Establishment of Marine Environmental High Risk Areas (MEHRAs)

Transcription

1 Establishment of Marine Environmental High Risk Areas (MEHRAs) Contents 1. Executive Summary MEHRAs the Concept Existing Protective Measures Identifying MEHRAs: Method Identifying MEHRAs: Results Protecting MEHRAs...34 Appendix A MEHRAs Environmental Background

2 Protection of United Kingdom Waters from Pollution from Ships Department for Transport Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 1. Executive Summary 1.1 This document outlines the work undertaken following the late Lord Donaldson's recommendation in his report Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas 1 that a comparatively limited number of areas of high environmental sensitivity, which are also at risk from shipping, should be identified and established around the UK coast. Lord Donaldson referred to these areas as Marine Environmental High Risk Areas (MEHRAs) and said that their primary purpose was "... to inform [ships'] Masters of areas where there is a real prospect of a problem arising. This prime purpose stands alone and regardless of any consequential defensive measures". Once identified, MEHRAs were to be marked on Admiralty charts, as an encouragement to mariners to take extra care in those areas. They are, essentially, an aid to passage planning. 1.2 This document also announces the location of those areas identified as MEHRAs, describes the protective measures already in place and outlines proposals for any future protective measures. 1.3 In Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas, Lord Donaldson jointly charged the then Department of the Environment and the Department of Transport with bringing forward proposals for MEHRAs. In the years since the publication of the Donaldson report, much work has been done by Departments, their successors and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee to develop the necessary methodology for identifying MEHRAs. This work has been done in collaboration with other Departments and Agencies across Government, as well as the Devolved Administrations, the country agencies for nature conservation and others (paragraph 4.1). 1.4 In his report, Lord Donaldson emphasised that MEHRAs should be seen as both an environmental and a shipping concept (paragraph 2.1) and that "... even the most sensitive areas should only become classified as MEHRAs if there is a realistic risk of pollution from merchant shipping." He further considered that, in the interests of ensuring that the concept of MEHRAs does not become devalued, "...the criteria should be set in such a way that not more than about a tenth of the UK coastline qualifies." While Lord Donaldson offered advice on the maritime and environmental criteria that could be considered in identifying a MEHRA, he also recognised that his approach would need refinement (paragraph 2.5). 1.5 Using Lord Donaldson's definition of a MEHRA (an area identified as both having high environmental sensitivity and being at risk from shipping activity) as a baseline, the work that has gone into the identification of MEHRAs has broken new ground (paragraphs ). The methodology which has been developed for identifying and ranking MEHRAs is innovative and embodies a high degree of objectivity. 1.6 For the purposes of the identifying MEHRAs, the UK coast and proximate sea areas were divided up into a large number of cells on a chart. Two parallel exercises were then carried out: (a) One exercise identified the shipping risk to which each cell was subject, taking into account ship routeing data, size and type of vessel, traffic density and analysis of past accidents resulting in pollution from ships (such as collisions, groundings and fires). A model was then created to combine this information and generate a measure of the risk per cell, taking into account the potential for an oil spill to drift from sea to shore. 1 Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas. London: HMSO, Cm ISBN

3 (b) The second exercise identified the environmental sensitivity of each cell, taking into account a number of different criteria, predominantly of an ecological and scientific nature. In particular, the sensitivity exercise took account of the statutory designations which were in place in each cell, such as Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protected Areas (SPAs) or Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs). The environmental sensitivity of each cell was scored on the basis of the number of such sites in each cell and their sensitivity to marine pollution. 1.7 The two sets of data for each cell - shipping risk and environmental sensitivity - were then brought together to produce an overall ranking. The cells which were eventually identified as MEHRAs were those which manifested a combination of both high sensitivity and a high level of shipping pollution risk. They represent approximately 9% of the UK coastline, which is consistent with Lord Donaldson's view that not more than 10% of the UK coastline should qualify as MEHRAs (paragraph 2.5). The main emphasis for the exercise has been on coastal areas, since most of the available data related to coastal, rather than "at sea" areas (paragraph 4.18). Protective Measures 1.8 During the process of identifying MEHRAs, it was recognised that a number of particularly sensitive areas around the UK coastline already benefit from protective measures (see Map 4). For example, there is an IMO recommended deep water route to the West of the Hebrides for laden tankers over 10,000 gross tonnage which greatly reduces the volume of traffic through the Minches and, consequently, the risks to the environment. As a result of general compliance with these measures the overall scores that such areas attracted in the identification exercise were much lower than those areas now recommended for designation as MEHRAs. Consequently, the list of MEHRAs contains some results which were not envisaged in Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas. In some cases, for example the Minches and the Isles of Scilly, their environmental sensitivity is not in question. That sensitivity is already acknowledged through existing protective measures (explained in section 3) that reduce the risks to such an extent that all the qualifying criteria for MEHRA status are not met (Paragraph 5.5). 1.9 Since Lord Donaldson introduced the concept of MEHRAs, a number of general protective measures have also been introduced around the UK coast, such as improvements in the provision of Emergency Towing Vessels, and the mandatory reporting system for tankers carrying heavy grades of oil into the newly designated Western European Particularly Sensitive Sea Area (PSSA) (see Section 3). In addition, work on vessel routeing and traffic management measures has progressed to take account of wider developments in UK policy on the sustainable use of the marine environment, such as the growth in offshore renewable energy, the Government's commitment to introducing a Marine Bill, developments in thinking on marine spatial planning and advances in e-navigation technology. The introduction of additional protective measures for MEHRAs has to be considered as part of these wider, inter-linked developments The Department for Transport and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) have an ongoing programme of vessel traffic surveys around the UK coast, which may either validate the efficacy and adequacy of existing arrangements or, alternatively, suggest the need for additional measures (Paragraph 5.7). For example, during 2004, a vessel traffic survey was carried out in the Minches and the Deep Water Route. The results of this survey have been analysed and have now been published. As a result, it has been decided that the UK will propose new routeing measures for the Minches to the IMO's Sub-Committee on Safety of Navigation for approval in July All work on possible future protective measures will be taken forward by the Government Departments and Agencies concerned, working closely with the Devolved Administrations and other stakeholders. The MEHRAs concept will be a useful indicator in developing thinking on all these issues. 3

4 Location of MEHRAS 1.12 As the culmination of this process, the UK Government has identified 32 MEHRAs (paragraph 5.4, table 1): Muckle Flugga Fethaland, Mainland Shetland Tor Ness, Hoy North St Kilda South St Kilda Gallan Head, Isle of Lewis West Islay, Argyll and Bute (2 MEHRAs) Islandmagee, County Antrim Pembrokeshire Islands Plymouth Berry Head Portland Western Solent Hastings Dungeness South Foreland to Ramsgate (2 MEHRAs) Harwich & Felixstowe (2 MEHRAs) Spurn Bight Flamborough Head Tees Farne Islands Holy Island Berwick St Abb's Head & Eyemouth Dunbar Bass Rock Isle of May Newburgh Kinnaird Head 1.13 The shipping industry will be made aware of the location of MEHRAs by means of markings on UK Hydrographic Office charts and through Marine Guidance Notices issued by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. The Government expects mariners to take note of MEHRAs and either to keep 4

5 well clear or, where this is not practicable, to exercise an even higher degree of care than usual when passing through a MEHRA The protective measures already in place, together with any proposals for additional protection measures for each of the MEHRAs, are set out in Section 6 of this document, Protecting MEHRAs. 5

6 2. MEHRAs the Concept Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas 2.1 Chapter 14 of Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas reviewed ships' routeing measures. Having covered law of the sea issues and the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) routeing measures, including those introduced or expanded in UK waters following the BRAER (also described in part 3 of this document), Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas proceeded to reject the concept of a "blanket ban" obliging all large, potentially polluting vessels to keep a prescribed distance from the coast. The report did, however, consider that a number of limited areas could be singled out for special status; the primary purpose of such areas being: "... to inform Masters of areas where there is a real prospect of a problem arising. This prime purpose stands alone and regardless of any consequential defensive measures" and recommended: "... the establishment of Marine Environmental High Risk Areas, or MEHRAs: comparatively limited areas of high sensitivity, which are also at risk from shipping" commenting that: "... the establishment of MEHRAs is an important concept, irrespective of whether anything further is done to protect them." An underlying concern of Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas was that, though there were protective measures in place, mariners were often unaware of the underlying reasons for their introduction and application. It was considered important that mariners knew, and could take account of, the underlying reasons for particular protective measures. 2.2 In essence, therefore, the identification of MEHRAs was seen as an aid to passage planning without a presumption that further protective measures would automatically be required. Defining MEHRAs 2.3 Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas proceeded to consider the criteria for the definition of MEHRAs and considered that the following maritime considerations should be taken into account: (a) the number, type and size of vessels passing and the nature of their cargoes; (b) the distance of the usual shipping lanes from the shore; (c) any circumstances giving rise to a significant risk of collision, such as a significant amount of traffic going across the normal flow; (d) hydrographical conditions relevant to safe navigation, such as a lack of safe anchorages, and (e) prevailing meteorological and tidal characteristics. 2.4 It was recommended that regard should be given to the following environmental considerations: (a) existence of wildlife feeding or breeding sites of international significance or the presence of biological communities of either flora or fauna or both of particular interest or rarity: designation as a Special Protection Area under the EC Birds Directive or an Area of Special Conservation under the EC Habitats Directive will normally be regarded as evidence of this. (b) the existence of commercially exploitable biological resources and mariculture sites, and (c) the extent to which the area provides a public recreational amenity. 6

7 2.5 While recognising that further refinement of these considerations would be required Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas emphasised: "A particular area would obviously need to qualify on both sets of consideration to be a candidate for special treatment. It is unlikely to be enough for an area simply to meet one of each set of criteria: it should score highly on both sets." Lord Donaldson was also clear that "... the criteria should be set in such a way that not more than about a tenth of the UK coastline qualifies." Examples of MEHRAs 2.6 Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas did not proceed to identify all the sites that deserved MEHRA status but suggested some that might qualify, and some that might not. 2.7 Those areas that were likely to deserve MEHRA status were considered to include: (a) Skomer (South West Wales); (b) Isles of Scilly; (c) Bass Rock (Firth of Forth); (d) Fair Isle; (e) parts of the Shetland Islands; (f) parts of Orkney; (g) parts of the coast of the Minches; (h) parts of the west coast of the Western Isles; (i) Rathlin Island, and (j) some headlands on the English south coast. 2.8 Those that were considered unlikely to qualify, mainly due to a believed lack of shipping traffic, included: (a) St Kilda; (b) Strangford Lough; (c) Lundy Island (Bristol Channel), and (d) the Farne Islands. Protecting MEHRAs 2.9 Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas considered that MEHRAs, once identified, should be marked on Admiralty charts (but see paragraph 6.3 below) and that formal and informal monitoring should be used to establish what effect they had on ships' voyage planning and routeing If such monitoring demonstrated that MEHRAs were not having the desired results, Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas recommended that consideration should be given, submitting proposals to the IMO as necessary, to the use of a range of defensive measures which could include: (a) protected headlands - where vessels would be required to keep a certain distance from the headland to provide protection to sensitive areas at, or adjacent to, the headland; 7

