Delivery Options for Strategic Marine Net Gain

Offshore Wind Evidence and Change Programme (2023). Delivery Options for Strategic Marine Net Gain. Report by Offshore Wind Evidence and Change Programme. Report for The Crown Estate.

@techreport{Offshore-Wind-Evidence-and-Change-Programme-2023-2131826,
author = {Offshore Wind Evidence and Change Programme},
title = {Delivery Options for Strategic Marine Net Gain},
institution = {Offshore Wind Evidence and Change Programme},
year = {2023},
month = {dec},
url = {https://www.marinedataexchange.co.uk/details/TCE-3938/2023-the-crown-estate-offshore-wind-evidence-and-change-programme-owec-delivery-options-for-strategic-marine-net-gain},
keywords = {Wind Energy, Habitat Change},
}

Export Citation to BibTex

TY - RPRT
TI - Delivery Options for Strategic Marine Net Gain
AU - Offshore Wind Evidence and Change Programme
AB - This report summarises work undertaken by a Task and Finish Group (T&F Group) between October 2022 to October 2023, funded by the Offshore Wind Evidence and Change programme, to explore and make recommendations on options for the strategic delivery of intertidal and Marine Net Gain (MNG), hereafter referred to as Strategic Marine Net Gain (SMNG). The report builds on earlier work undertaken by the T&F Group which identified strategic targets for MNG (The Crown Estate, 20211 ). This second report provides recommendations on delivery of those targets to best achieve SMNG. The T&F Group comprised conservation NGOs, Coastal, Estuary and Marine Partnerships (CEMPs), industry representatives and statutory bodies, supported by consultants, ABPmer. To support the work of the T&F Group, ABPmer co-ordinated a number of discrete tasks to examine how best to deliver the strategic targets identified within the first T&F Group report, the outputs of each of these tasks are included as appendices to the report: Collation of information on existing and planned marine restoration and recovery projects within an excel database;Collation of further information on marine restoration and recovery projects through a call for evidence;Issuing a second call for evidence on specific aspects of SMNG including on restoration and recovery priorities, approaches to co-ordination of restoration and recovery, information requirements to support delivery of SMNG, how a system of SMNG might support innovation, flexibility in the delivery of SMNG requirements and on the potential of a contributions-based approach as part of SMNG; andDevelopment of an initial spatial (regional) model seeking to estimate potential future demand for MNG restoration and recovery actions, based on forecast levels of future development activity and their residual impact. The review and the call for evidence identified over 700 projects and proposals seeking to reduce pressures upon or to create, enhance or restore marine and intertidal/coastal habitats and species. This showed that the greatest number of initiatives in the marine environment are focused on pressure reduction, either fisheries management measures to protect fish and shellfish stocks (which also provide a benefit to seabed habitats and dependent species) or Marine Protected Area (MPA) management measures. At the coast, there are also many saltmarsh and mudflat habitat creation projects. Increasingly, there are a number of restoration projects focused on seagrass and saltmarsh habitats, as well as projects seeking to reduce pressures on seabird colonies and wading bird populations. The second call for evidence received 54 online responses, many of which provided a lot of further detail regarding key limitations to current restoration initiatives, ecological or nature recovery priorities in the marine environment and potential measures and mechanisms to contribute to, or support delivery of SMNG targets. The information from this second call for evidence has been invaluable in shaping the recommendations of the T&F Group as to how a strategic approach to MNG implementation might be taken forward. These recommendations help in delivering the strategic targets identified in the first T&F Group report. An initial model for estimating future MNG demand carried out as part of the work necessarily required many assumptions to be made concerning the future level of development activity, the residual impact of such development, and how MNG requirements might be calculated. Given these uncertainties, however, the model is considered to indicate an ‘order of magnitude’ for MNG demand in the period to 2050, which suggested that, overall, the scale of MNG demand for habitat measures over this period may be less than 0.1% of subtidal mud, sand and gravel habitats to achieve MNG in relation to direct loss/change of habitat in English waters and less than 0.5% to achieve MNG in relation to both habitat loss and habitat disturbance. These are relatively small requirements when compared to the areas of English seabed currently under management measures for nature conservation or fisheries management (4.4% subtidal mud, 8.3% subtidal sand, 6.3% subtidal gravel). It has not been possible, within the scope of this work, to quantify residual impacts to species (fish, birds, marine mammals) nor to calculate a potential MNG requirement for species. This is due to the limited quantification of such impacts within Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and the lack of evidence available to estimate residual impacts. Appendix A: Call For Evidence ReportAppendix B: Second Call For Evidence ReportAppendix C: Assessment of Future Demand
DA - 2023/12//
PY - 2023
SP - 132
PB - Offshore Wind Evidence and Change Programme
UR - https://www.marinedataexchange.co.uk/details/TCE-3938/2023-the-crown-estate-offshore-wind-evidence-and-change-programme-owec-delivery-options-for-strategic-marine-net-gain
LA - English
KW - Wind Energy
KW - Habitat Change
ER -

