12th marine protected areas technical group meeting...

Marine Protected Areas Technical Group

1 12th MARINE PROTECTED AREAS TECHNICAL GROUP MEETING

12TH MARINE PROTECTED AREAS TECHNICAL GROUP MEETING

MINUTES

Wednesday, 22 May 2013

Monkstone House, Peterborough

Present: Phone:

Jon Davies (Chair) (JD) JNCC Nuala McQuaid (NMC)

DOENI

Hannah Carr (Secretariat) (HC)

JNCC Fiona Gell (FG) IOM

Dan Bayley (DB) JNCC Video-conferencing: Eleonora Manca (Notes) (EM)

Julie Black (JB) JNCC

Liz Pothanikat (LP) DOENI Mary Lewis (ML) NRW Maggie Hatton-Ellis (MHE)

NRW Kirsten Ramsey (KR) NRW

Nigel Buxton (NB) SNH Natasha Lough (NL) NRW Sarah Cunningham (SC) SNH Mary Roddick (MR) NRW Samantha King (SK) Natural England Matt Murphy (MM) NRW Apologies: Joanna Redgwell (JR) Natural

England Ian Enlander (IE) DOENI



1. Welcome and apologies for absence The chair welcomed the group to the meeting.

JD informed the group that Jenny Oates has now left JNCC and that Hannah Carr has taken over as Secretariat for the MPA Technical Group.

2. Minutes of the 11 MPA Technical group meeting and matters arising

The action points from the previous meeting were reviewed. Most actions were complete and updates on others were given. In relation to AP 11.11 SK stated that the conservation objectives standards document still needs to be signed off. Minutes were approved subject to changes requested.

Action 12.1 - SK to circulate conservation objectives standards document to the group once signed off.

Action 11.8 - All to send Karen Webb (JNCC) any information on sensitivity work being carried out within the country agencies.

3. Update on UK MPA identification and consultation: forthcoming work programme (MPATG12_1_UKMPAPlan and MPATG12_2_UKMPAPapers)

HC introduced the UK MPA Plan document. It was noted that the document and the information it contains requires regular update because it can become out of date and that the planned work might change. JD clarified that the purpose of the paper is to provide information on what MPA work is going on, by whom and where.

The UK MPA Papers document has also been updated note that the Northern Ireland Marine Conservation Zone Guidance is going to be circulated to the group intersessionally this summer and that the JNCC post-consultation MCZ Advice will be sent to the MPA Sub-Group for review and sign off.

3.1 Update on MCZ advice work (Hannah Carr) The Defra-led public consultation on Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) opened on the 14th December 2012 and closed at the end of March 2013. In total 31 sites (25 inshore and 6 offshore) have been proposed for designation in 2013. The response to the consultation was massive with the majority of responses coming from public campaigns.

Since Defra indicated the sites for the first tranche of MCZ designations, JNCC & Natural England have been working on revised advice for the first tranche of sites, taking into account any new evidence available since the SNCBs 2012 advice on all recommended sites. The updated advice will be submitted to Defra in the summer, with Defra aiming to designate sites in autumn 2013.

3.2 Update on Welsh MCZ project (Kirsten Ramsey) KR explained that the Welsh Government Task and Finish group (which includes representatives from JNCC & CCW/NRW) produced a report with recommendations on how to take forward the MCZ work in Wales. These recommendations include examining the legal requirements on the Administration under the Marine and Coastal Access Act, and what may be required to contribute to a UK MPA network. The report has been delivered to the Minister but it is not yet publicly available.



3.3 Update on Scottish MPA project (Sarah Cunningham) SC reported that, following the submission of the JNCC/SNH advice and the Marine Scotland Parliamentary report at the end of 2012, Scottish Ministers will make a decision on which of the 33 Nature Conservation MPA proposals and 4 MPA search locations are to be taken forward to public consultation. The final decision is expected in July 2013.