8 (b) protected areas - which could include areas between two islands, or between islands and the mainland; (c) compulsory Areas to be Avoided (ATBA) - which would be identical to an existing IMO ATBA save that compliance with any restrictions on movement would be compulsory, and (d) compulsory routes - where existing IMO recommended routes could be made mandatory; (e) new IMO routeing measures - where adoption could be sought of new IMO measures, aimed at ensuring vessels kept a specified distance from the shore Failure to comply with such defensive measures would be enforced by a compulsory priorreporting requirement. Ships identified as previously not having complied with the measures entering an area where such measures applied are more likely to have such a requirement placed upon them. Failure to comply with the reporting requirement will potentially result in a ban on loading, or unloading, at UK ports. Taking MEHRAs Forward 2.12 Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas recommended that the Department should work with other Government Departments and statutory advisors to identify the areas that merited special protection and to consider what defensive measures might be appropriate for such areas MEHRAs will have the beneficial effect of raising public awareness by highlighting a few specific areas where there are both environmental sensitivities together with a high level of shipping risks. This approach also incorporates the various uses of the coastline by marine industries such as the offshore renewable energy industry and also takes into account designation of special areas of conservation. 8

9 3. Existing Protective Measures Introduction 3.1 This section considers the range of existing protective measures, their legal basis, nature and the processes leading to their adoption and identified protective measures already applying in United Kingdom waters. Further details of existing protective measures in the vicinity of the identified locations for MEHRAs are provided in section 6 (below). The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 3.2 Since publication of Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas the United Kingdom has ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This Convention establishes the degree of coastal states' jurisdiction over the waters adjacent to their coast and details freedoms of navigation, which the United Kingdom has long supported and upheld. United Kingdom Pollution Control Zone 3.3 Map 1 shows the extent of the area nautical miles from the United Kingdom's UNCLOS baseline - over which the United Kingdom exercises jurisdiction to protect the marine waters under the provisions of UNCLOS and a range of IMO Conventions. Part of the exercise of this jurisdiction includes extensive aerial surveillance by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) and the prosecution, whenever possible, of those found illegally discharging oil or other substances within the area. 9

10 10

11 Map 1 - UK Marine Pollution Jurisdiction 3.4 Much of this area is included within the North West European waters Special Area under Annex I (Oil) of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL). This Special Area covers the North Sea, the Irish Sea and its approaches, the Celtic Sea, the English Channel and its approaches and part of the North Atlantic immediately to the west of Ireland. The North Sea is also part of a Special Area under Annex V (Garbage) of MARPOL. By virtue of their inclusion within MARPOL Special Areas, discharges of oil and garbage into these waters are governed by much more stringent limits under international law than other marine areas - in recognition of the fact that these waters deserve greater protection from pollution deriving from ships. 3.4 In addition, the October 2004 session of the IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee adopted the Western European Particularly Sensitive Sea Area (PSSA). PSSA is the international designation which represents the very highest level of environmental protection available through the IMO. To achieve PSSA status, an area must not only meet ecological, socio-economic or scientific criteria but also demonstrate risk from international shipping. Map 2 shows the extent of the Western European PSSA, which covers a sea area stretching from the Shetland Islands in the north to the Portuguese coast in the south, and extending as far east up the English Channel as the Belgium/Netherlands border. There is one protective measure which applies to the entire area of the PSSA, and that is a mandatory reporting system for tankers carrying heavy grades of oil. The PSSA and the mandatory reporting measure came into effect on 1 July

12 Map 2 - The extent of the Western European PSSA The United Kingdom Territorial Sea and Inland Waters 3.5 Map 3 shows the extent of the United Kingdom's territorial sea, now based on a 12 nautical mile line measured from the United Kingdom's UNCLOS baseline. When the United Kingdom extended its territorial sea from 3 to 12 nautical miles it undertook to maintain traditional freedom of navigation in certain areas now parts of our internal waters, notably through the Minches. 12

13 Map 3 - UK Territorial Seas (12nm) 13

14 3.7 A number of the coastal locations identified as the basis of MEHRAs are adjacent to internal waters, i.e. are within the UNCLOS baseline defining the inner limit of the United Kingdom's territorial sea. There is no domestic United Kingdom legislation which allows permanent restrictions to apply on shipping movements in the internal waters within our UNCLOS baseline. The other locations of MEHRAs face onto the United Kingdom's territorial sea. 3.8 The right of innocent passage is recognised throughout UK territorial seas together with the right of transit passage through straits used for international navigation, notably the Fair Isle Channel and the North Channel. Any navigational controls applying to ships exercising such rights have to be submitted to, and agreed by, the IMO as part of their routeing measures under the SOLAS Convention. They have to meet criteria laid down by the IMO. IMO routeing measures can be based on safety considerations and on protection of the marine environment. They can apply within, and beyond, the territorial sea. IMO Routeing Measures 3.9 There are existing examples of IMO routeing measures in UK waters (Map 4), with a number of measures applied in combination. They include: (a) Traffic Separation Schemes, which detail specific routes for traffic, some with related Inshore Traffic Zones, and are in place: i) in the Strait of Dover and Adjacent Waters, with associated Inshore Traffic Zones, radar coverage, aerial surveillance and compulsory reporting requirements; ii) in the North Channel, between Rathlin Island, Fair Head and the Mull of Kintyre; iii) off the Skerries, Anglesey; iv) west of the Pembrokeshire Islands, with an Area to be Avoided between the Smalls Lighthouse and Grassholm Island; v) west and south of the Scilly Isles and off Land's End between Seven Stones and Longships with associated Inshore Traffic Zones; vi) in the approaches to the River Humber; and vii) an advisory traffic movement pattern in the Fair Isle Channel. The success of the schemes near the Scilly Isles may explain why they do not feature in the list of MEHRAs, contrary to the expectation in Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas. (b) Areas to be Avoided, established to protect sensitive shoreline or areas of intensive fish farming or related coastal fishing activities. They often apply to ships in excess of a set tonnage or ships carrying hazardous or polluting cargoes. They are in place: i) around the Shetland Islands, with Precautionary Areas on the approaches to Lerwick and Sullom Voe; ii) around the Orkney Islands; iii) around Fair Isle; and, iv) between the Smalls Lighthouse and Grassholm Island (see paragraph 3.9 (a) (iv) above). (c) Precautionary Areas, used to emphasise the need for care in navigation and when applied in conjunction with Areas to be Avoided, allow access to commercial ports. (d) Deep Water Routes, used to identify or restrict employment of routes for ships of deeper draught. There is a Deep Water Route to the west of the Hebrides, that was extended following publication of Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas and operates in conjunction with advice to mariners to use the sheltered 14

15 waters of the Minches as an alternative in inclement weather. Part of the Traffic Separation Scheme in the Dover Strait and adjacent waters incorporates a Deep Water Route. The north east bound Deep Water Route in the Dover Strait is 1.3 miles wide at its narrowest point. (e) Mandatory Ship Reporting Systems, are adopted by the IMO in specified areas in accordance with international requirements. They include the area of the Channel Navigation Information Service (CNIS). Ships are required to report prior to entering the area covered by CNIS (Caldovrep). Mandatory reporting requirements have also been applied to areas of the Channel around Casquets and off Ushant. (f) Non-mandatory Ship Reporting Systems, used for the safety of life at sea, efficiency of navigation or protection of the marine environment. Voluntary UK systems are listed under section (g) Other Measures, there a number of IMO recommendations on navigation around the United Kingdom Coast including use of Admiralty Chart 5500 Mariner's Routeing Guide, for ships navigating in the English Channel and Dover Strait. Map 4 - IMO Routeing Measures Automatic Identification Systems (AIS) 3.10 In addition to the types of routeing measures outlined above the IMO has mandated the phased introduction of ship borne transponders. These can be interrogated by adjacent ships and by shore stations and could overcome some of the difficulties experienced with mandatory and voluntary ship reporting systems. IMO international regulations require passenger ships and other ships of 300 gross tons and over on international voyages to have AIS fitted by the end of European directive requirements apply a phase-in period for domestic shipping up until July Discussions are also underway in IMO on satellite based LRIT (Long Range Information Tracking) systems. 15

16 United Kingdom Measures 3.11 Following publication of Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas the United Kingdom implemented recommendations relating to: (a) Emergency Towing Vessels, and (b) Voluntary reporting arrangements. The aftermath of the SEA EMPRESS incident saw revision of the National Contingency Plan and the introduction of the Port Marine Safety Code. Emergency Towing Vessels 3.12 Emergency Towing Vessels are now permanently stationed (see map 4) covering: (a) the Dover Strait, in co-operation with the French Authorities; (b) the North West of Scotland, including the Hebrides and the Minches; (c) the South West approaches to the English Channel, and (d) the Fair Isle Channel, including the Orkney and Shetland Islands Discussions continue with the Irish Authorities with reference to an Anglo/Irish Emergency Towing Vessel. In addition, arrangements have been made by the MCA with towing firms to facilitate the provision of towing capability in the event of local emergencies requiring tug assistance. 1 It should be noted that the stationing of Emergency Towing Vessels was not taken into account in the consultants' risk assessment. Voluntary Reporting Arrangements 3.14 The United Kingdom introduced voluntary reporting requirements following the BRAER and Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas. Ships were requested to report to the relevant Coastguard Centre one hour prior to entering and on leaving. (a) Fair Isle Channel - laden vessels; (b) Pentland Firth - laden vessels; (c) The Minches - all vessels; (d) Kyle of Lochalsh; and (e) Isles of Scilly - laden vessels. 1 The vessels are contracted under the Coastguard Agreement on Salvage and Towage (CAST). This is effectively a call off contract which includes pre arranged hire rates for tugs signed up to the agreement. This means time is not lost negotiating hire terms for tugs needed at short notice Vessel traffic surveys showed that compliance with the request to report was varied in some areas. There are now IMO mandatory ship reporting requirements covering Casquets, Ushant and the Dover Strait (paragraph 3.9(e)) and, given the development of a fully commissioned network of receiving coast stations, AIS (paragraph 3.10) will allow Coastguard Centres around the United Kingdom to interrogate ships' transponders with the prospect of less action being required by those in charge of ships required to make reports. 16

