directive;
•
provides a consistent framework to enable relevant authorities in England to assess
the effects of activities and identify priorities for management within their areas of
responsibility; and
•
is appropriately robust to take into account the development of novel activities or
operations which may cause deterioration or disturbance to the interest features of the
site and should have sufficient stability to need only infrequent review and updating
by English Nature.
These broad categories provide a clear framework against which relevant authorities can
assess activities under their responsibility. The more detailed information in Tables 3a & 3b
provides relevant authorities with a context against which to consider an assessment of
‘significant effect’ of any plans or projects which may affect the site and a basis to inform on
the scope and nature of appropriate assessments required in relation to plans and projects. It is
important to note that this advice is only a starting point for assessing impacts. It does not
remove the need for relevant authorities to formally consult English Nature over individual
plans and projects where required to do so under the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.)
Regulations 1994.
6.4
Update and review of advice
Information as to the operations which may cause deterioration of natural habitats or the
habitats of species, or disturbance of species, for which the site has been designated, is
provided in light of what English Nature knows about current activities and patterns of usage
(as at September 1999) at the Flamborough Head European marine site. English Nature
expects that the information on current activities and patterns of usage (which was used to
derive Table 2) will be supplemented during the process of developing the management
scheme through further discussion with the relevant authorities. The option of zoning this
information may be appropriate. As such, it is important that future consideration of this
advice by relevant authorities and others takes account of changes in the usage patterns that
have occurred at the site, over the intervening period, since the advice was issued. In contrast,
the information provided in this advice on the sensitivity of interest features or sub-features
(Table 3a) is relatively stable and will only change as a result of an improvement in our
scientific knowledge, which will be a relatively long term process. Advice for sites will be
kept under review and may be periodically updated through discussions with relevant
authorities and others to reflect significant changes in our understanding of sensitivity
together with the potential effects of plans and projects on the marine environment.
28
6.5
Summary of advice on operations
6.5.1
Reefs
In pursuit of the conservation objective for ‘reefs’ (section 4.1), the relevant and competent
authorities for the Flamborough Head European marine site are advised to manage human
activities within their remit such that they do not result in deterioration or disturbance to
habitats or species for which the site has been selected, through any of the following:
•
•
•
•
•
Physical loss by removal and/or smothering
Physical damage by siltation and/or abrasion
Toxic contamination by increased input of synthetic and/or non-synthetic compounds
Non-toxic contamination by organic/nutrient enrichment and/or increased turbidity
Biological disturbance as result of selective extraction of species.
6.5.2
Sea caves
In pursuit of the conservation objective for ‘submerged or partially submerged sea caves’
(section 4.2), the relevant and competent authorities for Flamborough Head European marine
site are advised to manage human activities within their remit such that they do not result in
deterioration or disturbance to habitats or species for which the site has been selected,
through any of the following:
•
•
•
Physical loss by removal
Toxic contamination by increased input of synthetic and/or non-synthetic compounds
Non-toxic contamination by organic/nutrient enrichment
Table 2 showing operations which may cause deterioration or disturbance to the Flamborough
Head European marine site interest features at current levels of use6,7,8.
The advice below is not a list of prohibitions but rather a checklist for operations which may
need to be subject to some form of management measure(s) or further measures where
actions are already in force. Examples of activities under relevant authority jurisdiction are
provided. Operations marked with a 3 indicate those features (or some component of them)
that are considered to be highly or moderately vulnerable to the effects of the operations.
Categories of operations which may cause
deterioration or disturbance
Physical loss
Removal (eg harvesting, coastal development)
Smothering (eg disposal of dredge spoil)
Physical damage
Siltation (eg dredging, outfalls)
Abrasion (eg mobile benthic fishing, anchoring,
trampling)
Selective extraction (eg aggregate dredging,
entanglement)
Non-physical disturbance
Noise (eg boat activity)
Visual (eg recreational activity)
Reefs
Sea caves
3
3
3
3
3
29
Toxic contamination
Introduction of synthetic compounds (eg outfalls)
Introduction of non-synthetic compounds (eg outfalls,
spills)
Introduction of radionuclides
Non-toxic contamination
Nutrient enrichment (eg agricultural run-off, outfalls)
Organic enrichment (eg mariculture, outfalls)
Changes in thermal regime (eg outfalls, power stations)
Changes in turbidity (eg dredging)
Changes in salinity (eg water abstraction, outfalls)
Biological disturbance
Introduction of microbial pathogens
Introduction of non-native species & translocation
Selective extraction of species (eg bait collection,
fishing)
Reefs
Sea caves
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
6
This advice has been developed using best available scientific information and informed scientific
interpretation and judgement (as at September 1999). This process has used a coarse grading of relative
sensitivity, exposure and vulnerability of each interest feature to different categories of operation based on the
current state of our knowledge and understanding of the marine environment (Tables 3a & 3b; Appendix IV).
The advice is indicative only, and is given to guide relevant authorities and others on particular operations
which may cause deterioration of natural habitats or the habitats of species, or disturbance of species for which
the site has been designated. The advice, therefore, is not a list of prohibitions but rather a checklist for
operations which may need to be subject to some form of management measure(s) or further measures where
actions are already in force.
7
The precise impact of any category of operation occurring on the site will be dependent upon the nature, scale,
location and timing of events. More detailed advice is available from English Nature to assist relevant
authorities in assessing actual impacts and cumulative effects. Assessment of this information should be
undertaken in the development of the management scheme by the management group and through wider
consultation.
8
In accordance with Government policy guidance, the advice on operations is feature and site specific, and
provided in the light of current activities and patterns of usage at the site (as at September 1999) that have
occurred over the intervening period. Advice for sites will be kept under review and may be periodically
updated through discussions with relevant authorities, and others, to reflect significant changes in our
understanding of sensitivity together with the potential effects of plans and projects on the marine environment.
The provision of the statutory advice given here, on operations which may cause deterioration of natural habitats
or the habitats of species, or disturbance of species, for which the site has been designated, under Regulation
33(2), is provided without prejudice to, any advice to be given subsequently under Regulation 48(3) or
Regulation 50 on individual operations that qualify as plans or projects within the meaning of Article 6 of the
Habitats Directive.
6.6
Plans and Projects
Under Regulation 48(1), an appropriate assessment needs to be undertaken in respect of any
plan or project which:
a.
b.
either alone or in combination with other plans or projects would be likely to have a
significant effect on a European Site; and
is not directly connected with the management of the site for nature conservation.
30
An appropriate assessment is required by law for all European Sites (Regulation 48). A
European Site is any classified SPA and any SAC from the point where the Union and the
Government agree the site as a Site of Community Importance. Appropriate assessment is
also required, as a matter of Government policy, for potential SPAs, candidate SACs and
listed Ramsar Sites for the purpose of considering development proposals affecting them.
(PPG 9 paras 13 and C7).
English Nature’s ‘Habitats regulations guidance note: The Appropriate Assessment
(Regulation 48)’, is at Appendix V for further information.
Tables 2, 3a & 3b in this Regulation 33 package provide relevant authorities with a guide
against which to initiate an assessment of ‘significance’ of any plans or projects (and ongoing
operations or activities) proposed for the site, although this will only be the starting point for
assessing impacts and does not remove the need for relevant authorities to formally consult
English Nature over individual plans and projects where required under the Regulations.
6.7
Review of consents
Regulation 50 of The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 requires
competent authorities to undertake a review of all existing consents and permissions affecting
cSAC and SPAs, as soon as possible after the site officially becomes a Site of Community
Importance. This will have implications for discharge and other consents, which will need to
be reviewed in light of these objectives and may mean that lower targets for background
levels of contaminants etc will need to be set.