Recent work has focussed around providing material for each site in preparation for the consultation, which includes a detailed assessment for each site, data confidence assessments and an assessment of activities taking place. A management option paper will also be produced for each site which will be discussed with key stakeholders. The development of an indicative suite of SPAs may be part of the consultation material package. Marine Scotland is producing a consultation overview document and is also leading on the Impact Assessment.

The consultation will run alongside sectoral planning for marine renewables and the national marine plan. There will be bilateral drop-in sessions throughout the consultation process in locations near to the Nature Conservation MPA proposals, with more formal meetings and liaison with industry and other stakeholder groups. Pre-consultation meetings are already taking place to discuss the potential management options for each site. Pre-consultation meetings with local authorities are also envisaged.

SK enquired about the reaction from stakeholders to the management options papers so far. SC replied that the reaction has been positive overall, as the stakeholders were pleased to have being involved early on.

Action 12.2 - HC to circulate some examples of offshore site management options papers to the group for information.

3.4 Update on MCZ process in Northern Ireland (Liz Pothanikat) LP explained that the list of MCZ features has been finalised and peer reviewed. Features proposed to go forward in the list include 21 habitats, 29 low or limited mobility species and 14 highly mobile species. Five of the bird species (Common Scoter, Red-throated Diver, Slavonian Grebe, Manx Shearwater and Common Eider) require more survey work and may not end up as MCZ features. This list will be presented along with the draft MCZ guidance which will be similar to the SMPA project guidance report, and it is expected to be circulated in June.

Data collection is underway and a map of potential Areas of Search is being developed ready for presentation at stakeholder workshops which will be held to discuss these and ask for suggestions. Socio-economic issues will be taken into consideration.

LP stated that they are still waiting for enactment of the Marine Bill, which should happen in July 2013. Strangford Lough will will change from a Marine Nature Reserve to an MCZ (protecting the same features) soon after the legislation is formally enacted. A consultation on Strangford Lough is expected in 2014 if any additional features are thought necessary for the site.

Action 12.3 - HC to circulate to the group the feature list that LP provided after the 11th MPATG meeting

3.5 Isle of Man (Fiona Gell) FG reported that there were a number of candidate MPAs identified through the consultation process a few years ago, which they intend to progress and work with stakeholders. Of these candidate MPAs, one is important for basking sharks, another contains Modiolus beds, and



there is one adjacent to rMCZ6 recommended reference area, identified through the MCZ Project.

The Ramsay Nature Reserve has recently become an OSPAR MPA. The areas which feature basking shark and Modiolus beds will be the first to be progressed (hopefully by next year), but it is likely to be longer for other sites. Additionally a new fisheries closure zone for mobile gear has been put in place. This new closure added to the existing 4 closures and the part of Ramsay Marine Nature Reserve which is closed to mobile gear, makes six fisheries closed areas in total within Manx waters (see map in Annex A).

MHE asked for the total area that is closed to mobile gear in Manx waters. FG estimates that roughly 3% of Manx waters are closed to fishing with mobile gear, but can provide the exact figure if needed (see correspondence in Annex A).

Action 12.4 - HC to contact FG to get information about the candidate MPA adjacent to rMCZ 6.

Action 12.5 - FG to circulate figure of total area of Manx waters closed to mobile fishing gear.

3.6 Update on marine SAC work (Sarah Cunningham, Maggie Hatton-Ellis, Samantha

King, Liz Pothanikat, Dan Bayley) A Ministerial decision on The Sound of Barra pSAC is expected in summer 2013.

MHE reported that no new SACs are expected in Wales.

SK stated that there are no new SACs coming forward in England, unless new information emerges on harbour porpoises.

LP explained that the SAC network is considered complete in Northern Ireland and DOENI is concentrating on SAC management schemes.

DB provided an update on the offshore SAC network, which is largely completed. All but five of the SACs are now SCIs. The remaining 5 areas have been submitted to the European Commission. Some changes may occur, with the recent discovery of a possible Modiolus reef within the North West Anglesey Area of Search (AoS) by an offshore wind farm developer. This area remains an AoS while JNCC and NRW wait to receive the data in order to assess whether or not the Modiolus bed meets the definition of Annex I reef and the SAC selection criteria.