17 Revision of the National Contingency Plan 3.16 The UK has a National Contingency Plan for Marine Pollution from Shipping and Offshore Installations. The text which is currently in operation was published in February The revision of the National Contingency Plan is currently in progress. The Port Marine Safety Code and Vessel Traffic Services 3.17 The Port Marine Safety Code was developed following the SEA EMPRESS and a review of the Pilotage Act. The Code encourages Harbour Authorities to adopt risk assessment and safety management approaches when developing the policies and practices applied to their harbour areas, including their responsibility to protect the marine and coastal environment. Harbour Authorities can require compulsory pilotage, the preparation of passage plans and can provide vessel traffic services (VTS) for ships entering or leaving their port VTS may include radar and AIS monitoring. The radar coverage possible from Harbour Authorities' radars and/or AIS often extends beyond the area of responsibility of the Harbour Authority itself. Practice varies, but issues of liability can arise if Harbour Authority VTS seek to provide guidance to vessels outside the Harbour Authority Area particularly to passing vessels not actually entering or leaving their port(s). A number of the locations classified as MEHRAs are adjacent to, and in some instances come within, Harbour Authority Areas. European Community Requirements 3.19 Over recent years, several pieces of European Community (EC) legislation have been initiated which are relevant to the protection of the UK's seas and coasts from pollution from shipping. In particular: The EC Port waste reception facilities Directive (Directive 2000/59/EC) builds on earlier UK legislation (derived, in turn, from IMO requirements), obliging ports to make waste reception facilities available and to levy a charge irrespective of use, and obliging ships to notify ports in advance of the waste which they intend to discharge and - subject to certain qualifications - to deliver their waste before leaving port. The UK implemented the Directive in July The EC Vessel traffic monitoring and information system Directive (Directive 2002/59/EC) is a wide-ranging measure designed to help prevent accidents and pollution at sea and to minimise their impact upon the marine and coastal environment. Building on existing IMO requirements (particularly under the SOLAS Convention), the Directive contains provisions: setting up an EC vessel traffic monitoring and information system to enhance the safety and efficiency of maritime traffic; enhancing compliance with vessel traffic services (VTS) and mandatory ship reporting and routeing arrangements; enhancing requirements for ships to carry Automatic Identification Systems (AIS), facilitating safety and traffic monitoring; enhancing reporting and monitoring of ships carrying dangerous and polluting cargoes, including electronic exchange of information between Member States. This involves the repeal of the earlier Directive 93/75/EEC; providing for co-operation between Member States and the European Commission with proper communication links being established between competent authorities and ports of Member States; in respect of action for ports and ships to take in dangerous weather conditions; requiring coastal EC Member States to provide plans for accommodating ships in distress. 17

18 The UK completed legal implementation of the Directive in September An EC Ship-source Pollution and Sanctions Directive is currently going through the European legislative process. The aim of the Directive is to apply MARPOL's requirements in respect of ship-source pollution by oil and noxious liquid substances carried in bulk in a harmonised way, and to make it easier to prosecute the people and bodies associated with large oil spills resulting from damage to ships. The Council of Ministers achieved political agreement on a Common Position text in June 2004, and the current stage of negotiations is between the Council and the European Parliament. In addition to the Directive, a complementary Council Framework Decision is being negotiated which will provide criminal sanctions for the unlawful activities defined in the Directive. Informing Mariners 3.20 Safer Ships Cleaner Seas emphasised the need for mariners, ship-owners and insurers to be aware of MEHRAs and the reasons underlying their classification Information on IMO-adopted routeing measures and reporting systems is included on Admiralty Charts and in selected Nautical Publications (e.g. Annual Summary of Admiralty Notices to Mariners, IMO General Provisions on Ships' Routeing, Admiralty Sailing Directions, Admiralty List of Radio Signals and The Mariner's Handbook), amended as appropriate, by weekly Notices to Mariners. Further information will be provided to mariners through, for example, a Marine Guidance Note (MGN) issued by MCA. The MGN will include a list of MEHRAs with a corresponding table detailing the measures (if any) in place for a particular area. 18

19 4. Identifying MEHRAs: Method Introduction 4.1 After the MEHRAs concept had been developed and set out in Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas, much of the work was carried out for the Department by consultants. The consultants' Main Report and its Appendices were completed in March 2001 to develop the consultation. They are published in conjunction with this document and can also be accessed through both the Department for Transport website, [J.P.1]and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) website The methodology which the consultants used for assessing the area under consideration involved dividing the area into "cells", some of which contained both coastline and sea ("coastal cells") while others contained only sea ("sea cells"). The report process was overseen by a steering group made up of Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) officials (from both the shipping and environment divisions) and a representative from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC). The eventual product was submitted to an interdepartmental group, led by the DETR and one of its successor Departments, the Department for Transport. Apart from the Department and the MCA, the interdepartmental group was comprised of representatives from Defra, DTI, the Devolved Administrations, the country agencies for nature conservation and the UK Hydrographic Office. Meetings were held by the relevant Government Departments with other UK and Devolved Administration departments and agencies, with a view to developing a document to build on and supplement the report. The aim of the document was to announce the location of the MEHRAs, set out the protective measures in place and assess whether further measures are needed. This document undertakes that task. Ports and Harbours 4.2 As envisaged in Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas MEHRAs were intended as areas which ships could avoid. Clearly ships would not be able to avoid estuaries which included active ports and harbours. In deciding the regions to be used by the consultants an early decision was made not to include areas including such ports or harbours. For this reason MEHRA boundaries will only go as far as the Harbour Authority limit of jurisdiction. It is important to note that just because the MEHRA classification does not continue across the mouth of estuaries and voes, it does not mean that such areas can be construed as being less sensitive than the nearby coastline. Examples of such locations are illustrated in Maps 5, 6 and 7. 19

20 Map 5 - Solent showing Cell Boundaries (b) The Humber Estuary (Map 6), and Map 6 - Humber Estuary showing Cell Boundaries (b) The Firth of Forth (Map 7). 20

21 Map 7 - Firth of Forth showing Cell Boundaries Estuaries, Inlets and Islands 4.3 As the assessment of shipping risk developed it was possible to define areas where there was no identifiable shipping risk. These areas were estuaries and inlets - essentially 'inland' areas - and areas between islands. For many estuaries and inlets this was because of their physical characteristics, notably depth, precluded entry or use by ships. Such areas were also excluded from the consultants' coastal cells. Examples are illustrated in the attached Maps for: (a) Solway Firth (Map 8), and 21

22 Map 8 - Solway Firth showing Cell Boundaries (a) the Orkney Islands (Map 9). Map 9 - Orkney Islands showing Cell Boundaries Method 4.4 The section below demonstrates the general approach followed, including the parallel assessment of pollution risk and environmental sensitivity. Coastal Pollution Risk 22

23 4.5 The Assessment of Coastal Pollution Risk involved five distinct processes: (a) hazard identification; (b) establishing ship routeing in UK waters; (c) the assessment of accident frequency; (d) the assessment of oil pollution spill frequency, and (e) the ranking of coastal pollution risk. An outline of each of these stages is provided below. Hazard Identification 4.6 This stage involved the assembly and analysis of data on pollution from ships, specifically data relating to oil spills resulting from operational and accidental discharges. Consideration was also given, to the extent necessary, to other forms of physical damage that could be caused by ships. 4.7 The analysis concluded that operational discharges represent the most significant number of oil spills. However, individual incidents tended to involve the release of limited amounts of oil, and that operational discharges were increasingly being limited by the application and enforcement of the provisions of MARPOL and its Annexes. The study therefore focused its risk assessment on accidental discharges of oil as posing the significantly greater risk to the marine environment. Ships Routeing in UK Waters 4.8 Following publication of Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas the Department contributed to the funding of the Computer Assisted Shipping Traffic (COAST) database which provided data on ships' routeing in UK waters obtained from a number of sources and presented for five vessel types. For the purposes of this study the COAST data was enhanced to allow presentation of the data for ten vessel types and five size categories allowing a more detailed assessment of shipping movements around our coasts. Accident Frequency 4.9 Several models were developed to assess the frequency, and possible locations, of shipping accidents in UK waters using a combination of sea and coastal methodological Cells. Calibrated against historical data the models indicated that predicted accidents in five broad categories were likely to occur in the areas of highest shipping density though factors such as distance from the coastline, proximity to shipping lanes and age of vessel also influenced the range of predictions. Oil Spill Frequency 4.10 This process involved the development of predictive models to assess both spill probability and spill size. Historical oil spill data, from worldwide and UK information sources, was used to identify the geographical distribution of various sizes of oil spill for the sea cells covering UK waters. Suitable information was not available to allow the prediction of the frequency of spills other than those involving oil (cargo and/or fuel). Ranking the Pollution Risk 4.11 This stage involved the ranking of all cells in UK waters based on a prediction of both: (a) the amount of oil predicted as being spilt directly within each cell, and (b) the amount of oil drifting into a coastal cell following a spill elsewhere at sea. A simple oil spill drift model was developed to assist the latter prediction. The model took into account the amount of oil spilled, the worst case scenario for wind direction and speed, distance from the spill to the cell and the time taken for the oil to reach the cell in question and the proportion of oil 23

24 evaporated and naturally dispersed. Again suitable information was not available to allow prediction of spills involving discharges other than oil Several different scoring methods were attempted. The chosen method proved to be the most rigorous and consistent technique agreed with a qualitative review by the experts. The result allowed the risk ranking for each coastal cell around the UK coast to be established. Environmental Sensitivity 4.13 The approach taken to the assessment of the environmental sensitivity of each coastal cell was developed from the considerations outlined in Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas. The classification of sites was however expanded considerably to include the following categories: (a) Wildlife designations and sites; (b) Vulnerability of seabirds to oil pollution at identified sites; (c) Fishing data, including fish farms, shell-fishing areas etc; (d) Amenity/Economy, represented by locations such as Blue Flag Beaches, Marinas and Country Parks; (e) Landscape, including Heritage Coastal, National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and (f) Geological, including World Heritage Sites and Conservation Review Sites. While it is recognised that other environmental features are vulnerable to oil pollution, no consistent widespread rating of the sensitivities of these other features on all UK coasts has been undertaken, partly due to the variations in quality of information. It was considered that the costs of conducting the necessary surveys and evaluation would be disproportionate to the value of the MEHRAs identification exercise For wildlife, seabird vulnerability and fishing each coastal cell was given a score from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high). For amenity/economy the limited number of categories resulted in each individual score being added to the total for the particular cell. For landscape the score was between 1 (low) and 3 (high) and for geological between 1 and 4. All coastal cells were then given a cumulative score. The theoretical maximum score a cell could achieve for environmental sensitivity was For environmental sensitivity the exercise primarily focused on coastal cells. However, the consultants also assessed the environmental data that was available in respect of sea cells. Classifying Cells Coastal Cells 4.16 To classify each of the coastal cells on both risk and environmental sensitivity the scoring for each cell was re-calibrated, in both cases, to scores between 1 and 14 and then combined. The results of this process are outlined in the next chapter of this document The length of coastline at risk from an accident was also important when clarifying coastal cells. This particularly applies to the West of Scotland, where a short length of coastline as perceived on a small-scale map hides the reality of an intensely convoluted and long coastline. For example, a sea loch may have an entrance only quarter of a mile wide onto the Minch or adjacent waters, yet that entrance gives access to 20 to 30 miles or more of coast within the sealoch. Sea Cells 4.18 The consultants undertook a similar exercise relating to the sea cells covering UK waters. However, no further work was undertaken because of the very limited environmental data on which 24