6.8
Interest feature and sub-feature specific advice
This section provides information to help relate general advice to each of the specific interest
features of the Flamborough Head European marine site.
This advice relates to the vulnerability of the interest features and sub-features of the
Flamborough Head European marine site as summarised in Table 2 and detailed in Tables 3a
& 3b. An explanation of the sensitivity of the interest features or sub-features follows, with
examples of their exposure and therefore their vulnerability to damage or disturbance from
the listed categories of operations. This enables links to be made between the categories of
operations and the ecological requirements of the European marine site’s interest features, as
set out in Section 3.
6.8.1
Reefs
Physical loss
•
•
The extensive areas of chalk reefs at Flamborough Head are of international marine
conservation importance as they support a wide variety and unique range of marine
habitats and species. The loss of the reef, or any part of it, could jeopardise the
survival of some of these habitats or species and would therefore be detrimental to the
favourable condition of the reef.
All the sub-features of the reef are considered sensitive to physical loss through direct
removal or smothering, because such losses would be permanent. Furthermore, many
of these communities are dependent upon the ecological functioning of others and the
31
•
•
loss of one may have major implications on the condition of others. This linkage
should not, therefore, be overlooked when the potential impact of removal or
smothering is considered.
Subtidal habitats on the south side of the headland are considered particularly
vulnerable to physical loss since they are more exposed to the potential effects of
smothering due to proximity to outfall pipes and dredged spoil disposal areas.
Deterioration or disturbance to reef sub-features by physical removal or smothering
can be the result of either one-off events or the cumulative effect of activities.
Physical damage
•
•
Chalk reef communities at Flamborough Head are sensitive to physical damage
resulting from siltation, abrasion or selective extraction. Siltation can smother or
block the feeding/ respiratory organs of animals or can effect recruitment processes.
Abrasion can result in the dislodgement of species or damage the structure of habitats.
Damage to the reef, or any part of it, thorough selective extraction could jeopardise
the survival of some of these habitats or species and would therefore be detrimental to
the favourable condition of the reef. This is because many of these communities are
dependent upon the ecological functioning of others and the loss of one may have
major implications on the condition of others
Most intertidal communities at Flamborough Head are less sensitive to physical
damage than subtidal communities because of their adaptation to the physical
processes to which they are normally subjected, which generally results in rapid
recolonisation and growth. The rocky shores are, however, considered to be
moderately vulnerable to abrasion since the effects of trampling may result in
abrasion of newly settled spores and recruits at certain times of the year. If such
damage is intensive and persistent, particularly on accessible shores around the
eastern end of the headland, it may result in damage to fucoid communities, thus
altering the natural cycle of the rocky shore ecology. The exposure of rocky shore
communities to activities or operations resulting in physical damage from siltation or
selective extraction is, however, currently considered negligible.
32
Table 3a. Sensitivity and vulnerability matrix for the Flamborough Head European marine site
interest features9
Physical Loss
Removal (eg harvesting, land claim)
Physical Damage
trampling)
entanglement)
Visual presence (eg recreational activity)
Toxic contamination
Introduction of non-synthetic compounds (eg
outfalls, spills)
Nutrient enrichment (eg agricultural run-off,
outfalls)
Changes in thermal regime (eg outfalls, power
stations)
fishing)
Interest features/sub-features
Rocky
shore
Reefs
Kelp
forest
●●●●
●●●
●●●●
●●●
●●●●
●●●
●●●●
●●
●●●●
●●
●●●
●●●
●●●●
●●●
●●●●
●●●
●●
●●
●●
●●●
●●●
●●●
●●●
●●
●●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●●●●
●●●
●●●●
●●●
●●●●
●●●
●●●●
●●●
●●●●
●●●
●●
●●
●●
●●
●●
●●●
●●●
●●●
●●●
●●
●●●
●●
●●●
●●●
●●●
●●●
●●●
●●
●●
●●●
●●
●●
●●●
●●●
●●
●●●
●●
●●
●●
●●●
●●
●●●
●●●
●●
●●●
●●●
●●
●●●
●●●
●●
●●●
●●●
●●
●●●
●●●
High vulnerability
Moderate vulnerability
●●●●
●●●
●●
●
9
Subtidal
faunal
turf
Sea
Microalgal
and lichen
caves
Faunal
cushion
and crust
High sensitivity
Moderate sensitivity
Low sensitivity
No detectable sensitivity
English Nature’s advice on operations is derived from an assessment combining relative
sensitivity of the features or sub-features with information on human usage of the site (as at
September 1999), to identify relative vulnerability to categories of operations (Appendix IV).
33
Table 3b. Exposure assessment of interest features of the Flamborough Head European
marine site based on current levels of usage at the site10
Physical Loss
Removal (eg harvesting, land claim)
Physical Damage
trampling)
entanglement)
Visual presence (eg recreational activity)
Toxic contamination
Introduction of non-synthetic compounds (eg
outfalls, spills)
Nutrient enrichment (eg agricultural run-off,
outfalls)
Changes in thermal regime (eg outfalls, power
stations)
fishing)
High
Low
Key:
Interest features/sub-features
Reefs
Sea
caves
Rocky
shore
Kelp
forest
Subtidal
faunal
turf
Microalgal
and lichen
Faunal
cushion
and crust
Low
Low
Low
Med
Low
Med
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Med
Med
Low
Med
Med
Low
Low
Low
Low
None
None
Low
None
None
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med
Low
Low
Low
Low
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med
None
None
None
None
None
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med
Med
None
Med
None
Med
None
Med
None
Med
None
Low
Low
Med
Low
Med
Low
None
None
None
None
Low
Low
Low
Low
Low
Med
Low
Low
Med
Low
Low
None
Low
Low
None
High exposure
Low exposure
Med
None
10
Medium exposure
No detectable exposure
In accordance with Government policy guidance, this advice is provided in light of current
activities and patterns of usage at the site (as at September 1999). It is important therefore that future
consideration of this advice by relevant authorities, and others, takes account of changes in the usage
patterns at the site. In contrast, the sensitivity of interest features, or sub-features, is relatively stable with
alterations reflecting improvement in our scientific knowledge and understanding. To this end,
information on sensitivity has been included in Table 3a to assist the management group and advisory
groups with future management of the site.
34
•
•
Kelp forest communities are considered to be vulnerable to physical damage by
siltation due to their exposure to outfalls and a dredged spoil disposal area. Deposition
of silt can cover available hard substrata which interferes with the process of spore
attachment (Jones and others 1998). It can also smother young plants, inhibiting their
growth and development, or holdfasts which contain a diverse range of filter feeders.
The exposure of kelp forest communities to activities or operations resulting in
physical damage from abrasion or selective extraction is, however, currently
negligible.
Subtidal faunal turf communities at Flamborough Head are currently considered to be
exposed to the effects of outfalls and a dredged spoil disposal area. Deposition of silt
can cover available hard substrata which interferes with the process of attachment. It
can also smother species, inhibiting their growth and development, particularly filter
feeders. Subtidal faunal turf communities at Flamborough Head are currently
considered to be exposed to the effects of mobile benthic fishing. These operations
should, however, be assessed in the context of the intensity and type of gear used, as
set out in the two reports; ‘Preliminary study investigating the types and potential
effects of fishing activities in and around the Flamborough Head candidate Special
Area of Conservation site’ (Senior 1999a) and ‘The Flamborough Head cSAC fishing
fleet (1999): Inventory of vessels and gear and analysis of fishing effort’ (Senior
1999b), reference should also be made to Gubbay & Knapman (1999).