DB provided an update from Eunice Pinn on marine SAC species work being undertaken by JNCC.

Action 12.6: HC to liaise with LP regarding management schemes

3.7 Update on marine SPA work (including an update on Falmouth Bay to St Austell Bay pSPA Departmental brief circulated intersessionally) (Samantha King, Julie Black, Nigel Buxton, Matt Murphy, Ian Enlander)

SK provided an update on the marine SPA work in England. Natural England is currently focussing on Falmouth Bay to St Austell pSPA and Flamborough Head pSPA, with the intention they will be ready for public consultation by the end of 2013. An informal dialogue on Coquet pSPA is going to start in October 2013.

The Falmouth Bay to St Austell Bay pSPA Departmental brief, previously circulated intersessionally to the MPATG. Black neck grebe has been removed from the list of species, whilst the Slavonian grebe was added. Falmouth Bay to St Austell Bay pSPA will go to the Natural England Executive Board in June 2013.



SK stated that there will be more survey work this year for Balearic shearwaters, with NE managing a contract for data collection and JNCC leading on data analysis and boundary delineation. NE are considering collecting further data for shags around the Isles of Scilly SPA, which means that advice on the Isles of Scilly SPA will be submitted in 2016.

The group had a short discussion the some issues arising where SPAs are underpinned by SSSIs in intertidal zones. There is no definite view as to whether the boundary should be set at MHWS or MLWS. The advantage of choosing a MLWS boundary is that it will not include intertidal land, therefore reducing the number of landowners involved, especially because the important estuarine areas are already classified under the estuarine SPAs.

There was also a discussion on the multi-species approach and the need to include species on a range basis (guideline 1.4, using stage 2 judgements), or consider priority species singularly (guidelines 1.1-1.3). The multi-species approach has been endorsed by the Scottish Government and adopted by SNH, but NE do not follow this multispecies approach.

MR asked whether the issue of choosing between the multi-species and single priority species approach was due to be discussed at the next Chief Scientist Group meeting. JNCC will update the group on any CSG discussion.

JB updated on the recent progress on work for SPAs at JNCC. In the last months the work focussed on preparing an indicative suite of SPAs for Scottish waters. Work continues to finalise boundaries for inshore tern sites throughout the UK, as well as estimating little gull populations within Liverpool Bay and Outer Thames SPAs to consider whether that species should be added to the existing SPA as an additional feature.

NB explained that SPA work in Scotland has been timescale-driven by the Scottish Government and their MPA consultation, as the Ministers recognise that MPA stakeholders would like to know what other designations might be coming in the near future. Considerable progress has been made since the last MPATG meeting on the indicative suite of SPAs. This list is precautionary; it is not expected that further SPAs will be progressed by 2015, but it is possible that some of the SPAs in the indicative suite may not be progressed unless a strong enough scientific case is provided. It is likely that the decision on indicative SPA sites will go to public consultation will be taken in 2014.

The group had a short discussion on some of the issues that arise where SPA proposals overlap other MPA proposals or existing MPAs. The group noted the need for wider discussion when developing conservation objectives and conservation advice for SPA features where there are overlaps with other habitat or species features that may require similar management approaches.

MR reported on the progress on SPAs in Wales. The plan is to extend three SPAs to include areas at sea used for maintenance behaviours. Due to stakeholder confusion about Welsh MCZs the SPA work has been put on hold. NRW expect the work will be progressed later in 2013and proposals will be prepared for public consultation.

LP had no update on SPAs in Northern Ireland.

FG explained that there are no SPA sites within the Isle of Man, but there are some SPA species protected within coastal SSSIs.

Action 12.7 - JD to find out whether the Chief Scientists Group members are going to discuss the multi-species approach at their next meeting.