25 an assessment could have been based. The full consultants' report can be downloaded from A CD ROM of the report is also available on request from the Department for Transport (Shipping Policy Division, Zone 2/24, Great Minster House, 76 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DR). 25

26 5. Identifying MEHRAs: Results Identifying MEHRAs 5.1 Using the methodology described in the previous chapter the scores were calculated for each of the coastal cells around the UK coastline. 5.2 Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas recommended that no more than 10% of the UK coastline should be identified as MEHRAs. 5.3 The 32 top ranking coastal cells, ie those with a score over 100, represent 9% of the UK coastline. On that basis, the Government has decided to identify areas in those 32 coastal cells as MEHRAs. Map 11 shows the locations of the 32 coastal cells which include areas which have been identified as MEHRAs and Table 1 lists the 32 coastal cells in score order. Results 5.4 The rankings for each coastal cell are shown on Map 10 on the following basis: Ranking Colour Band Score % Highest Black HH more than High Red H 70 to Medium Green M 45 to Low Light Blue L 25 to Very Low Yellow LL less than

27 Map 10 - MEHRAs Ranking for Coastal Cells 27

28 Map 11 - Top Ranking Coastal Cells Table 1 Top Ranking Coastal Cells (MEHRAs) Position Name Score 28

29 (1) Dungeness 154 (2=) Portland 132 St Abb's Head & Eymouth 132 Farne Islands 132 (5=) Tees 130 Muckle Flugga 130 (7) South Foreland to Ramsgate 121 (8=) Harwich & Felixstowe 117 Berwick 117 Flamborough Head 117 (11=) Western Solent 112 Hastings 112 Plymouth 112 (14=) South Foreland to Ramsgate 110 Berry Head 110 Kinnaird Head 110 Tor Ness 110 Dunbar 110 West Islay, Argyll & Bute 110 Newburgh 110 (21=) Harwich & Felixstowe 108 Islandmagee 108 Holy Island 108 Pembrokeshire Islands 108 (25=) West Islay, Argyll & Bute 104 Fethaland 104 Gallen Head 104 (28=) Bass Rock 100 North St.Kilda 100 South St.Kilda 100 Spurn Bight 100 Isle of May

30 30

31 5.5 During the process of identifying MEHRAs, it was recognised that a number of particularly sensitive areas around the UK coastline (see Map 4) already benefit from protective measures. One such example is around the Scilly Isles where there is an extensive pattern of Traffic Separation Schemes with associated Inshore Traffic Zones around the Isles and between Seven Stones and Longships a voluntary reporting requirement which applies to laden vessels. There is also an IMO recommended deep water route to the West of the Hebrides for laden tankers over 10,000 gross tonnage which greatly reduces the volume of traffic through the Minches and, consequently, the risks to the environment. Additionally, an Emergency Towing Vessel is stationed to cover the western approaches to the English Channel. 5.6 As a result of general compliance with these measures the overall scores that such areas attracted in the identification exercise were much lower than those areas now recommended for designation as MEHRAs. Consequently, the list in Table 1 contains some results which were not envisaged in Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas (see paragraphs 2.6 to 2.8 above). For example Fair Isle was suggested as a possible MEHRA by Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas, but in the event it did not figure among the highest scoring coastal cells. The Farne Islands and St Kilda, on the other hand, were considered by Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas to be unlikely to be identified as MEHRAs, but they did achieve the necessary high scores. 5.7 It is nonetheless worth noting that the Department for Transport and the MCA have a programme of vessel traffic surveys around the UK coast and that such surveys may either validate the efficacy and adequacy of existing arrangements or, alternatively, suggest the need for additional measures. For example, during 2004 a vessel traffic survey was carried out in the Minches and the Deep Water Route. The results of this survey have been analysed and have now been published. It has been decided that the UK will propose new routeing measures, subject to endorsement by the UK Safety of Navigation (UKSON) committee, to the IMO's Safety and Navigation Committee for approval. The proposed measures are the upgrading of some recommended tracks (through the narrows south of the Shiant Islands) to IMO-adopted status as recommended routes, and the introduction of a new traffic separation scheme off Neist Point. The Status of MEHRAs 5.8 Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas envisaged MEHRAs as a means of identifying United Kingdom coastal areas of high environmental sensitivity where there was also a significant risk of pollution from ships. The intention was to provide information to mariners, which would assist route planning while also providing information on the sensitivity of the areas concerned. It was not suggested that MEHRAs should be subject to statutory designation or that the introduction of protective measures would be an inevitable consequence of the identification of a particular location as a MEHRA. 5.9 Having identified the coastal locations that merit classification as MEHRAs it is intended to proceed on the basis originally envisaged in Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas. Classification of a location as a MEHRA will not result in a new statutory designation; there is no basis in United Kingdom law for such a designation. MEHRAs will be advisory as proposed by Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas. If specific protective measures apply in the vicinity of a MEHRA it will be because they are already in place or because their introduction can be justified and approved, if necessary, by the IMO (see below) Lord Donaldson expressly intended MEHRAs to alert Masters of vessels to the fact that a stretch of coast was particularly sensitive, and he made a clear differentiation between the identification of a stretch of coast as an area where there is a real prospect of a problem arising, and the application of specific protective measures which would dictate where a ship might or might not go in the waters off that coast. The Government is strongly of the opinion that Lord Donaldson's approach was right and it is our intention that, when an area of coast has been identified as a MEHRA, Masters will know that that coast combines high sensitivity with risk from shipping There is then the question of what the Master should do with that knowledge. As Lord Donaldson indicated in paragraph of Safer Ships,Cleaner Seas, it will normally make sense for 31

32 a ship to "... keep well clear..." of a MEHRA. But sometimes, and most especially when a MEHRA is close to the approaches to a port, ships will not be able to keep well clear; in such cases, they will instead have to exercise an even higher degree of care than usual Then again, the circumstances of MEHRAs will differ, so that in some cases it will be necessary for ships to stay further away from the coast (eg because of marine wildlife) than in others, and in these cases we can achieve a targeted effect through specific routeing measures - eg by directing passing traffic further offshore. These routeing measures will, of course, be marked on charts. The combination of the MEHRA along the coast, and the routeing measures shown on the chart in the relevant part of the sea, will mean that the Master has all he needs to know in order to decide how to conduct his ship in the vicinity of a MEHRA United Kingdom Government policy has been, and remains, to ensure the maximum protection possible for all of our coastline and waters. The fact that specific measures are applied at particular locations does not detract from the Government's intention to ensure that all UK coastline and waters are protected from the risk of damage from marine pollution. Existing and expanded development of UK coastal infrastructures to monitor marine traffic meets with European Community requirements and strategies to help prevent accidents and pollution at sea and to minimise their impacts upon the marine and coastal environment. The Term: Marine Environmental High Risk Area (MEHRA) 5.14 The term Marine Environmental High Risk Area (MEHRA) was introduced by Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas to indicate the essential combination of environmental sensitivity and high risk of pollution from ships. There is no comparable term in general maritime or environmental usage. Alternatives have been considered but they tend to fall to one side or other of the environmental/shipping risk balance. It is proposed to continue to use the term Marine Environmental High Risk Area (MEHRA). Cartographic Representation of MEHRAs 5.15 Following submission of the Consultant's report there was discussion within the Inter- Departmental Group on the appropriate cartographic representation of MEHRAs. It was generally accepted that it was inappropriate to use the consultants' coastal cells to define the limits of MEHRAs, particularly as they included, for the most part, significant areas of sea which were not themselves subject to any underlying environmental designation In some cases, and notably in the area of the Pembrokeshire Islands, use of the statutory boundary of the candidate Special Area of Conservation (Map 12) would include significant areas of sea and coastline including the entrance to Milford Haven, a major oil port. Yet the coastal cell, which gave rise to the high ranking, centred on the Skomer, Grassholm and Skokholm Islands did not include any mainland coastline. It was argued that the use of such a boundary was against the underlying intention of Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas which was to identify areas ships could avoid and not areas they would have to pass through on entry into a major port. 32

33 Map 12 - Candidate Special Area of Conservation covering the Pembrokeshire Islands 5.17 To address this difficulty it is proposed that: (a) in all cases where there is a statutory designation underlying the classification of a location as a MEHRA the representation of a MEHRA should be by a line along the coast based on the coastwise extent of the underlying designation(s), and (b) on small scale maps a dot. The remainder of this document will use red lines along the coast to depict the MEHRAs. 33

34 6. Protecting MEHRAs Introduction 6.1 This section outlines the proposed action intended in respect of the issue of advice to mariners on MEHRAs and the protective measures in place relating to, or the action proposed in respect of monitoring, each of the locations classified as a MEHRA. Advice to Mariners 6.2 The location of MEHRAs and the action which mariners need to take will be notified through a Notice to Mariners, to be included as an Annual Admiralty notice to mariners, published in Section I of the Annual Summary of Notices to Mariners (NP 247). It will also be available to download from the UKHO website ( to mariners). 6.3 In addition, MEHRAs will be incorporated in Admiralty Charts and relevant nautical publications in accordance with the appropriate resolutions and recommendations adopted by the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO), in accordance with SOLAS Chapter V, Regulation 9.3. Current IHO resolutions and recommendations indicate that MEHRAs will be shown by a suitably worded note on appropriate charts, referring to further information in Admiralty Publications or Annual Notice, possibly with legend(s) on the face of the chart. Further details will be incorporated in Admiralty Sailing Directions. MEHRAs may also be included in any relevant special charts, publications or datasets. Routeing measures and reporting systems established to protect any MEHRA will be included on Admiralty Charts and Publications, amended as appropriate, by Notices to Mariners, as indicated in paragraph Analogue and digital products are listed and shown graphically in the Catalogue of Admiralty Charts and Publications (NP131), available from Admiralty Distributors, and in the Admiralty Online Catalogue on the UKHO website ( 6.4 Guidance to mariners issued by MCA will generally be in the form of a Marine Guidance Note (MGN) which, when published, can be downloaded from the MCA's website at Another source of information may be the MCA Resource Atlas, when published. Description of MEHRAs 6.5 The section below includes an overall description of the coastal areas of the United Kingdom with brief descriptions of each MEHRA in the following areas (a) Shetland and Orkney Islands and Cape Wrath to Duncansby Head (covering 3 MEHRAs); (b) Northwest Scotland including St Kilda, the Hebrides and the Minches (3 MEHRAs); (c) West Scotland (2 MEHRAs); (d) Northern Ireland, Southwest Scotland and England and Wales from the Solway Firth to Anglesey (1 MEHRA); (e) West and South West Wales (1 MEHRA); (f) Bristol Channel, Scilly Isles and South West England to Portland (3 MEHRAs); (g) South and South East England to Harwich (7 MEHRAs); (h) East England (1 MEHRA); (i) North East England (5 MEHRAs); (j) East Scotland (5 MEHRAs), and 34