Toxic contamination
•
•
•
•
Synthetic compounds include pesticides, Polychlorinatedbiphenyls (PCBs) and
Tributyltin (TBT). Non-synthetic compounds include heavy metals, such as cadmium,
lead and mercury, or oil. All are known to have toxic effects in low concentrations,
with larval stages being particularly sensitive, and to be capable of bioaccumulation
(Hartnoll 1998) within a foodchain. Reef communities are recognised as being
sensitive to toxic contamination because faunal communities primarily consist of filter
feeders and marine species which rely on larval dispersion for recruitment. Changes
to the reef communities, or any part of them, could jeopardise the survival of some of
these communities or species and would therefore be detrimental to the favourable
condition of the reef.
At Flamborough Head faunal communities in both the intertidal and subtidal are
considered to be vulnerable to toxic contaminants given their proximity to outfall
pipes and dredged spoil disposal areas, which are potential sources of contaminant
input. Toxic contaminants in the marine environment are, however, often the result of
diffuse sources and therefore difficult to identify.
Faunal turfs are characterised by molluscs, sponges, hydroids, soft corals, annelid
worms and bryozoans. Disturbance to species composition of reef communities may
result in changes to population structure, through loss of key grazers or predators, eg
limpets or dogwhelks, or bioaccumulation, eg plaice feeding on mussels, thus
affecting favourable condition and is considered harmful. Dogwhelks at South
Landing have been shown to exhibit imposex (Morris 1991), which is a condition
induced by TBT at concentrations of around 2-3ng Sn 1-1 and above (Hill and others
1998).
Intertidal reef communities of Flamborough Head are sensitive to acute events, such
as oil spills, due to their toxicity and smothering effects, although exposure is
35
minimal. They often take many years to recover, 5 to 15, depending upon recruitment
rates and dispersal of toxic substance.
•
•
•
•
The composition and diversity of reef communities at Flamborough Head is partly a
result of it being situated in an important biogeographic position, at the meeting point
of two different oceanic systems. Activities or operations which significantly alter the
physical and chemical regime of the waters off Flamborough Head may change the
community structure of the reefs. Changes to the reef communities, or any part of
them, could jeopardise the survival of some of these habitats or species and would
therefore be detrimental to the favourable condition of the reef.
Reef communities are sensitive to nutrient/organic enrichment, because they have the
potential to be altered due to some species being more competitive than others. This
could lead to a dominance by a single or few species which could change the
structural composition and potentially lead to a reduction in species diversity and
biotopes, characteristic of the reef communities at Flamborough Head. These
communities are currently considered to be exposed to the effects of agricultural runoff, industrial and waste water outfall pipes.
Increased water turbidity influences the ability of kelp and other algal species to
photosynthesise, and this affects the maximum depth at which the kelp can grow.
Therefore activities resulting in a reduction in water clarity may affect the growth and
survival of kelp forest at Flamborough Head, an important primary producer and
habitat. Kelp communities at Flamborough Head are currently considered to be
exposed to the effects of activities such as the dumping of dredged spoil south of the
headland and proximity to industrial outfall pipes.
Subtidal reef communities at Flamborough Head are considered to be more sensitive
to changes in salinity and temperature than intertidal communities, which are exposed
to daily temperature and salinity changes, because there is the potential to
significantly alter the distribution and structure of the reef biotopes. The exposure of
reef sub-features to activities or operations resulting in changes to these physical
parameters is, however, currently minimal.
•
•
Over exploitation of shellfish, demersal or pelagic fisheries, either commercially or
through recreational pursuits, within the European marine site may disrupt the
stability of reef communities, the functional regime of the reefs at Flamborough Head
or the fisheries themselves. This is because the removal of particular species or
predators from a marine food web, or trophic level, not only affects that population,
but can also have a knock on effect for associated species, for example kittiwake. Due
to the complexity of marine systems and mobility of species being influenced by
seasonal and climatic conditions, the precise impacts of selective extraction of these
different types of fisheries is presently unclear.
Commercial and recreational fisheries have long been a common activity within and
around the European marine site (Senior 1999a; 1999b), resulting in the selective
extraction of species from nearshore waters, chalk habitats and associated kelp forest
habitats. These areas are considered to be important habitats for a diverse assemblage
of species and the precise impacts of selective extraction on these habitats is presently
36
•
•
6.8.2
unclear, therefore a precautionary approach should be used when managing increased
fishing effort or use of ‘new’ gear in the area.
Collection of marine plants and animals from the intertidal area, whether for food or
bait, results in the selective extraction of species. Rocky shore communities are
sensitive to selective extraction due to the potential effects it could have on the
structural composition by the removal of key species. Rocky shore communities at
Flamborough Head are not considered vulnerable to the effects of selective extraction,
at current levels.
Reef communities are sensitive to the introduction of competitive non-native species
because of the potential impact on community structure. The reef communities at
Flamborough Head are currently not vulnerable to the effects of introduced nonnative species due to their low exposure.
Sea caves
Physical loss
•
•
•
The extent and number of chalk sea caves at Flamborough Head are of international
marine nature conservation importance because they support a wide variety and
unique range of habitats and specialist marine plant and animal communities which
attach to or burrow into the bedrock. Loss of the sea caves, or any parts of it, could
jeopardise the survival of some of these habitats or species and would be detrimental
to the favourable condition of the sea caves.
Both the sub-features are considered sensitive to physical loss through direct removal
because such losses would be permanent. The microalgal/ lichen communities at
Flamborough Head are nationally rare biotopes, whilst many of the faunal cushion
and crust communities are dependent upon the ecological functioning of others so the
loss of one may have implications on the condition of others. This linkage should not,
therefore, be overlooked when the potential impact of removal is considered.
Deterioration or disturbance by physical removal can be the result of either one-off
events or the cumulative effects of activities.
Physical damage
•
Faunal cushion and crust communities are sensitive to physical damage resulting from
abrasion which can result in the dislodgement or damage to the structure of habitats
and species. However given their inaccessibility and location, the sea cave subfeatures at Flamborough Head are not considered to be vulnerable to this category of
operation, based on their low exposure to current levels of usage at the site.
Toxic contamination
•
•
Sea cave communities, including microalgal, lichen and faunal turf, are vulnerable to
toxic contamination for the same reasons as reef communities. Therefore changes to
the sea cave communities, or any part of them, could jeopardise the survival of some
of these communities or species and would therefore be detrimental to the favourable
condition of the sea caves.
Intertidal sea cave communities at Flamborough Head are sensitive to acute events,
such as oil spills, due to their toxicity and smothering effects. Recovery time will
depend upon recruitment rates and dispersal of toxic substance. Although the complex
37
and intricate topography of the caves will itself contribute to the persistence of
harmful substances.
•
Microalgal and lichen communities are sensitive to nutrient/organic enrichment,
because they have the potential to be altered due to some species being intolerant to
such conditions or some more competitive than others. This could lead to a
dominance by a single or few species which could change the structural composition
and potentially lead to a reduction in species diversity and biotopes, characteristic of
these specialised communities at Flamborough Head. These communities are
currently considered to be exposed to the effects of agricultural run-off, industrial and
waste water outfall pipes.
•
The faunal cushion and crust sea cave communities at Flamborough Head are more
sensitive to fluctuations in salinity and temperature because there is the potential to
significantly alter the distribution and structure of the sub-feature communities in this
specialised habitat. The exposure of sea cave sub-features to activities or operations
resulting in changes to these physical parameters is, however, currently negligible.
•
The sea cave communities are sensitive to the introduction of competitive non-native
species and the extraction of selected species because of the potential impact on
community structure. The sea cave communities at Flamborough Head are currently
considered to have a low or negligible exposure to activities that may result in
biological disturbance.