4. Update on the paper on the completion of the UK SAC network for marine Annex I habitats in UK waters (Dan Bayley)

DB informed the group that the SAC network paper was reviewed by the Joint Committee who requested some amendments. These changes are complete and the paper will be signed and then published on the JNCC website in summer 2013.



5. Paper on defining UK SAC boundaries (MPATG12_3_DefiningSACBoundariesFromPatchesOfAnnexIReef) (Dan Bayley)

DB explained that the current SAC boundary guidance has some parts which are not clear enough. In particular there is an issue regarding where to draw the boundary for those areas with a large core Annex I habitat and small patches of the same feature at its edges. It is not easy to assess whether these patches might be integral for the functionality of the habitat and often (especially for offshore areas) there is limited knowledge on the true extension of the feature.

Generally for rocky reefs, for example, it is not popular with fisherman to include small but rich patches of reefs, which are accessible to fishing gear, and often heavily fished. Ideally what is required is a mathematical or statistical formulation that would allow boundary definition, for each habitat, by considering data uncertainty, some measure of the viable habitat size and adequacy targets. This generic rule needs to be different for each habitat sub-type, and it will avoid subjective interpretation of a habitat boundary.

The group discussed the paper concluded that setting guidelines for these situations could be useful, but that a hard and fast rule can be risky and cause application issues. They noted the importance of linking the guidelines to the criteria already used to define boundaries elsewhere.

In addition DB explained that JNCC is trying to organise a workshop on Annex 1 mussel reefs (Mytilus and Modilus) to obtain expert advice enabling the definition of the habitat. The idea is to produce a paper for recommendation on these habitats.

Action 12.8 - SC to circulate the work carried out for the SMPA Project selection guidelines on the integrity of features.

Action 12.9 - SK to circulate the contact details for fisheries experts who have worked on buffers in Article 6.3 work.

Action 12.10 - DB to report back at the next MPATG meeting on the feedback received from the paper on UK SAC boundaries and to circulate ideas in the mean time.

Action 12.11 DB to keep the group updated on the progress of the Annex 1 mussel reefs (Mytilus and Modilus) workshop organisation.

6. DOE Northern Ireland ‘A draft Strategy for Marine Protected Areas in Northern Ireland Inshore Region’ (paper circulated intersessionally) (Liz Pothanikat)

LP updated the group on the development of the document on draft strategy for MPAs in Northern Ireland, which was released for consultation in May 2013. The document contains an overview of the drivers, generic strategy and OSPAR principles, without including a high level of detail on features or reference areas. She asked for feedback from the group. The consultation will close on 30th September and will be finalised in autumn 2013.

LP noted that the Northern Ireland Marine bill includes a clause to consider the displacement of activities when designating MCZs. For this reason DOENI is asking industries, and any other relevant stakeholders, to provide information and evidence to be analysed and incorporated in the guidance document.

LP asked for advice on fisheries data collection methodology used in the past.

JD stated that ScotMap was used to collect fisheries data in Scottish territorial waters.

MHE mentioned that a smaller scale project was run in Anglesey called FishMap for the collection of both fishing and angling data.



SK explained that Natural England has worked on this in the Seamap project for which CEFAS is still collecting data. They have also carried out fisheries data standardisation, based on FisherMap data collected through the MCZ Project

SC noted that fisheries displacement had been considered in the SMPA project impact assessment. JD further noted that fisheries displacement was considered on a regional basis during the MCZ impact assessment.

Action 12.12 - JNCC to send LP details on ScotMap.

7. MCZ Project protocol revisions (Jon Davies) JD explained that, following the closure of the MCZ consultation, JNCC and Natural England are currently reviewing all relevant new data and re-assessing those sites proposed by Defra for designation in 2013 (feature presence, extent and condition etc). A new protocol (protocol I) was recently circulated to the MPATG for independent review, the comments received were incorporated and it has since been published on the JNCC website.

In addition, guidance on the application of protocol E is being developed to explain how SNCB staff interpreted the protocol, and offer help to others should they wish to apply the principles to other sites. The guidance also recognises that the protocol was specifically written to review the recommendations made by the regional MCZ projects, and future applications would have a different context.