35 (k) Moray Firth and North East Scotland (1 MEHRA). The UK is split into separate regions for the sake of this exercise. Each region has its own separate map and the detailed depiction of individual MEHRAs is given within the subsequent maps. Where appropriate, the description also includes the recommendation stemming from the findings of traffic surveys carried out by consultants. Detailed environmental descriptions of each of the MEHRAs can be found in Appendix A. Shetland and Orkney Islands, and Cape Wrath to Duncansby Head (Map 13) Map 13 - Shetland and Orkney Islands, Cape Wrath to Duncansby Head 6.6 Map 13 shows the extent of this area and the coastal cells scores. The area contains three MEHRAs, several high ranked cells - notably along the northern coastline of the Scottish mainland, and several medium ranked cells on the coasts of Orkney and Shetland. There are Areas to be Avoided and Precautionary Areas around the Shetland Islands, with further Areas to be Avoided around Fair Isle and the Orkney Islands. There is an advisory Traffic Separation Scheme in the Fair Isle Channel and there are voluntary reporting systems covering that Channel and the Pentland Firth. A UK Government Emergency Towing Vessel is stationed to cover the Fair Isle Channel. The western part of the area is within range of the Emergency Towing Vessel stationed at Stornoway. The IMO routeing measures were reviewed and extended, or applied, following the grounding of the BRAER. The traffic survey for Duncansby Head found that the level of traffic and width of channel through the Pentland Firth precludes the creation of a traffic separation scheme in the area. It also recommended consideration be given to making the voluntary Mariners Reporting system (MAREP) mandatory (especially for vessels with hazardous loads) and to consider whether to ban tankers and vessels 35

36 carrying hazardous cargoes apart from those accessing the Scapa Flow facilities. All of which would be subject to adoption of UK proposals by the IMO There are two MEHRAs on the Shetland Islands one east, the other west, of the main entrance to Sullom Voe, one of the United Kingdom major oil and gas terminals. Map 14 - Muckle Flugga, Unst 36

37 6.6.2 Muckle Flugga, Unst (Map 14) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds with a high concentration of vulnerable seabirds and a medium level of fishing activity. It is protected by the North Shetland Area to be Avoided which applies to ships of over 5,000 gross tonnage carrying oil or other hazardous cargoes in bulk. There is radar coverage of the approaches to Yell Sound as part of the Sullom Voe Vessel Traffic Service. In addition, the harbour authority, Shetland Islands Council, undertakes its own aerial surveillance of the approaches to Sullom Voe, including the waters off Muckle Flugga. Map 15 - Fethaland, Mainland Shetland Fethaland, Mainland Shetland (Map 15) has underlying statutory designations for wildlife and landscape, with a very high concentration of vulnerable seabirds and a medium to low level of offshore fishing activity. Fethaland marks the western entrance to Yell Sound and to the Sullom Voe terminal. It is protected by the West Shetland Area to be Avoided, again applying to ships of over 5,000 gross tonnage carrying oil or other hazardous cargo, and the Precautionary Area covering the main approach to Yell Sound. The waters off Fethaland are subject to the same surveillance regime as Muckle Flugga The protective measures around the Shetland Islands were reviewed, and extended, following the wrecking of the BRAER. While there are reports of a small percentage of vessels failing to comply with certain measures, no real underlying difficulties have been reported. Given that both the Fethaland and Muckle Flugga MEHRAs are near the main entrance to Sullom Voe, shipping movements in their vicinity are subject to a high level of surveillance. Though the effectiveness of the measures needs to be continually monitored, no additional protective measures are proposed in respect of either Muckle Flugga or Fethaland. 37

38 Map 16 - Tor Ness, Hoy Tor Ness, Hoy (Map 16) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds, a very high concentration of vulnerable seabirds and a high level of off-shore fishing activity. Tor Ness is at the western entrance to the Pentland Firth and is protected by the Orkney Islands Area To be Avoided which was established following the BRAER incident - effective for vessels over 5,000 gross tonnage, oil and hazardous cargo in bulk. There is already a voluntary reporting scheme in place in the Pentland Firth, which is extensively used by shipping and provides the access to the Flotta Oil Terminal. No difficulties have been reported with the operation of the Area to be Avoided and any difficulties with the voluntary reporting scheme will be overcome with the mandatory fitting of AIS. While the effectiveness of the established measures needs to be kept under review, no additional protective measures are proposed in respect of Tor Ness. 38

39 Map 17 - North West Scotland North West Scotland (Map 17) 6.7 This area (Map 17) includes the North West Coast of the Scottish Mainland, the Hebrides, the Minches (Great and Little Minch) and offshore islands including St Kilda. There are three MEHRAs, with a number of high and medium ranking coastal cells along the western coast of the Hebrides and covering the offshore islands. All the coastal cells facing the Minches - save two classed as medium on the Scottish mainland south of Cape Wrath - are classed low or very low. There is an IMOdesignated deep-water route between the Outer Hebrides to the east and St Kilda and the Flannan Isles to the northwest. Laden tankers of over 10,000 gross tonnage carrying oil are recommended, weather permitting, to use the deep-water route in preference to sailing through the Minches. There are no IMO adopted traffic separation schemes, though there are recommended routes to separate traffic at points in the Minches, reflected in hydrographic charts and sailing directions. A UK Government Emergency Towing Vessel is stationed to cover the area. There is a voluntary reporting scheme for all vessels using the Minches. Overall this is an area of high sensitivity with constant local pressure to restrict use of the Minches. The Emergency Towing Vessel undertakes regular radar surveys of shipping movements in the Minches. 39

40 Map 18 - St Kilda (covering 2 MEHRAs cells) North St Kilda and South St Kilda (Map 18) have underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. It is a World Heritage Site. There are high concentrations of vulnerable seabirds and a medium to low level of offshore fishing activity. It lies to the west of the deep-water route, intended primarily to protect the Minches and the western coasts of the Hebrides. St Kilda's main protection is its relative remoteness, coupled with the low level of shipping movements in its immediate vicinity, although some of these movements involve tankers carrying significant quantities of oil westwards from Norway, through the Fair Isle Channel, Sullom Voe and Flotta. 40

41 Map 19 - Gallan Head, Isle of Lewis Gallan Head, Isle of Lewis (Map 19) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. There are very high concentrations of vulnerable seabirds and a medium level of offshore and near-shore fishing activity. It is protected by the IMO-designated deepwater route to its west and by the availability of a sheltered alternative route through the Minches in adverse weather As with St Kilda, the current measures appear to provide an appropriate balance and, while there is a continuing need for vigilance and monitoring of the behaviour of vessels operating in the area, no specific proposals are suggested in respect of either St Kilda or Gallan Head. Map 20 - West Scotland West Scotland (Map 20) 6.8 With the exception of its West Islay MEHRA this area (map 20) mainly comprises coastal cells in the low and very low categories. This must reflect, in part at least, the relatively low levels of shipping traffic, particularly inshore traffic. Traffic densities increase on the approaches to the North Channel and its Traffic Separation Scheme (see below). There is a voluntary reporting scheme off the Kyle of Lochalsh. 41

42 Map 21 - West Islay, Argyll and Bute (covering 2 MEHRAs cells) 42

43 6.8.1 West Islay, Argyll and Bute (Map 21) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. This area covers two MEHRA cells, containing very high concentrations of vulnerable seabirds and a range of fishing activities, including shellfish. No routeing or protective measures presently apply in the vicinity, but it was recognised that a traffic survey should be carried out to quantify shipping movements in the vicinity of West Islay and to establish whether any protective measures are necessary. A survey was carried out in 2002 during which it was noted that there could be strong winds and currents in the area where there is no dedicated tug cover. As a result it is recommended that a 3 nautical mile Area to be Avoided be established for vessels over a certain size (subject to adoption by the IMO). In addition, further work is needed to identify the shallow patches, the general tidal regime and the feasibility of a new route to the south and west, while an additional traffic survey around Rathlin Island may be necessary to get a fuller appreciation for any proposed new routeing scheme. Map 22 - Northern Ireland, South West Scotland, England and Wales to Anglesey Northern Ireland, South West Scotland and, England (Map 22) 6.9 The single MEHRA in this area (Map 22) and all, save two, of the high category coastal cells are along the Northern Ireland coastline. One of the two lies south of Southport and the other is to the west of the Mull of Kintyre. There is a Traffic Separation Scheme on the northern approach to the North Channel adjacent to the high-ranking cells surrounding Rathlin Island. Laden tankers of over 10,000 gross tonnage should avoid the area between the Traffic Separation Scheme and the Mull of Kintyre and between the Traffic Separation Scheme and Rathlin Island. The other Traffic Separation Scheme (just south of this area (see Map 24), off the Skerries, North West of Anglesey, caters for shipping traffic primarily bound to, or from, the Mersey. 43

44 Map 23 - Islandmagee, County Antrim Islandmagee, County Antrim (Map 23) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife and geological grounds. There is a very high concentration of vulnerable seabirds and fishing activities range from medium to very low. Islandmagee is on the northern edge of Belfast Lough with adjacent shipping routes to and from the nearby ports of Belfast and Larne. It is proposed that MCA should approach the relevant Harbour Authorities to discuss any need for any local guidance to apply to vessels using the adjacent ports As previously indicated, discussions are continuing with the Irish Authorities on a shared Emergency Towing Vessel for the Irish Sea (paragraph 3.13). 44

45 Map 24 - West and South West Wales West and South West Wales (Map 24) 6.10 Extending from Anglesey to Port Talbot (Map 24) the northern section of coastline includes a number of medium ranked coastal cells including Bardsey Island. These are followed by the low and very low cells around Cardigan Bay, a number of medium cells near Fishguard and a high and medium rank cell at St David's Head. The area's sole MEHRA is at the Pembrokeshire Islands and is followed by a number of low and medium ranked cells, ending with two high ranked cells at the Gower Peninsula. There is a Traffic Separation Scheme west of The Smalls, with an Area to be Avoided between The Smalls and Grassholm Island. All tankers, gas carriers, chemical tankers carrying noxious liquid substances and all other ships of more than 500 gross tonnage should avoid the Area to be Avoided. The Pembrokeshire Islands are at the limit of the area of operation of the MCA Emergency Towing Vessel stationed in the Western Approaches (see paragraph 6.11) but could be covered by the proposed Irish Sea Emergency Towing Vessel. Milford Haven is a major oil port and the site of the SEA EMPRESS grounding. There is already an IMO Recommendation on Navigation in place off Smalls and Grassholm Channel whereby laden tankers are recommended to avoid the area between the Smalls Traffic Separation Scheme and the Smalls. Laden tankers over 10,000 gross tonnage are also recommended not to use the channel between Grassholm and Skomer Islands unless moving between the anchorage in St Bride's Bay and Milford Haven. Map 25 - Pembrokeshire Islands Pembrokeshire Islands (Map 25) have underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. They have a high concentration of vulnerable seabirds with low to very low offshore fishing. The Traffic Separation Scheme off The Smalls and the Area to be Avoided provides a significant level of protection and MCA radar surveys have shown that vessels abide by the restrictions. Other than monitoring the continuing effectiveness of the IMO routeing measures no further protective measures are considered necessary. 45