Export Citation to RIS

Abstract

This report summarises work undertaken by a Task and Finish Group (T&F Group) between October 2022 to October 2023, funded by the Offshore Wind Evidence and Change programme, to explore and make recommendations on options for the strategic delivery of intertidal and Marine Net Gain (MNG), hereafter referred to as Strategic Marine Net Gain (SMNG). The report builds on earlier work undertaken by the T&F Group which identified strategic targets for MNG (The Crown Estate, 20211 ). This second report provides recommendations on delivery of those targets to best achieve SMNG.

The T&F Group comprised conservation NGOs, Coastal, Estuary and Marine Partnerships (CEMPs), industry representatives and statutory bodies, supported by consultants, ABPmer. To support the work of the T&F Group, ABPmer co-ordinated a number of discrete tasks to examine how best to deliver the strategic targets identified within the first T&F Group report, the outputs of each of these tasks are included as appendices to the report:

Collation of information on existing and planned marine restoration and recovery projects within an excel database;
Collation of further information on marine restoration and recovery projects through a call for evidence;
Issuing a second call for evidence on specific aspects of SMNG including on restoration and recovery priorities, approaches to co-ordination of restoration and recovery, information requirements to support delivery of SMNG, how a system of SMNG might support innovation, flexibility in the delivery of SMNG requirements and on the potential of a contributions-based approach as part of SMNG; and
Development of an initial spatial (regional) model seeking to estimate potential future demand for MNG restoration and recovery actions, based on forecast levels of future development activity and their residual impact.

The review and the call for evidence identified over 700 projects and proposals seeking to reduce pressures upon or to create, enhance or restore marine and intertidal/coastal habitats and species. This showed that the greatest number of initiatives in the marine environment are focused on pressure reduction, either fisheries management measures to protect fish and shellfish stocks (which also provide a benefit to seabed habitats and dependent species) or Marine Protected Area (MPA) management measures. At the coast, there are also many saltmarsh and mudflat habitat creation projects. Increasingly, there are a number of restoration projects focused on seagrass and saltmarsh habitats, as well as projects seeking to reduce pressures on seabird colonies and wading bird populations.

The second call for evidence received 54 online responses, many of which provided a lot of further detail regarding key limitations to current restoration initiatives, ecological or nature recovery priorities in the marine environment and potential measures and mechanisms to contribute to, or support delivery of SMNG targets. The information from this second call for evidence has been invaluable in shaping the recommendations of the T&F Group as to how a strategic approach to MNG implementation might be taken forward. These recommendations help in delivering the strategic targets identified in the first T&F Group report.

An initial model for estimating future MNG demand carried out as part of the work necessarily required many assumptions to be made concerning the future level of development activity, the residual impact of such development, and how MNG requirements might be calculated. Given these uncertainties, however, the model is considered to indicate an ‘order of magnitude’ for MNG demand in the period to 2050, which suggested that, overall, the scale of MNG demand for habitat measures over this period may be less than 0.1% of subtidal mud, sand and gravel habitats to achieve MNG in relation to direct loss/change of habitat in English waters and less than 0.5% to achieve MNG in relation to both habitat loss and habitat disturbance. These are relatively small requirements when compared to the areas of English seabed currently under management measures for nature conservation or fisheries management (4.4% subtidal mud, 8.3% subtidal sand, 6.3% subtidal gravel). It has not been possible, within the scope of this work, to quantify residual impacts to species (fish, birds, marine mammals) nor to calculate a potential MNG requirement for species. This is due to the limited quantification of such impacts within Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) and the lack of evidence available to estimate residual impacts.