Action 12.13 - JNCC to circulate the guidance on the application of protocol E when finalised.

8. Development of conservation objectives and advice for MPAs

SK provided an update on Natural England’s work on taking forward the recommendations of the Habitats Directive Implementation Review, particularly on MPA conservation objectives, NE have drafted strategic and operational standards to guide the development of objectives and conservation advice for both terrestrial and marine operations. The first draft of this pilot approach has been produced but it has not yet been formally signed off. JNCC have been involved in the development work and will endorse the outputs to support its work in UK offshore waters around England.

Following workshops with stakeholders, NE was asked to produce a more user friendly document and has engaged for feedback with some of the country agencies.

SK further added that Natural England is aiming to standardise the list of Annex 1 sub-features used in marine SACs, and this list may need to be considered in any network assessment.

Action 12.14 - SK to ask Chris Davies to call SC regarding the new advice on operational standards.

9. UK MPA network and database (MPATG12_4_UKMPA_Analysis and MPATG12_5_UKMPADatabase_Specification) (Hannah Carr)

HC presented the paper on the UK MPA database. This work has been discussed at previous meetings and this paper provides an update on the work. The work has reached a stage at which it will soon be in a state where it can be populated with information on UK MPAs.

JD emphasised the need for a centralised database of all MPAs in the UK to facilitate the MPA network assessment. This metadata database is intended to be a correlated list of all UK MPAs with basic information on each designation. In the longer term it could be



developed to contain the management information, but it is not a priority at the moment. JNCC propose to manage the database in the long term.

Database development is progressing after some initial IT problems; the core structure will be ready in summer 2013. Initially the database will not include SSSI data due to problems with the definition of marine SSSI features. When such problems are resolved, SSSI information would be uploaded.

Members were invited to contact Alice Ramsey for further information.

MHE suggested that they could start by comparing the different lists maintained by each of the country agencies. She also pointed out that the agencies have already submitted most of this information for the MAIA database.

UK MPA stocktake HC also presented the paper setting out plans for an analysis of existing UK MPAs (a stocktake) and explained that JNCC are seeking active collaboration with the country agencies to carry out this work. The paper proposes that a sub-group of the MPATG is established with a representative from each agency.

The group agreed with the proposal for a sub-group and members will nominate representatives. Any comments on the paper can be sent to Alice Ramsay or Amy Ridgeway.

The group had a short discussion on some key issues including the definition of MPAs and the problems created by having different approaches used by the different country agencies when including species on the marine components of MPAs. The proposed sub-group would need to consider these matters in more detail. The MPATG noted that some of the key questions may need to be considered by the Chief Scientists Group to gain a UK view.

Action 12.15 - All to decide/agree which country agency staff on the MPATG to nominate for the UK MPA network analysis sub-group.

Action 12.16 - JNCC to contact each of the agencies to start organise the MPA network analysis subgroup.

8. Update on OSPAR MPA work (MPATG12_6_OSPAR_EcologicalCoherence) (Hannah Carr)

HC provided an update on the progress with the OSPAR MPA work. For JNCC, Pete Chaniotis has taken over responsibility for OSPAR MPA work from Jenny Oates.

HC explained that earlier in the year, the OSPAR Secretariat Commissioned SeaScape Consultants Ltd. to undertake an assessment of the OSPAR Network of MPAs in 2012. The specification for this piece of work has been circulated to the group. In particular, the contractors were asked in the tender specification to:

1. Assess the coherence of the OSPAR Network of MPAs in terms of its adequacy, representativity, replication and connectivity (as at the end of 2012), identifying where the network may be coherent and making note of where the network is not yet coherent. This was to be done at a range of geographical scales including the entire OSPAR Maritime Area, the OSPAR Region, and the Dinter Biogeographic Provinces and included reviewing available assessment methods for the core OSPAR network principles;

2. Set out the limitations of the methodology applied; and,



3. Propose, if appropriate, recommendations as to how the ecological coherence of the OSPAR MPA network could be improved and how future assessments could be improved.