46 Map 26 - Bristol Channel, Scilly Isles and South West England Bristol Channel, Isles of Scilly and South West England (Map 26) 6.11 This extensive area (Map 26) extends from Port Talbot to Portland Bill. Save for two medium cells near Ilfracombe the cells covering the Bristol Channel, including Lundy Island, are ranked low to very low. There are two medium ranked cells between Padstow and Newquay on the North Cornwall coast, with two high ranked cells at Land's End. The Isles of Scilly are ranked medium. The long line of medium, high and very high ranked cells which stretch along the south coast of England effectively starts with the Lizard. There are three MEHRAs within the area. There is an extensive pattern of Traffic Separation Schemes with associated Inshore Traffic Zones around the Isles of Scilly and between Seven Stones and Longships. An MCA Emergency Towing Vessel is stationed to cover the western approaches to the English Channel. 46

47 Map 27 - Plymouth 47

48 Plymouth (Map 27) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. It has a medium concentration of vulnerable seabirds, a range of offshore fishing and a number of amenity/economic features. It is located on both sides of the entrance to Plymouth Sound allowing access to one of the United Kingdom's major naval bases, RN Devonport, and the commercial port of Plymouth. There are no IMO routeing measures in its vicinity and it is proposed that the MCA should discuss local advice for vessels using the naval dockyard and commercial harbour with the relevant Harbour Authorities. Map 28 - Berry Head Berry Head (Map 28) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. It has a medium concentration of vulnerable seabirds, a range of offshore fishing and a number of amenity/economy features. It lies on both sides of Tor Bay, close to Brixham and near a long-standing anchorage and location for picking up, or setting down deep-sea pilots. It is proposed that the MCA should discuss local advice for vessels operating, or anchored, in the area with the local harbour authorities. 48

49 Map 29 - Portland Portland (Map 29) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds, mainly to the west of Portland Bill. It has a medium concentration of vulnerable seabirds, a range of offshore fishing and a number of amenity/economic facilities. It is adjacent to the approaches to the active commercial ports of Portland and Weymouth. It is proposed, again, that the MCA should discuss local advice for vessels using the commercial ports with the relevant harbour authorities. Any subsequent traffic routeing measures, will however be viewed as part of a wider initiative being considered by the MCA. Map 30 - South and South East England 49

50 South and South East England (Map 30) 6.12 This area (Map 30) from Swanage to Felixstowe continues the pattern of medium to very high coastal cells found along the south and east coasts. The area includes the major ports of Southampton, Portsmouth, Dover, the Thames Estuary and Felixstowe. It also includes a number of smaller, active commercial ports. The area of the Channel Navigation Information Service (CNIS) covers one of the busiest sea-lanes in the world with its Traffic Separation Scheme, associated Inshore Traffic Zones, radar coverage and mandatory ship-reporting requirement. An Emergency Towing Vessel, joint funded and controlled by the MCA and the French authorities, is stationed covering the Dover Strait. The area has a total of seven very high ranking coastal cells. Map 31 - Western Solent Western Solent (Map 31) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. It has a low concentration of vulnerable seabirds, a range of fishing and all categories of amenity/economic activity. It lies on both sides of the western entrance to the Solent and includes The Needles on the Isle of Wight. An IMO adopted recommendation advises against laden tankers of 10,000 gross tonnage and above from entering or leaving through the Western Solent. Major shipping movements are restricted each day to high tides. Most commercial shipping enters the Solent from the east. It remains essential to monitor the effectiveness of the recommendation upon shipping movements, but otherwise no further proposals are made with respect to the Western Solent. 50

51 Map 32 - Hastings and Dungeness (covering 2 MEHRAs cells) 51

52 Hastings (Map 32) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. It has a medium concentration of vulnerable seabirds, and some fishing and amenity/economic activity. It comes within the extensive measures forming part of the Channel Navigation Information Service. The area is protected by the IMO-designated Traffic Separation Scheme for the Dover Straits with the area lying within the associated English Inshore Traffic Zone. The international Regulations for Preventing Collision at Sea 1972, as amended (COLREGS) require ships, sailing vessels and fishing vessels, not to use an inshore traffic zone when they can safely use the appropriate traffic lane within the adjacent traffic separation scheme. The traffic separation scheme is monitored by radar from Dover Coastguard who with their French counterparts, operate the Channel Navigation Information Service. Given the level of protection already in place no further proposals are made for Hastings Dungeness (Map 32), the highest ranking coastal cell around the United Kingdom coast, also has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. Like Hastings it has a medium concentration of vulnerable seabirds and some fishing and amenity/economic activities. It also comes within the area of the Channel Navigation Information System and is protected by the IMO designated Traffic Separation Scheme for the Dover Straits. There are no further proposals for this area. Map 33 - South Foreland to Ramsgate (covering 2 MEHRAs cells) South Foreland to Ramsgate (Map 33) has underlying statutory designations relating to wildlife, landscape and geology. It has medium concentrations of vulnerable seabirds and a range of amenity/economic activities. The area contains two MEHRA cells, which, for most of their length are within the area of the Channel Navigation Information Service (see paragraph above). There are no further proposals for this area. 52

53 Map 34 - Harwich and Felixstowe (covering 2 MEHRAs cells) Harwich and Felixstowe (Map 34) have underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. This stretch of coast contains two MEHRAs, which have medium concentrations of vulnerable seabirds and a range of fishing and amenity/economic activities. The MEHRAs lie both sides of the entrance to Harwich and Felixstowe, both very active ports. Parts of the area off the ports are not covered by an existing Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) system and vessels entering, or leaving, the Thames Estuary pass the area. Harwich Haven Authority's VTS extends from the Naze in the South up to beyond Orford Haven in the North and out to the Shipwash buoy. Harwich also operates a VTS in the area of the Sunk Light Vessel to the south east on behalf of the MCA, this area also being an IMO adopted Precautionary Area. The VTS systems together with radar surveillance operated by Harwich Haven Authority provide extensive protection. However, it remains essential to monitor the effectiveness of these measures. VTS arrangements for the Sunk are currently being reviewed as part of a comprehensive package of measures which are being considered by the MCA. 53

54 Map 35 - East England East England (Map 35) 6.13 Extending from Orford Ness to north of Spurn Head this area (Map 35) includes several medium and high ranking coastal cells - a pattern found along most of the East Coast. There are high-ranking cells along the coast from Orford Ness to Southwold and along the north Norfolk coast. There is extensive offshore gas extraction off the coast, with associated support traffic. The area includes a number of active East Anglian commercial ports and the approaches to the Humber. IMO-designated Deep Water Routes about 30 nautical miles offshore are mandatory for tankers sailing from North Hinder to the German Bight and vice versa. Other than these there are no IMO routeing measures along the coast - a pattern repeated along the entire East Coast. The area lies outside the coverage of the Dover Strait Emergency Towing Vessel. The sole very high-ranking coastal cell is north of Spurn Head. MCA are currently considering a package of routeing measures for various locations in UK waters (including the east coast) as a result of proposals to develop offshore renewable energy installations. 54

55 Map 36 - Spurn Bight Spurn Bight (Map 36) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. There is a very high concentration of vulnerable seabirds, medium to very low fishing, including shellfish. Several North Sea pipelines come ashore within the area. Further out to sea there are unmanned offshore extraction platforms providing radar surveillance by a gas company. The area is adjacent to the Humber Harbour Authority's area and there is VTS and an IMO adopted Traffic Separation Scheme on the approach to the Humber. No further specific measures are proposed for this MEHRA. Map 37 - North East England 55

56 North East England (Map 37) 6.14 This area (Map 37) continues the pattern found along the south and east Coast with coastal cells ranging from medium to very high ranking. Eight of the seventeen cells have a high ranking. Five have a very high ranking. At the north of the area are the first of series of very high ranking cells running from Farne to Forth. The area includes a number of major ports on the Tees and Tyne and a significant number of smaller active ports. There is limited offshore extraction off the southern end of the area, linked to the Humber. Emergency Towing Vessel coverage is through arrangements with tug companies as described in paragraph There are thirteen Coastguard Agreements on Salvage and Towage (CAST) tugs available in the Humber. There are a further nine CAST tugs on the Tees and three more on the Tyne. There are no IMO routeing measures in the area. Map 38 - Flamborough Head Flamborough Head (Map 38) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. Though the MEHRA is justified on the area north of the Head itself the designations also extend to the south in the adjacent high ranking cell. The location has a very high concentration of vulnerable seabirds, medium to very low fishing and limited amenity/economy features. There are no protective measures in place but there is a significant density of traffic making use of a natural waypoint in the area. Any such measures adopted in the future will take account of any MEHRAs in the general area. 56

57 Map 39 - Tees Tees (Map 39) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. There is a very high concentration of vulnerable seabirds, medium to very low fishing and a number of amenity/economic activities. The MEHRA lies on both sides of the entrance to Teesport and is within the Harbour Authority area. Local advice to users will be developed in consultation with the harbour authority and the MCA. Map 40 - Farne Islands and adjacent Coastline Farne Islands, Holy Island and the adjacent coastline (Map 40) have underlying statutory designations based on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. There are very high concentrations 57

58 of vulnerable seabirds and a range of fishing activities. There are limited amenity/economic factors. These are the first in a series of MEHRAs along the coast of North East England and South East Scotland. There are currently no routeing measures in place. Any future routeing measures will be considered as part of the wider initiative being considered by the MCA. Map 41 - Berwick Berwick (Map 41) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. There is a very high concentration of vulnerable seabirds and a range of fishing and amenity/economic activity. The MEHRA extends on both sides of the entrance to the Tweed. The area would be affected by any measures designed to protect the Farne Islands which are being considered as part of a wider MCA initiative. The MCA will discuss any potential affects and local advice to port users with the harbour authority. 58

59 Map 42 - East Scotland East Scotland (Map 42) 6.15 This area (Map 42) extends from the north of Berwick, to Scotstown. It includes the entrance to the Firth of Forth and its port complexes, and the ports of Dundee, Montrose, Aberdeen and Peterhead. The majority of coastal cells are in the medium to very high ranking. There are three MEHRAs towards the entrance of the Forth with a fourth at Newburgh. Emergency Towing Vessel coverage is through arrangements with tug companies as described in paragraph Several CAST tugs are available in this area. 59