38
7.
Bibliography
ANON. 1994. The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations. Statutory Instrument
No. 2716
ANON. 1981. The WildLife and Countryside Act 1981. London: HMSO.
ABP RESEARCH & CONSULTANCY LTD. 1998. Good practice guidelines for ports and
harbours operating within or near UK marine Special Areas of Conservation. Task Report
2.2: Ports and Harbour Operations. UK Marine SAC LIFE Project.
BARNES, J., & ROBSON, C. 1995. British Coasts and Seas. Region 6: Eastern EnglandFlamborough Head to Great Yarmouth.
BAYLISS, R. 1995a. Consultation Draft: Issues and Progress Report. Flamborough Head
Sensitive Marine Area Project.
BAYLISS, R. 1995b. Draft: Technical Report. Flamborough Head Sensitive Marine Area
Project.
BIRKETT, D.A., and others. 1998. Infralittoral reef biotopes with kelp species (Volume
VII). An overview of dynamics and sensitivity characteristics for conservation management
of marine SACs. Scottish Association of Marine Science (UK Marine SACs LIFE Project).
BRAZIER, D.P., HOLT, R.H.F., & MURRAY, E. 1996. Marine Nature Conservation
Review Sector 5: The marine biology of south-east Scotland and north-east England:
Overview. Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservation Committee.
BRAZIER, D.P., DAVIES, J., HOLT, R., & MURRAY, E. 1998. Marine Nature
Conservation Review Sector 5: South-east Scotland and north-east England: area summary.
Peterborough: Joint Nature Conservation Committee.
BROWN, A.E., BURN, A.J., HOPKINS, J.J., & WAY, S.F. 1997. The Habitats Directive:
selection of Special Areas of Conservation in the UK. JNCC Report, No. 270.
CONNOR, D.W., BRAZIER, D.P., HILL, T.O., & NORTHEN, K.O. 1997A. Marine
Nature Conservation Review: Marine biotope classification for Britain and Ireland. Volume
1. Littoral biotopes. Version 97.06. JNCC Report, No. 229.
CONNOR, D.W., DALKIN, M.J., HILL, T.O., HOLT, R.H.F. & SANDERSON, W.G.
1997. Marine Nature Conservation Review: Marine biotope classification for Britain and
Ireland. Volume 2. Sublittoral biotopes. Version 97.06. JNCC Report, No. 230
COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. 1979. Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2
April 1979: on the conservation of wild birds.
COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES. 1992. Council Directive 92/43/EEC: on the
conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Official Journal of the
European Communities, L206/7.
39
DAVIES, J., & SOTHERAN, I. 1995. Mapping the distribution of benthic biotopes at
Flamborough Head. English Nature Research Reports, No. 121.
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, TRANSPORT, & THE REGIONS. 1998. European
Marine Sites in England and Wales: A Guide to the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.)
Regulations 1994 and to the Preparation and Application of Management Schemes. London:
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
ENGLISH NATURE. 1994. Important areas for marine wildlife around England.
Peterborough: English Nature.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION. 1996. Interpretation manual of European Union Habitats
(Version EUR 15). Brussels: DG XI- Environment, nuclear safety and civil protection.
FOWLER, S.L., & TITTLEY, I. 1993. The Marine Nature Conservation Importance of
British Coastal Chalk Cliff Habitats. English Nature Research Reports, No. 32. London:
The Natural History Museum.
GEORGE, J.D., TITTLEY, I., PRICE, J.H., & FINCHAM, A.A. 1988. The macrobenthos
of chalk shores in North Norfolk and around Flamborough Headland (North Humberside).
Report to the Nature Conservancy Council, No. 833. London: The Natural History Museum.
GUBBAY, S., & KNAPMAN, P. 1999. In prep. A review of the effects of fishing within
European marine sites. Task Report. UK Marine SAC LIFE Project.
HARTNOLL, R.G. 1998. Circalittoral faunal turf biotopes (Volume VIII). An overview of
dynamics and sensitivity characteristics for conservation management of marine SACs.
Scottish Association of Marine Science (UK Marine SACs LIFE Project). UK Marine SAC
Project.
HILL, S., BURROWS, M.T., & HAWKINS, S. J. 1998. Intertidal reef biotopes (Volume
VI). An overview of dynamics and sensitivity characteristics for conservation management
of marine SACs. Scottish Association of Marine Science (UK Marine SACs LIFE Project).
UK Marine SAC Project.
HISCOCK, K., ed. 1996. Marine Nature Conservation Review: rationale and methods.
Peterborough: JNCC.
HOWARD, L. 1998. Flamborough Head Sensitive Marine Area Management Strategy.
HOWSON, C. In prep. Flamborough Head cSAC sea cave survey.
INSTITUTE OF ESTUARINE AND COASTAL STUDIES. 1991. Filey Bay
Environmental Statement. Institute of Estuarine and Coastal Studies. University of Hull.
INSTITUTE OF ESTUARINE AND COASTAL STUDIES. 1992. Block 41/30Flamborough Head Environmental Statement Phase I. Institute of Estuarine and Coastal
Studies. University of Hull.
40
JONES, L.A., HISCOCK, K., & CONNOR, D.W. 1998. Marine Habitat Reviews.
Peterborough: JNCC.
MORRIS, E. 1991. Levels of TBT induced imposex in the dogwhelk Nucella lapillus along
the North Yorkshire coast. Report BN19/91, National Rivers Authority Yorkshire Region
PINGREE, R.D., & GRIFFITHS, D.K. 1978. Tidal fronts on the shelf seas around the
British Isles. J. Geophys. Res. No. 83, 4615- 4622.
SAUNDERS, C., SELWYN, J., RICHARDSON, S., MAY, V.J. & HEEPS, C. 1998.
Recreational user interactions. Task 2.1. UK Marine SAC LIFE Project.
SENIOR, R. 1999a. Preliminary study investigating the types and potential effects of fishing
activities in and around the Flamborough Head candidate Special Area of Conservation site.
North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee/ English Nature Joint Report.
SENIOR, R. 1999b. The Flamborough Head cSAC fishing fleet (1999): Inventory of vessels
and gear and analysis of fishing effort. North Eastern Sea Fisheries Committee/ English
Nature Joint Report.
TITTLEY, I. 1988. Chalk-cliff algal communities: 2 outside southeastern England. Report
to the Nature Conservancy Council No. 870. London: The Natural History Museum.
WOOD, E. 1988. Flamborough Headland: Sublittoral survey. Report to the Nature
Conservancy Council No. 832.
41
8.
Glossary
Advisory Group
The body of representatives from local interests, user
groups and conservation groups, formed to advise the
management group.
Annex I habitat(s)
A natural habitat(s) listed in Annex I of the Habitats
Directive for which Special Areas of Conservation can
be selected.
Annex II species
A species listed in Annex II of the Habitats Directive
for which Special Areas of Conservation can be
selected.
Attribute
Characteristic of an interest feature/ sub-feature which
provides an indication of the condition of the feature or
sub-feature to which it applies.
Benthos
Those organisms attached to, or living on, in or near,
the seabed, including that part which is exposed by
tides.
Biotope
The physical habitat with its biological community; a
term which refers to the combination of physical
environment and its distinctive assemblage of
conspicuous species.
Biodiversity
The total variety of life on earth. This includes diversity
within species, between species and of ecosystems.
Characteristic
Special to or especially abundant in a particular
situation or biotope. Characteristic species should be
immediately conspicuous and easily identified.