As part of the contract, the OSPAR Secretariat set up an ecological coherence task group, comprising members of Nature Conservation Bodies from the UK (represented by JNCC), France, Germany, Norway and a representative from the European Union. The job of the task group was to steer the contractors from a technical perspective. The final report has recently been released and is due to be published by OSPAR in summer 2013. The final job of the task group will be to provide a cover note to the OSPAR Commission on key messages and steps moving forward, based on the outputs of the report.

Action 12.17 - JNCC to circulate the OSPAR commissioned work by Seascape Ltd on ecological coherence of the OPSAR MPA network as soon as it is published.

Following AP 11.12 from the 11th MPATG meeting HC provided an update from the OSPAR BDC meeting – a note is attached as Annex B.

10. Updates to the MPA Technical Group Terms of Reference and attendees (MPATG12_7_TOR_2013 and MPATG12_8_GroupDistributionList_review) (Jon Davies/Hannah Carr)

10.1 Updated MPA Technical Group Terms of Reference (Jon Davies) The Terms of Reference (TOR) were discussed, updated and approved 18 months ago (7th MPATG meeting, September 2011). The updated version of the TOR was never published. It has now been reviewed and a few minor amendments have been made. The revised TOR were agreed with the following minor correction: NB suggested to add a statement to specify that the review of the TOR will occur every 2-3 years.

Action 12.19 - HC to make suggested changes to the Terms of Reference and publish.

10.2 Review of MPA Technical Group attendance and distribution lists (Hannah Carr) HC presented the MPA Technical Group paper and explained the context of the membership and distribution list review that had been undertaken. MHE highlighted that the TOR states that each country agency can decide who represents them on the group and so that there may need to be more than just two representatives.

The review was generally agreed. In particular it was decided that the membership is going to be restricted to a smaller core of people that will need to participate to the meetings (ideally 2 members from each agency but this is up to each agency to decide who needs to attend). Other members of staff from country agencies can then take part to specific meetings, for certain pieces of work, if they so wish.

HC explained that the purpose of having two separate carbon copy distribution lists for the group (one for technical specialists and one for programme and policy leads) means that it would allow the circulation of technical papers (that do not need the involvement of programme and policy lead) to just technical specialists for review and feedback.

Action - 12.20 - All country agencies staff to discuss who will be representatives on the MPATG and inform HC.

Action 12.21 - SC to speak to Marine Scotland to find out who will be their representative(s) for the programme and policy leads carbon copy distribution list and inform HC.



11. Any other business

SK had a query from Chris Davis regarding whether other country agencies have been undertaking any work on defining favourable condition for conservation status for Natura 2000 marine features. Chris Davis pointed out that so far most work has been done on a terrestrial basis only. SK asks whether it is worth discussing this issue at the next MPATG meeting.

JD highlighted work being carried out at JNCC and suggested Chris to liaise with Beth Stoker. He added that the issue of defining favourable conservation status for marine feature at a site level is very complicated and more work is needed, as it has wide consequences.

NB added that in Scotland most of this work has been done on a terrestrial basis only.

HC asked the group about the frequency/dates for future MPATG meetings. It was proposed to move the February meeting to the end of January instead, to have more equally spaced meetings throughout the year. All agreed to moving the February meeting to late January, however NB requested JNCC to try to make sure that these meetings coincide roughly at the same time as SPA Scientific Working Group meetings, which also take place in Peterborough, to avoid spending more money and time travelling from Scotland.

Action 12.22 - NB to get back to SK regarding work done by SNH on favourable condition status.

Action 12.23 - MHE to contact Chris Davis regarding work done by NE on favourable condition status.