60 Map 43 - St Abb's Head and Eyemouth St Abb's Head and Eyemouth (Map 43) have underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. There are very high concentrations of vulnerable seabirds and a range of fishing and amenity/economic activities. This MEHRA continues the string of MEHRAs between Farne and Forth and are covered by the recommendation made for that stretch of coastline (see above). The recommendations for this area as a result of the traffic survey carried out in 2002 are to establish a 3 nautical mile Area to be Avoided as well as further consideration to be given to a traffic separation scheme to align north west and south east bound traffic, together with a separation scheme at the entrance to the Firth of Forth. Any subsequent routeing measures will be considered by the MCA as part of the wider initiative for the Firth of Forth. Map 44 - Bass Rock and adjacent coastline 60

61 Bass Rock, Dunbar and the adjacent coastline (Map 44) have underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. There is a very high concentration of seabirds and a range of fishing and amenity/economic activities. The MEHRAs are on the southern side of the entrance to the Firth of Forth and complete the string of MEHRAs from Farne to Forth. The recommendation from the results of a traffic survey applying to those MEHRAs also applies here and the requirement for local advice for users of the Forth needs to be discussed with the harbour authority. Laden tankers are already advised to avoid passing between Bass Rock and the Coast. Any subsequent measures will be considered as part of the wider MCA initiative. Map 45 - Isle of May and adjacent coastline Isle of May and the adjacent coastline (Map 45) have underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. There is a very high concentration of vulnerable seabirds and a range of fishing and amenity/economy activities. The Isle of May lies at the northern entrance to the Firth of Forth and a traffic survey, carried out by MCA in 2003, indicated a significant density of shipping. A consideration of future routeing measures will be part of the wider initiative being considered by MCA. 61

62 Map 46 - Newburgh Newburgh (Map 46) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. There is very high concentration of vulnerable seabirds and a range of fishing activities. The MEHRA lies between Aberdeen and Peterhead and traffic to, and from, both ports passes by. Although the traffic survey in 2002 found a high density of traffic, most was out beyond 2 nautical miles from the coast. The survey also found that there was a large number of offshore support vessels in the area which could be available to assist in the event of an incident. As a result no recommendations are made for routeing measures. Map 47 - Moray Firth and North East Scotland 62

63 Moray Firth and North East Scotland (Map 47) 6.16 This area (Map 47) follows the pattern of medium to high ranking coastal cells found along the east coat. There are low and very low ranking cells covering the approach to Inverness. There is a single MEHRA. There are no IMO routeing measures within the area. The area is within the operating radius of the Fair Isle Emergency Towing Vessel. Map 48 - Kinnaird Head Kinnaird Head (Map 48) has underlying statutory designations on wildlife, landscape and geological grounds. There is a very high concentration of vulnerable seabirds and a range of fishing and amenity/economic activity. The traffic survey to establish the nature of the passing traffic concluded that a routeing measure is not necessary, but because of the passing traffic and fishing vessels leaving Fraserburgh, transiting distances may need to be considered. Any subsequent routeing measures will be considered as part of the wider initiative being considered by MCA. IMO Routeing Measures 6.17 Any routeing measures intended to protect MEHRAs, whether part of the wider MCA initiative or not, should be submitted to the IMO for adoption, so that they will apply to international shipping. 63

64 Appendix A MEHRAs Environmental Background Berry Head Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 5054) To the north of Torbay, is the geologically important headland of Hope's Nose with, just offshore, the islets of Flat Rock, Ore Stone and Thatchers Rock. Torbay is an area of very sheltered fine sand and mud. The intertidal area is a mix of sedimentary and hard substrates, with rock outcrops and sandy bays occurring. Berry Head is a limestone headland with a number of caves, many of which lie below sea level and have tidal or permanently flooded passages. The caves were formed by solution of the limestone and from fragments of a network that must underlie the whole headland. Many deeper caves and passages extend beyond the influence of wave action where there is an almost constant temperature, often reduced salinity due to freshwater input and no light, providing a marine environment which is probably unique in this country. Plymouth Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 4936) The site supports a wide diversity of habitats and species because there are a variety of wave exposures from open to sheltered coast, providing the differing environments with a range of habitats and species. Owing to the southwestern location of the site, seawater temperatures are increased allowing southerly species to occur. The site contains three distinct areas: the marine inlet of the Yealm and the lower reaches of the Tamar, Tavy and Lynher Rivers; the open bay of Plymouth Sound and the open coast. The Yealm is formed from drowned riverbeds that mostly cut through slate bedrock and have extensive intertidal mudflats. The coastline of the Sound consists almost entirely of steeply sloping rock with only a few small sandy and shingle beaches. On the north side of the Sound the rock is of hard limestone that is the remains of a Palaeozoic coral reef. The rocky shores found along the open coast support communities typical of wave-exposed shores. The presence of gullies and overhangs adds to the habitat diversity. Portland Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 5021) Weymouth Bay is a sheltered sandy bay, which gives way to mud and gravel further offshore. Portland harbour is an extensive and partially artificial tidal basin enclosed by a large breakwater that opens into Weymouth Bay. The Isle of Portland is a limestone outcrop that forms a significant promontory along the Dorset coast. Chesil Beach connects the Isle of Portland to the mainland and comprises of a 28km long shingle bank. This internationally important feature encloses the Fleet, the largest tidal lagoon in England, which is also internationally important. The Fleet is connected to the sea by a narrow channel that opens into Portland Harbour, with some percolation through the shingle bank from Lyme Bay also occurring. The lagoonal basin of the Fleet has minimal wave exposure, weak currents, poor flushing and a predominantly fine substratum regime for most of its length. Western Solent Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 4962) The Western Solent is enclosed by the Isle of Wight and includes Christchurch harbour. The complex tidal regime results from there being two entrances to the system so that there is a prolonged stand at high water followed by a shortened ebb flow, and a stand also occurs during the flood phase. Benthic habitats are predominantly sedimentary in nature, with extensive intertidal mud and sandflats within sheltered harbours and areas of gravely and pebbly sediments on more exposed beaches. Hard substrata are limited. The Western Solent encompasses a major estuarine system on the south coast of England, with two types of estuary; a bar-built estuary of the River Beaulieu and a coastal plain estuary of the River Yar. Christchurch harbour is lagoonal in character being poorly flushed and very warm in summer and supports species characteristic of saline lagoons and a number of rare taxa. Subtidally, benthic habitats are also sedimentary and range from silty mud in the more sheltered inlets to tidally swept stones, shell and coarse sand in the main body of the Solent. In some places, gravel 64

65 and sand is formed into waves and dunes, and outcrops of clay bedrock occur where there is tidal scour. Dungeness Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 4892) Shingle beaches fringe approximately a third of the coastline of the UK, but much of this is devoid of vegetation. Dungeness to Rye includes a large proportion of the total resource of vegetated shingle in the UK. Vegetated shingle is a rare habitat in the UK, in particular drift line vegetation is ephemeral and sites where this habitat is persistent are rare. The distinct beach system at Dungeness with its variations in pebble size, age and exposure to maritime influence has allowed highly unusual vegetation types to develop. Many plant and animal species of restricted distribution occur here. The shingle system at Rye Harbour has similarities to that at Dungeness, though it is far less extensive. South Foreland to Ramsgate Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID ) Ramsgate is the only major rock outcrop in the southern North Sea and represents the last significant occurrence of rocky reef on the eastern English coast for 300km until the hard chalk headland further north at Flamborough Head in Yorkshire. The cliffs at Ramsgate consist of chalk and encompass 12% of the European coastal exposure of this scarce habitat. The cliffs are characterised by numerous fractures, faults and joint cracks which have eroded to form irregularly-shaped promontories, stacks, pillars, caves and tunnel formations. In parts of the site the shore in front of the cliffs consists of a strip of sand and, lower down, gently sloping wave-cut platforms that are dissected by numerous pools and channels. In other areas the wave-cut platform starts at the base of the cliff. Below low water the chalk platforms shelve down gently and are cut by gullies and areas of sand. From Longnose to the western end of the site the seabed becomes progressively siltier, as does the overlying water, with the finest and thickest sediments in areas sheltered from the prevailing weather and strong currents. Harwich & Felixstowe Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID ) The Harwich & Felixstowe MEHRA is located near the mouth of the Orwell estuary, where it joins the Stour. The River Stour is a coastal plain estuary, which is relatively wide and formed as a series of scalloped bays with a marked 'headland' or 'ness' opposite each bay. The headlands are predominately mixed sediment beaches of gravel, shingle, sand and mud. The River Orwell is generally wide along its length. The size of the channel results in a large tidal influence and high salinity well up the inlet. An intertidal rock platform, the Harwich Stone Band, is present at the entrance of the Stour and represents the only hard natural rocky outcrop on the East Coast of England between Kent and Norfolk. South of the mouth of the Stour and Orwell estuaries is the convoluted coastline embayment of Hamford Water. Around the entrance to Hamford Water the sediment is sandy with a marked spit on each side of the channel. Many small saltwater drainage creeks enter the channel along its length. The intertidal areas of Hamford Water are a mosaic of tidal creeks, saltmarsh and extensive mudflats. 65

66 Flamborough Head Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 5383) Flamborough Head represents the most northerly outcrop of coastal chalk in the British Isles. The chalk of Flamborough Head is harder than the chalk exposed in southern England and is not so easily eroded. The northern side of the headland has relatively steep and rugged shores that are exposed to wave action, whereas on the southern side, where the chalk is softer, the shores have broader, wavecut platforms and are more sheltered. There are over 200 sea caves at Flamborough Head, particularly around the headland and north facing cliffs where weaknesses associated with faulting and jointing are exposed to wave action. The seabed around the headland is predominantly chalk rock and includes a wide range of features such as outcrops, boulders, terraced and flat bedrock, cobbles and pebbles. The headland is flanked to the north and south by sandy bays, and there are areas of sand and silt, mixed with flint, further offshore and to the south. Spurn Bight Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 5340) Spurn is a conspicuous narrow peninsula that protrudes 5km into the mouth of the Humber from the Southeast extremity of Holderness. Spurn is unusual, as it is a spit system at the mouth of a macrotidal estuary. It owes its existence to the large supply of material from erosion of the Holderness coast to the north. On the western side much of the intertidal area of Spurn consists of mudflats with fringing saltmarsh. Characteristic saltmarsh and sand dune vegetation types occur with areas of both accretion and erosion. Being located on England's eastern seaboard, Spurn is exposed to the full force of cold easterly winds from the Continent and to the influence of the North Sea. A series of lagoons are found two kilometres north of Spurn peninsula which are associated with variety of the coastal habitats including saltmarsh, shingle, sand dune and swamp. Tees Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 5361) Due to extensive land claim much of the habitat on the Tees estuary are subtidal. There are narrow strips of mudflat along the banks of the Tees and its tributary channel, Greatham Creek, but Seal Sands constitutes the only extensive area of mudflat. In the lower reaches of the estuary, at North Gare Sands and Bran Sands, the intertidal flats become sandier. On either side of the estuary mouth sandy beaches stretch northwestwards to Hartlepool and eastwards to Redcar. To the Northwest of the estuary mouth dunes back the sandy foreshore of Seaton Sands. Very little saltmarsh remains in the estuary with the exception of areas on the margins of Greatham Creek and within Seal Sands Peninsula. On the opposite side of the estuary mouth lies South Gare and Coatham Sands, an extensive tract of intertidal sand backed by dunes. Further sand flats and dune systems are located at Hart Warren, to the north of Hartlepool. Significant areas of rocky shore are found at Hartlepool Headland, South Gare, Coatham Rocks and Redcar Rocks. Newburgh Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 5658) Newburgh MEHRA is located on the NE Grampian coast of Scotland. The Sands of Forvie are the 5 th largest sand dune system in Britain and possibly the least disturbed. They contain large areas of sandy foreshore, mobile and fixed dunes, dune pasture and lowland heath and the successional development of vegetation associated with increasing sand stability is especially well demonstrated. An estuary runs approximately north to south and extends for about 8km. Much of the estuary is composed of intertidal mud and sand flats. Pebbles, shingle or mussel beds are largely confined to the areas of faster moving water. The Ythan Estuary remains one of the least modified in Scotland and is the most extensive in North East Scotland. The intertidal mudflats are an important area for wintering and passage wildfowl and waders. Greylag and pink-footed geese, and whooper swans regularly occur in internationally significant numbers and the overall numbers and diversity of estuary bird life is outstanding. In addition, inshore waters at the mouth of the estuary are a major moulting and wintering ground for various seaducks and divers. The Reserve also has interesting terrestrial and estuarine invertebrate fauna. 66