Circalittoral
The rocky subtidal zone below that dominated by algae
(Animal dominated subtidal zone)
Community
A group of organisms occurring in a particular
environment, presumably interacting with each other
and with the environment, and identifiable by means of
ecological survey from other groups.
Competent authority
Any Minister, government department, public or
statutory undertaker, public body or person holding a
public office that exercises legislative powers.
Conservation objective
Statement of the nature conservation aspirations for a
site, expressed in terms of the favourable condition that
we wish to see the species and/or habitats for which the
42
site has been selected to attain. Conservation objectives
for European marine sites relate to the aims of the
Habitats Directive.
A European site (SAC or SPA) which consists of, or in
so far as it consists of, marine areas.
Favourable conservation status
A range of conditions for a natural habitat or species at
which the sum of the influences acting upon that habitat
or species are not adversely affecting its distribution,
abundance, structure or function throughout the EU in
the long term. The condition in which the habitat or
species is capable of sustaining itself on a long-term
basis.
Favourable condition
A range of conditions for a natural habitat or species at
which the sum of the influences acting upon that habitat
or species are not adversely affecting its distribution,
abundance, structure or function within an individual
Natura 2000 site in the long term. The condition in
which the habitat or species is capable of sustaining
itself on a long-term basis.
Habitat
The place in which a plant or animal lives.
Habitats Directive
The abbreviated term for Council Directive 92/43/EEC
of 21 May 1992 on the Conservation of Natural
Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora. It is the aim of
this Directive to promote the conservation of certain
habitats and species within the European Union.
Infralittoral
The subtidal zone in which upward facing rocks are
dominated by erect algae, typically kelps.
Interest feature
A natural or semi-natural feature for which a European
site has been selected. This includes any Habitats
Directive Annex I habitat, or specific component of
their fauna and flora, or any Annex II species and any
population of a bird species for which a SPA has been
designated under the Birds Directive. Any habitat of a
species for which the site has been selected, or typical
species of an Annex I habitat are also considered to be
interest features.
Maintain
The action required for an interest feature when it is
considered to be in favourable condition.
Management Group
The body of relevant authorities formed to manage the
European marine site.
43
Management scheme
The framework established by the relevant authorities at
a European marine site under which their functions are
exercised to secure, in relation to that site, compliance
with the requirements of the Habitats Directive.
Nationally scarce/rare
For marine purposes, these are regarded as species of
limited national occurrence.
Natura 2000
The European network of protected sites established
under the Birds Directive and the Habitats Directive.
Operations which may cause
Any activity or operation taking place within, adjacent
to, or remote from a European marine site that has the
potential to cause deterioration to the natural habitats
for which the site was designated or disturbance to the
species and its habitats for which the site was
designated.
Plan or project
Any proposed development that is within a relevant
authority’s function to control, or over which a
competent authority has a statutory function to decide
on applications for consents, authorisations, licences or
permissions.
Relevant authority
The specific competent authority which has powers or
functions which have, or could have, an impact on the
marine environment within, or adjacent to, a European
marine site.
Restore
The action required for an interest feature when it is not
considered to be in a favourable condition.
Sensitivity
The intolerance of a habitat, community or individual
species to damage or disturbance from an external
force.
Sub-feature
An ecologically important sub-division of an interest
feature.
Vulnerability
The likelihood of a habitat, community or individual of
a species being exposed to an external factor to which it
is sensitive.
44
Appendix I List of relevant authorities for the
Flamborough Head European marine site
Harbour Master
Gummers Wharf
West End
Bridlington
East Yorkshire YO15 3AN
Sustainable Development Manager
Economic Development, Tourism and Forward Planning
County Hall
Beverley
East Yorkshire HU17 9BA
Conservation Officer- East Riding
English Nature
North and East Yorkshire Team
Genesis 1
Science Park
Heslington
York YO10 5ZQ
FER Manager
Environment Agency
Ridings Area
Phoenix House
Global Avenue
Leeds LS11 8PG
Flamborough and North Landing Harbour Commissioners
West Kapelle
Woodcock Road
Flamborough
East Yorkshire YO15 1LL
Chief Fisheries Officer
Town Hall
Bridlington
East Yorkshire YO16 4LP
Head of Heritage Service
Environment Department
County Hall
45
Northallerton
North Yorkshire DL7 8AH
Director of Technical Services
Town Hall
St. Nicholas Street
Scarborough
North Yorkshire YO11 2HG
Legal and Insurance Manager
Trinity House Lighthouse Service
Trinity House
Tower Hill
London EC3N 4DH
Head of Safety, Health and Environment
Yorkshire Water Services ltd
Western House
Western Way
Halifax Road
Bradford BD6 2LZ
46
Appendix IIa Map of Flamborough Head candidate SAC
47
Appendix IIb Map of the Flamborough Head and Bempton Cliffs SPA
48
Appendix III Summary of key biotopes recorded in the
Flamborough Head European marine site
A number of habitats, community types and species present at Flamborough Head are of
special interest, either for their rarity, conservation importance or their characteristic regional
distribution. The key biotopes are summarised below; listed as MNCR biotopes (Connor and
others. 1997). For additional information on biotopes refer to Connor and others (1997) and
their distribution at Flamborough Head, refer to Brazier and others (1998).
Key biotopes
MNCR
Biotope
Brief description (Connor and others 1997)
LITTORAL ROCK
(LR.L)
Ver.Ver
Lichens or algal crusts
Chr
Bli
UloUro
EXPOSED
LITTORAL ROCK
(ELR.MB)
MytB
BPat
BPat.Sem
(ELR.FR)
Him
MODERATELY
EXPOSED
LITTORAL ROCK
(MLR.BF)
FvesB
Fser
Fser.Fser
Fser.Fser.Bo
(MLR.R)
Mas
Verrucaria maura on very exposed to very sheltered upper
littoral fringe rock
Chrysophyceae on vertical upper littoral fringe soft rock
Blidingia spp., on vertical littoral fringe soft rock
Ulothrix flacca and Urospora spp., on freshwaterinfluenced vertical littoral fringe soft rock
Frequency of
occurrence in
Britain
Very common
Rare
Rare
Rare
Mytilus (mussels) and barnacle shores
Mytilus edulis and barnacles on very exposed eulittoral rock
Barnacles and Patella spp on exposed or moderately
exposed, or vertical sheltered, eulittoral rock
Semibalanus balanoides on exposed or moderately exposed,
or vertical sheltered eulittoral rock
Robust fucoids or red seaweeds
Himanthalia elongata and red seaweeds on exposed lower
eulittoral rock
Common
Very common
Very common
Common
Barnacles and fucoids (moderately exposed shores)
Fucus vesiculosus and barnacle mosaics on moderately