End



Action Points Action Point number

Action Action by Action on

12.1 To circulate conservation objectives standards document to the group once signed off.

11/09/13 SK

11.8 To send Karen Webb (JNCC) any information on sensitivity work being carried out within the country agencies.

11/09/13 All

12.2 To circulate some examples of offshore site management options papers. 11/09/13 HC 12.3 To circulate to the group the feature list that LP provided after the 11th MPATG

meeting. 11/09/13 HC

12.4 To contact FG to get information about the candidate MPA adjacent to rMCZ 6. 11/09/13 HC 12.5 To circulate figure of total area of Manx waters closed to mobile fishing gear. 11/09/13 FG 12.6 To liaise with LP regarding management schemes. 11/09/13 HC, LP 12.7 To find out whether the Chief Scientists Group members are going to discuss the

multi-species approach at their next meeting. 11/09/13 JD

12.8 To circulate the work carried out for the SMPA Project selection guidelines on the integrity of features.

11/09/13 SC

12.9 To circulate the contact details for fisheries experts who have worked on buffers in Article 6.3 work.

11/09/13 SK

12.10 To report back at the next MPATG meeting on the feedback received from the paper on UK SAC boundaries and to circulate ideas in the mean time.

11/09/13 DB

12.11 To keep the group updated on the progress of the Annex 1 mussel reefs (Mytilus and Modilus) workshop organisation.

11/09/13 DB

12.12 To send LP details on ScotMap. 11/09/13 HC 12.13 To circulate the guidance on the application of protocol E when finalised. 11/09/13 HC 12.14 To ask Chris Davies to call SC regarding the new advice on operational standards. 11/09/13 SK 12.15 To decide/agree which country agency staff on the MPATG to nominate for the UK

MPA network analysis sub-group. As soon as possible.

ALL

12.16 To contact each of the agencies to start organise the MPA network analysis subgroup.

As soon as possible.

Alice Ramsay

12.17 To circulate the OSPAR commissioned work by Seascape Ltd on ecological coherence of the OPSAR MPA network as soon as it is published.

11/09/13 HC

12.18 To find out the outcome of the discussions on the OSPAR database. 11/09/13 JD



12.19 To make suggested changes to the Terms of Reference for the MPATG and publish. 11/09/13 HC 12.20 All country agencies staff to discuss who will be representatives on the MPATG and

inform HC. 11/09/13 ALL

12.21 To speak to Marine Scotland to find out who will be their representative(s) for the programme and inform HC so she can add them to the distribution list.

11/09/13 SC

12.22 To get back to SK regarding work done by SNH on favourable condition status. 11/09/13 NB 12.23 To contact Chris Davis regarding work done by NE on favourable condition status. 11/09/13 MHE



Annex A: Map showing Isle of Man fisheries closures



Annex B: Update from the OSPAR BDC meeting Ecological coherence

• Some changes to the OSPAR MPA reporting and assessment process were agreed: the annual deadline for reporting has moved to 1st October, a full assessment and status report of the OSPAR MPA network will be produced every two years and a light touch assessment report will be produced annually

• The paper on the results of the matrix trial in the Channel which was presented by UK and France was endorsed by BDC as an appropriate method for assessing ecological coherence and the approach was considered suitable for scaling up for wider application at the OSPAR level

• The successful consultant for the contract on the assessment of ecological coherence for 2013 was announced as SeaScape Ltd (contract spec circulated for information – see agenda item 10).

OSPAR MPA database

• There was a discussion about the future of the OSPAR MPA database (whether France or Germany would take it on); in the end the majority view was that the French option was preferred (integrate the OSPAR MPA database with the MAIA database); a final decision on this will be taken at the OSPAR HODs meeting. Whatever the final outcome, it was agreed that a steering group will be needed at a technical level to guide this work.

Management

• The terms of reference for a workshop on management effectiveness for MPAs were discussed. France are seeking funding in order to be able to host the meeting but a back-up host may be required.

EBSAs

• Contracting Parties were requested to nominate relevant experts to the OSPAR panel reviewing the ICES Advice on EBSAs (24-26th June)

12th marine protected areas technical group meeting...

Documents