67 Forth / Berwickshire / Northumberland] Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell IDs 5464, 5075, 5501, 5502, 5611, 5521, 5631) The Forth / Berwickshire / Northumberland MEHRA lies on the East Coast of Britain. The extended Forth Islands Special Protected Area (SPA) is of special nature conservation and scientific importance within Britain and the EU for its outstanding assemblage of breeding seabirds. The Forth Islands SPA comprises Inchmickery, Eyebroughty, Fidra, Lamb, Craigleith, Bass Rock and the Isle of May. The island of Long Craig and Imperial Dock Pontoon support the largest populations in the Firth of Forth of roseate tern and common tern. The MEHRA contains a complex of marine habitat types and associated species and communities, which is of international importance; unusually diverse for the North Sea both in UK and European context. A sizeable proportion of the marine species within the area are characteristic of cold water influences from the sub-arctic, or are Atlantic species which are only rarely found on the North Sea coast. Several reach their southern or eastern limits of distribution. Kinnaird Head Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 5150) Kinnaird Head MEHRA is located on the North East Grampian coast of Scotland. The environment in this area is extremely varied. Troup Head mainly consists of cliffs interspersed with sandy bays. Rocky shores at Pennan are of conservation interest. The cliff's decline in height as they approach Rosehearty until the shoreline becomes a low-lying rocky shoreline at the Bay of Lochielair. Sublittoral Bay of Lochielair for example consists of rocky gullies lying perpendicular to the intertidal ridges. Between Rosehearty and Kinnaird Head an open and exposed coastline is predominate, unusually containing fairly extensive areas of intertidal mud and sandflats interspersed (mainly at Rosehearty) with low rocky outcrops, and backed by a narrow fringe of sand dune and saltmarsh. Phingask shore consists of boulders/cobbles on sediments between rocky shores of Sandhaven and Clubbie. Extensive sandy beaches exist between Kinnaird Head and Rattray Head that are backed by a continuous dune system, with saltmarsh, to Cairnbulg. Muckle Flugga Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 5411) The northern and western coastlines of the island of Unst are extremely exposed along most of their length and much of it comprises high cliffs. Herma Ness, at the northern tip of Unst, is particularly scenic with cliffs of over 150m in height and numerous geos, arches, caves and stacks. The area includes one voe, Burra Firth, which is open to the north and is exposed to wave action even at its head. The littoral zone consists almost entirely of steep or vertical rock, which continues into the sublittoral to depths of 35m. On the open coast, bedrock and boulders are replaced at their lower limits by coarse, clean shelly sand, which is often dunned. Finer sand is found on the floor of Burra Firth and there is a sand beach at its head. Strong tides surround Muckle Flugga and Herma Ness. The headland of Herma Ness has important bird populations. The east and south coast of Unst comprises a stretch of predominantly rocky coastline which is broken by a number of voes, embayments, islands and sounds which provide varying degrees of shelter. 67

68 Fethaland Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 5448) Fethaland MEHRA is located on the North of the Shetland Islands in Scotland and includes the small islands of Ramna Stacks and Gruney. The small islands of Ramna Stacks and Gruney are situated approximately 2km off the northernmost point of mainland Shetland. Ramna Stacks consists largely of composed of bare rock. Yell Sound divides Mainland Shetland from Yell and is one of the major channels in the Shetland Islands. It has a rocky coastline with numerous small islands and rocks, and there are cliffs along much of the northern part of the area. There are several voes in the area. Strong tides of up to 7 knots run through the sounds which reaches a maximum depth of 102m, with much of the sea bed deeper than 50m. The area is moderately exposed to wave action throughout most of its length, with very exposed conditions in the northern end. Yell Sound is fringed by bedrock and boulder shores, many of which are steep and vertical, but there are sandy beaches in several of the more open bays and shingle overlying muddy sediment in more enclosed areas. In the sublittoral, steep rock gives way at about 25-30m to boulder, cobble and pebble plains with coarse sand widespread. There is finer sand in the Voes and mud outside the entrance to Sullom Voe. Other coastal habitats include houbs at Queyfirth and North Haa on Burr Voe, patches of saltmarsh and sand dunes. Salmon and mussel farms are present in Bay of Ollaberry. Tor Ness Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 5429) The Tor Ness MEHRA is located off the West Coast of the Island of Hoy. Vegetated sea cliffs, natural dystrophic lakes and ponds, Northern Atlantic wet heaths with Erica tetralix, European dry heaths, Alpine and Boreal heaths, Blanket bogs, Petrifying springs with tufa formation (Cratoneurion), Alkaline fens, Calcareous rocky slopes with chasmophytic vegetation are commonly found in the Tor Ness MEHRA. High sandstone sea cliffs with a superb range of vertical faces with a range of aspeces, and well-developed talus fans also exist. The ledges provide habitat for cliff plants and birds despite the high exposure and northern Scottish species are well represented. Gallen Head Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 5094) Located on the Isle of Lewis within the Western Isles of Scotland, the Gallen Head MEHRA will be within the stretch of coast from Traigh Luskentyre to Barvas. Moving north from the large sedimentinfilled inlet of Traigh Luskentyre, sea lochs occur up to Mealasta Island; many of them such as Loch Resort are surrounded by steeply rising ground and have a fjord-like aspect. Between Mealasta Island and Aird Fenish the coast is generally cliffed and indented with numerous inlets. North of Aird Fenish the large sea lochs of East and West Loch Roag indent the coast. The form of the largely rocky, cliffed coast is complex, with numerous small islands offshore and freshwater lochs to landward. Beaches have accumulated in some places along the edges of the lochs, as at Uig Sands and Traigh na Berie. Dunes and machair back the beaches. A series of sea lochs with entrances commonly ponded by shingle bars lies along the coast from Dalbeg Bay to Barvas. Boulder beaches overlying a rock platform lie to seaward of the bars. From Barvas northwards, the coast consists of low drift-covered cliffs fronted by wave-cut rock platform and dissected by a number of open, wide valleys. At Eoropie a cobble ridge along the back of the beach changes abruptly landwards to Machair. St. Kilda Marine Environmental High Risk Areas (Cell ID 5085 and 5088) St Kilda is a remote archipelago located to the West of the Outer Hebrides. It is one of the most exposed groups of islands and rocks in the UK and is more strongly influenced by the North Atlantic Drift than inshore areas on the Scottish Coast. The igneous rock type creates steep cliffs and vertical reefs around the entire island group, with few low-lying areas. Rock faces extend to over 300m above sea level. Sublittorally reaches depths of between 60-80m on a subtidal plateau that encircles the island group, with drop-offs to depths of 120m. Basalt and dolerite dykes throughout the island group have eroded to form caves and tunnels above and below the water. The communities these support are diverse and reflect the degree of surge to which each cave is exposed. St. Kilda's combination of extensive, rich, very exposed reef habitats, its system of caves and tunnels and oceanic location are 68

69 unique in the North Atlantic, and are of outstanding marine biological interest and international conservation status. West Islay, Argyll & Bute Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell IDs 5605 & 5513) Located within Scotland, Argyll and Bute, the West Islay MEHRA would ensure coverage of the areas from Mull of Oa in the south round to northern edge of the Gruinart Flats site. The West Coast of Islay is a predominantly raised shore platform backed by cliff interspersed with major areas of 'soft' shores (mud, sand or shingle). Sand dunes present between Killeyan in the south to Bagh an da Dhoruis in the north. The majority of these areas are SSSI, ESA. Fringing shingle beaches are found at Claddach, Machair Bay, and Gortanoid Point. Saltmarsh found at Bridgend Flats, Gruinart Flats. Estuarine environments include Traigh Cill-a-Rubha (embayment) and Loch Gruinart (fjard). West Coast of Islay is fully exposed to the force of the Atlantic and little sea bed information is recorded. The shores of Islay's west coast have a surprisingly diverse fauna and flora for such an exposed area and the brown alga Fucus distichus anseps probably reaches its southern limit here. Islandmagee Marine Environmental High Risk Area Northern Ireland (Cell ID 5243) The proposed MEHRA is centred on the mouth of Belfast Lough. It extends Southeast to include the Copeland Island group and the adjoining County Down shoreline between Groomsport and Donaghadee. On the County Antrim side, its western limit is immediately east of Whitehead. It continues northward on the Islandmagee coastline to Barr's Point. The proposed MEHRA has within it a wide variety and high density of important and vulnerable nature conservation and landscape sites all in close proximity to very busy shipping routes, emanating from the ports of Belfast and Larne. The County Antrim coastline is typified by high basalt cliffs with occasional boulder or sand dominated embayments. The proposed MEHRA provides a nesting habitat for many different species located in the area, together with major feeding and loafing areas. The Manx Shearwater, Common, Arctic, Sandwich and Roseate Terns, Guillemot, Razorbill Puffin, Black Guillemot, Fulmar and Kittiwake all use the area on a regular basis. Pembrokeshire Islands Marine Environmental High Risk Area (Cell ID 4902) The Pembrokeshire Islands MEHRA encompasses the sea area west of the Pembrokeshire coast from St. David's Head in the north and St Anne's Head in the south. It includes the islands of Ramsey, Skomer, Skokholm and Grassholm and the islets and rocks of the Bishops and Clerks and the Hats / Barrels / Smalls complex. The proposed MEHRA has within it a wide variety and particularly dense concentration of internationally and nationally important and vulnerable nature conservation and landscape sites. Of the many environmental factors that underpin the area's nature conservation and landscape features, the extensive shallow rocky reefs, extreme tidal streams and frequently severe wave action also render the area hazardous to shipping. 69