exposed and mid eulittoral rock
Fucus serratus on moderately exposed lower eulittoral rock
Dense Fucus serratus on moderately exposed to very
sheltered lower eulittoral rock
Fucus serratus and under-boulder fauna on lower eulittoral
boulders
Red seaweeds (moderately exposed shores)
Mastocarpus stellatus and Chondrus crispus on very to
moderately exposed lower eulittoral rock
49
Very common
Very common
Very common
Common
Scarce
MNCR
Biotope
(MLR.Eph)
Ephemeral green or red seaweeds (freshwater or sandinfluenced)
Enteromorpha spp on freshwater-influenced or unstable
upper eulittoral rock
Ent
EntPor
Rho
(MLR.MF)
MytFves
MytFR
SHELTERED
LITTORAL ROCK
(SLR.F)
Fspi
Fves
LITTORAL ROCK
(OTHER)
(LR.Rkp)
Cor
FK
SwSed
(LR.Ov)
RhoCv
SR
EXPOSED
INFRALITTORAL
ROCK (EIR)
(EIR.KFaR)
LhypFa
FoR
(EIR.SG)
Frequency of
occurrence in
Britain
Uncommon
Porphyra purpurea or Enteromorpha spp on sand-scoured
mid or lower eulittoral rock
Rhodothamniella floridula on sand-scoured lower eulittoral
rock
Mytilus (mussels) and fucoids (moderately exposed
shores)
Mytilus edulis and Fucus vesiculosus on moderately
exposed mid eulittoral rock
Mytilus edulis, Fucus serratus and red seaweeds on
moderately exposed lower eulittoral rock
Dense fucoids (Stable rock)
Scarce
Fucus spiralis on moderately exposed to very sheltered
upper eulittoral rock
Very common
Fucus vesiculosus on sheltered mid eulittoral rock
Rockpools
Very common
Corallina officinalis and coralline crusts in shallow
eulittoral rockpools
Fucoids and kelps in deep eulittoral rockpools
Seaweeds in sediment (sand or gravel)-floored eulittoral
rockpools
Overhangs and caves
Rhodothamniella floridula in upper littoral fringe soft rock
caves
Sponges and shade-tolerant red seaweeds on overhanging
lower eulittoral bedrock
Very common
Kelp with cushion fauna, foliose red seaweeds or
coralline crusts (exposed rock)
Laminaria hyperborea forest with a faunal cushion
(sponges and polyclinids) and foliose red seaweeds on very
exposed upper infralittoral rock
Foliose red seaweeds on exposed or moderately exposed
lower infralittoral rock
Robust faunal cushions and crusts (surge gullies and
caves)
50
Uncommon
Scarce
Rare
Common
Common
Rare
Common
Uncommon
MNCR
Biotope
SCAn.Tub
Sponge crusts, anemones and Tubularia indivisa in shallow
infralittoral surge gullies
Sponge crusts, colonial (polyclinid) ascidians and a
bryozoan/hydroid turf on wave-surged vertical or
overhanging infralittoral rock
Balanus crenatus and/or Pomatoceros triqueter with
spirorbid worms and coralline crusts on severely scoured
vertical infralittoral rock
SCAs.ByH
CC.BalPom
MODERATELY
EXPOSED
INFRALITTORAL
ROCK (MIR)
(MIR.KR)
Ldig
Ldig.Ldig
Lhyp.Ft
Lhyp.Pk
Lhyp.Tft
(MIR.SedK)
XKScrR
EphR
INFRALITTORAL
ROCK (OTHER)
(IR)
(IR.FaSwV)
AlcByH
AlcByH.Hia
MODERATELY
EXPOSED
CIRCALITTORAL
ROCK (MCR)
(MCR.ByH)
Flu.Flu
Kelp with red seaweeds (moderately exposed rock)
Laminaria digitata on moderately exposed or tide-swept
sublittoral fringe rock
Laminaria digitata on moderately exposed sublittoral fringe
rock
Laminaria hyperborea forest and foliose red seaweeds on
moderately exposed upper infralittoral rock
Laminaria hyperborea park foliose red seaweeds on
moderately exposed lower infralittoral rock
Laminaria hyperborea forest, foliose red seaweeds and a
diverse fauna on tide-swept upper infralittoral rock
Sand or gravel-affected or disturbed kelp and seaweed
communities
Mixed kelps with scour-tolerant and opportunistic foliose
red seaweeds on scoured or sand-covered infralittoral rock
Ephemeral red seaweeds and kelps on tide-swept mobile
infralittoral cobbles
Fauna and seaweeds (shallow vertical rock)
Alcyonium digitatum with a bryozoan, hydroid and ascidian
turf on moderately exposed vertical infralittoral rock
Alcyonium digitatum, Hiatella arctica, bryozoan, hydroid
and ascidian turf on moderately exposed vertical
infralittoral rock
Bryozoan/hydroid turfs (sand-influenced)
Flustra foliacea on slightly scoured silty circalittoral rock
or mixed substrata
51
Frequency of
occurrence in
Britain
Uncommon
Very common
Very common
Very common
Common
Uncommon
Uncommon
Common
Very common
MNCR
Biotope
Flu.SerHyd
Sertularia argentea, S. cupressina and Hydrallmania
falcata on tide-swept circalittoral cobbles and pebbles
Urticina felina on sand-scoured circalittoral rock
Mussel beds (open coast circalittoral rock/mixed
substrata)
Mytilus edulis beds with hydroids and ascidians on tideswept moderately exposed circalittoral rock
Brittlestar beds
Ophiothrix fragilis and/or Ophiocomina nigra beds on
slightly tide-swept circalittoral rock or mixed substrata
Grazed fauna (moderately exposed or sheltered rock)
Faunal and algal crusts, Echinus esculentus, sparse
Alcyonium digitatum and grazing-tolerant fauna on
moderately exposed circalittoral rock
Ascidian communities (silt-influenced)
Stolonica socialis and/or Polyclinum aurantium ascidian
communities with Flustra foliacea on slightly sand-scoured
tide-swept moderately exposed circalittoral rock
Soft rock communities
Polydora sp tubes on upward facing circalittoral soft rock
Urt.Urt
(MCR.M)
MytHAs
(MCR.Bri)
Oph
(MCR.GzFa)
FaAlC
(MCR.As)
StoPaur
(MCR.SfR)
Pol
CIRCALITTORAL
MIXED
SEDIMENTS
(CMX)
SspiMx
ModMx
Sabellaria spinulosa and Polydora spp on stable
circalittoral mixed sediment
Modiolus modiolus beds on circalittoral mixed sediment
52
Frequency of
occurrence in
Britain
Very common
Common
Uncommon
Appendix IV Matrix of relative vulnerability
The relative vulnerability of an interest feature or sub-feature is determined by multiplying the scores for relative sensitivity and exposure, and
classifying that total into categories of relative vulnerability.
Relative sensitivity of the interest feature
High (3)
Medium (2)
Low (1)
None detectable
(0)
9
6
3
0
6
4
2
0
Low (1)
3
2
1
0
None (0)
0
0
0
0
High (3)
Relative exposure of the
interest feature
Medium (2)
Categories of relative
vulnerability
High
Medium
Low
None detectable
6-9
3-5
1-2
0
53
Appendix V English Nature’s Habitats Regulations
Guidance Note 1: The Appropriate Assessment
(Regulation 48) The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.)
Regulations 1994
54
1
HRGN
Habitats regulations
guidance note
Issued by Greg Smith, Environmental Impacts Team, English Nature. Tel: 01733 455210
The Appropriate Assessment (Regulation 48)
The Conservation (Natural Habitats &c) Regulations, 1994
Introduction
1.
This Guidance Note has been prepared to assist
competent authorities and English Nature staff when
undertaking the “appropriate assessment” required by
Regulation 48 of the Habitats Regulations 1994 implementing
Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC). Only the
Courts can provide authoritative interpretation of the
Regulations, but these notes have been developed in the light
of practical experience and a close examination of the
Regulations, the Habitats Directive and central government
guidance, particularly in PPG 9.
d.
Significant Effects
5.
The plan or project does not have to be located
within the designated area. Significant effects may occur
even if the plan or project is some distance away and even
outside any consultation area defined by English Nature (PPG
9 paras 30-32). The effects may be direct or indirect,
temporary or permanent, beneficial or harmful to the site, or a
combination of these.
When Does An ‘Appropriate Assessment’
Need To Be Undertaken?
6. The initial determination of likely significance is
intended to ensure that all relevant plans and projects likely to
have a material effect on these internationally important sites
are subject to an appropriate assessment. In all but the most
clear cut cases, competent authorities are likely to need
advice. English Nature will advise, on request, as to whether
any particular plan or project may be likely to have a
significant effect on any of these sites. If the decision as to
whether or not the development would have a significant
effect on the designated site is inconclusive, on the
information available, the competent authority should make a
fuller assessment; in doing so they may ask the developer or
other parties for more information. (PPG 9 para C10).
Types of Proposal
2. Under Regulation 48(1), an appropriate assessment
needs to be undertaken in respect of any plan or project
which:
a. either alone or in combination with other plans or
projects would be likely to have a significant effect on a
European Site, and
b. is not directly connected with the management of the site
for nature conservation.
3. Appropriate assessment is required by law for all
European Sites (Regulation 48). A European Site is any
classified SPA and any SAC from the point where the
Commission and the Government agree the site as a Site of
Community Importance. Appropriate assessment is also
required, as a matter of Government policy, for potential
SPAs, candidate SACs and listed Ramsar Sites for the purpose
of considering development proposals affecting them. (PPG 9
paras 13 and C7).
Who Undertakes the Appropriate
Assessment?
7.
The appropriate assessment must be undertaken by
the competent authority, as defined in Regulation 6(1) of the
Habitats Regulations, which includes any Minister,
Government Department, public or statutory undertaker,
public body of any description or person holding a public
office. The developer or proposer of the plan or project is
required to provide relevant information. English Nature must
be consulted, during the course of the assessment, but it is the
duty of the competent authority to undertake the assessment
itself.
Timing of the Assessment
4. An appropriate assessment needs to be undertaken in
respect of a plan or project described above before any
"competent authority":
a.
decides to undertake the plan or project, in cases where
no consent, permission or other authorisation is
required. (Reg. 48(1));
b. decides to give any consent, permission or other
authorisation for the plan or project. (Regs. 48(1) et al);
c.
reviews the decision to undertake a plan or project or
reviews consents, permissions or other authorisations
HRGN No. 1
for plans or projects that are incomplete. (Regs. 50(2)
et al - see also English Nature Habitats Regulations
Guidance Note No. 2);
decides whether to approve an application for
development that would otherwise be permitted
development. (Reg. 62(6)).
8. Most competent authorities will not have the technical
expertise "in house" to assess the effects of the plan or project
on the international nature conservation interests. Most will
need to rely heavily on the advice, guidance and
55
English Nature May 1997
recommendations of English Nature, at each stage, including
the scope and content of the assessment, the site's
conservation objectives, the information required from the
developer or proposer and the effects on the integrity of the
site, all of which are discussed below. The appropriate
assessment, in many cases, is likely to be an iterative process.
In the simplest cases a general statement in a single
consultation response from English Nature may suffice to
enable the competent authority to complete the assessment.
However, in most cases, it is envisaged that a more detailed
response from, and dialogue with, English Nature is likely to
be necessary.
compliance with the Directive 85/337/EEC. In many cases,
plans or projects that will be subject to an appropriate
assessment will need an Environmental Statement (ES) to be
prepared under the EA Regulations. (PPG 9 paras 38 and 39).
14. The ES will address all significant environmental effects.
It will be appropriate to use the information assembled for the
ES when carrying out the appropriate assessment under the
Habitats Regulations. In view of this it would be helpful if the
relevant ES clearly identified, under a specific subject
heading, the likely significant effects on the internationally
important habitats and/or species.
What is an ‘Appropriate Assessment’
How is an Appropriate Assessment Undertaken?
9. It is a self contained step in a wider decision making
process, required by the Habitats Regulations and described
more fully in PPG 9, Annex C. Its conclusions must be based
only on the scientific considerations under steps laid out in the
Habitats Regulations.
The assessment should not be
influenced by wider planning or other considerations.
Key Steps
15. Having established that an appropriate assessment is
required, the following conclusions may be drawn (from the
foregoing considerations and Government guidance) in
respect of how it should be undertaken.
The Key Steps in an Appropriate Assessment
The competent authority:
I
Must consult English Nature
II
May consult the general public
III
Should clearly identify and understand the site’s conservation
objectives having regard to the advice of English Nature
IV
Should require the applicant to provide such information as
may reasonably be required for the purposes of the assessment
V
Should identify the effects of the proposal on the habitats and
species of international importance and how those effects are
likely to affect the site’s conservation objectives
VI
Should decide whether the plan or project, as proposed, would
adversely affect the integrity of the site in the light of the
conservation objectives
VII
Should consider the manner in which the plan or project is
proposed to be carried out, whether it could be modified, or
whether conditions or restrictions could be imposed, so as to
avoid adverse effects on the integrity of the site
VIII
Should conclude whether the proposal, as modified by
conditions or restrictions, would adversely affect the integrity
of the site
IX
Should record the Assessment and notify English Nature of
the conclusions
10. The Regulations do not specify how the assessment
should be undertaken but describe it simply as “an appropriate
assessment”. This is taken to mean that the assessment must
be appropriate to its purpose under the Regulations (and also
the Directive, which originated the use of the term). Its
purpose is to assess the implications of the proposal in respect
of the site’s "conservation objectives". The conclusions of the
assessment should enable the competent authority to ascertain
whether the proposal would adversely affect the integrity of
the site.
Scope and Content
11. PPG 9 indicates that the scope and content of an
appropriate assessment will depend on the location, size and
significance of the proposed plan or project (PPG 9 box C10).
The PPG indicates that English Nature will advise on a caseby-case basis. According to the nature conservation interests
of the site, English Nature will identify particular aspects that
the appropriate assessment should address. Examples given
are hydrology, disturbance and land-take, but there are clearly
many other potential matters that may need to be addressed in
particular cases.
12. Procedures under the Habitats Regulations should be
confined to the effects on the internationally important
habitats or species for which the site is or will be
internationally designated or classified, including any indirect
effects on these interests, for example, via their supporting
ecosystems and natural processes.
Notwithstanding a
favourable assessment in respect of the plan or project's
effects on the international nature conservation interests for
which the site was classified or designated, decisions to
undertake or give consent to the plan or project may need to
take account of other international, national, regional or local
nature conservation interests in the light of other policy and
legislative provisions. (PPG 9 paras 4, 18 and 27).
The Key Steps Explained
These key steps are explained in more detail below.
I. Consulting English Nature
16. Under Regulation 48(3) the competent authority must
consult English Nature and must have regard to any
representations made by English Nature. It may be inferred
from PPG 9 (box C10 and para C9) that the competent
authority would be expected to follow the advice of English
Nature and normally to decide the case “in accordance with
Environme ntal Assessment
13. The appropriate assessment is not the same as an
environmental assessment under the provisions of the various
Environmental Assessment (EA) Regulations (1988-95), in
HRGN No. 1
56
the recommendations of English Nature”. If it does not do so,
the competent authority should be prepared to explain its
reasons. In cases where it proposes to agree to a plan or
project notwithstanding a negative assessment, the competent
authority is required to notify the Secretary of State in
advance of any decision.
plan or project, either alone or in combination with other plans
or projects, on the habitats and species of international
importance and how those effects are likely to affect the site’s
conservation objectives. This will involve considering, for
example, the nature, scale, geographic extent, timing, duration
and magnitude of direct and indirect effects; considering the
degree of certainty in the prediction of effects; considering all
mitigating measures already contained in the proposal and the
extent to which these measures are likely to avoid, reduce or
ameliorate adverse effects on the international nature
conservation interests.
It is the residual effects, after
mitigation, that are considered at this stage.
II. Consulting the General Public
17. Under Regulation 48(4) the competent authority may (if
it considers it appropriate) take the opinion of the general
public, on the implications of the proposal for the site’s
conservation objectives, using whatever steps they consider
necessary. This may usefully include taking the opinion of
others with relevant knowledge or expertise.
VI. Integrity of the Site
22. Having regard to English Nature’s advice, other
consultation responses and any other information available,
the competent authority should decide whether the plan or
project, as proposed, would adversely affect the integrity of
the site, in the light of its conservation objectives. That is,
whether the plan or project would adversely affect the
“coherence of the site’s ecological structure and function,
across its whole area, or the habitats, complex of habitats
and/or populations of species for which the site is or will be
classified” (PPG 9 box C10). An adverse effect on integrity is
likely to be one which prevents the site from making the same
contribution to favourable conservation status for the relevant
feature as it did at the time of its designation.
III. The Site's Conservation Objectives
18. The Regulations do not define what is meant by the site’s
conservation objectives but PPG 9 box C10 describes them as:
"the objectives.... / the reasons for which the site was
classified or designated"
English Nature will be able to give a clear statement of the
site's conservation objectives in the light of its European Site
Register entry (compiled by Government under Regulation
11), its citation, its reasons for recommendation, English
Nature’s knowledge of the site, national and international
objectives for the international nature conservation interests
(such as may be contained in the UK Biodiversity Action
Plan) and any Management Plan or Management Statement
for the site in so far as they relate to the interests for which the
site was selected.
19. The site may also host habitats and/or species of
Community interest (see Article 1 of the Habitats Directive)
which are not mentioned in the European Site Register, the
citation or the reasons for recommendation because they were
not, at the time, a reason for classification or designation.
Such features are not relevant to the appropriate assessment
itself. Nevertheless their presence may be material to the
decision as to whether or not to undertake or to consent to the
plan or project.
23. The form of words used in Regulation 48(5) implies that
a precautionary approach should be taken in considering
effects on integrity, in line with the Government’s principles
for sustainable development (see Sustainable Development:
the UK strategy page 33). Regulation 48(5) says that (subject
to Regulation 49) projects may only proceed if the competent
authority has ascertained that it will not adversely affect the
integrity of the European site.
VII. Considering How To Avoid Adverse Effects
24. If the proposal would adversely affect the integrity of the
site then, having regard to English Nature’s advice, the
competent authority should consider the manner in which it is
proposed to be carried out and whether the plan or project
could be modified, or whether conditions or restrictions could
be imposed, so as to avoid the adverse effects. This may
include, for example, changes to the siting, layout, timing or
use of the proposal and the use of obligations or legal
agreements. (Reg. 48(6)).
IV. Requiring Further Information
20. The competent authority, taking the advice of English
Nature where necessary, should require the applicant to
provide such information as the competent authority may
reasonably require for the purposes of making the assessment
(Reg.48(2)). The information required may relate to any
environmental information, or information about the proposal,
relevant to the assessment and may include:
25. Compensatory measures that may be offered in the
proposal at this stage, seeking to redress but not remove
residual harm to the international interests (such as the
provision of land for habitat creation purposes), should not be
considered in the appropriate assessment, but may be
considered later in the decision making process. (See Reg.
53).
i. information already available, or
ii. new information from surveys that may need to be carried
out, or
iii. data analysis, predictions, comparisons or assessments of
a technical nature.
VIII. Conclusion on Effects In The Light of Conditions
and Restrictions
26. The competent authority should reassess the conclusions
in the light of any such modifications, conditions or
restrictions that may be agreed or imposed.
V. Identifying the Effects
21. Having regard to English Nature’s advice and other
consultation responses and, where relevant, taking account of
the ES or any other information supplied by the
developer/proposer, or otherwise available, the competent
authority should identify what the effects of the proposal are
likely to be. The effects considered should be those of the
HRGN No. 1
IX. Recording the Assessment
57
27. It would be advisable for this conclusion, and the reasons
for it, to be recorded. English Nature should be notified of the
conclusion of the appropriate assessment and the authority’s
decision as to the effects on the integrity of the site, before the
authority undertakes the plan or project or issues any
permission, consent or other authorisation (PPG 9 para 30).
28. The subsequent courses of action open to a competent
authority are set out in Regulations 48(5) - (7), 49 and 54(3).
The Regulations prohibit a competent authority from
undertaking or giving consent to any plan or project unless the
appropriate assessment concluded that it would not have an
adverse effect on the integrity of the site, or specific criteria
are met and the Secretary of State has been informed.
Good Practice Outline of an Appropriate Assessment Record
29. A suggested model or good practice outline record of an
scale, location and significance of the proposal and to the
appropriate assessment is set out below. It may be contained in,
relevant nature conservation interests. It is provided here as a
for example, a planning officer’s committee report or the
guide to assist competent authorities and English Nature staff,
minutes of a competent authority’s decision. In other cases it
not as an authoritative legal formula. Any record made of an
may be a file note, clearly recording compliance with the
appropriate assessment should be copied to English Nature and
Regulations. The record may take many different forms
to any other parties who were consulted on the assessment.
because each assessment needs to be appropriate to the type,
Title of Plan or Project/Application
Location of Plan or Project/Application
[With location plan attached showing relationship to the international designation]
International Nature Conservation Site
Nature/Description of Plan or Project/Application
[Including brief description of manner in which plan or project is proposed to be carried out]
Date Appropriate Assessment Recorded
This is a record of the appropriate assessment, required by Regulation 48 of the Habitats Regulations 1994, undertaken by [name
of competent authority] in respect of the above plan/project, in accordance with the Habitats Directive (Council Directive
92/43/EEC). Having considered that the plan or project would be likely to have a significant effect on the [name of international
site] and that the plan or project was not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site, an appropriate
assessment has been undertaken of the implications of the proposal in view of the site’s conservation objectives.
English Nature was consulted under Regulation 48(3) on [date] and their representations, to which this authority has had regard,
are attached at Annex 1. The conclusions of this appropriate assessment * are/are not in accordance with the advice and
recommendations of English Nature.
*The applicant was required to submit further information reasonably necessary for this assessment on [date] under Reg.48(2) *
and replied with the information on [date]/but did not supply the information.
* The opinion of the general public was taken under Reg. 48(4) by way of *public advertisement/further consultation etc and the
views expressed (attached at Annex 2) have been taken into account.
The site’s conservation objectives have been taken into account, including consideration of the citation for the site and
information supplied by English Nature (see Annex 1). The likely effects of the proposal on the international nature conservation
interests for which the site was designated may be summarised as:
[List of Effects]
The assessment has concluded that:
*a) the plan or project as proposed would not adversely affect the integrity of the site,
or
*b) the plan or project as proposed would adversely affect the integrity of the site.
[If (b):]
The imposition of conditions or restrictions on the way the proposal is to be carried out has been considered and it is ascertained
that:
*a) conditions or restrictions cannot overcome the adverse effects on the integrity of the site.
or
*b) the following conditions and/or restrictions would avoid adverse effects on the integrity of the site. [list
conditions/restrictions]
Signed ........................ Date ..................
(* delete as appropriate)
Annexes to also include relevant correspondence, minutes or meetings with English Nature, the applicant etc.
HRGN No. 1
58

Flamborough Head Management Plan

Transcription

Similar documents

521 6th Concession Road East

WARD 14 FINAL March18

R. Lee Ermey served 11 years active duty with the US Marine Corps

The truth about… The truth about… habitats

MFCU Scholarship Application - Marine Federal Credit Union

ECOMARE - Oceano XXI

Deks Olie - Robin Alys Roberts

Climate Change Dare to move

Glen Haffy Conservation Area Trail Map

PDF - Monterey Boats