Current and future environmental policy needs for

the North Sea

Richard MoxonMarine Strategy and Evidence team

Defra

Overview of presentationBrief overview of current policy needs and how we address them

Policy needs arising from the Marine Strategy Framework Directive

How might EMECO contribute ?

UK Government’s Shared Vision

Clean, Healthy, Safe, Productive and Biologically Diverse Oceans and Seas.

Key policy goals: How can we achieve this vision for UK Seas , and how can we demonstrate we are achieving it ?

through applying the ecosystem approach !

this is now a key driver for the protection, use and management of the UK marine UK environment . At heart of global and European

marine policy as well.

the comprehensive integrated management of human activities based on the best available scientific knowledge about the ecosystem and its dynamics, in order to identify

and take action on influences which are critical to the health of marine ecosystems, thereby achieving sustainable use of

ecosystem goods and services and maintenance of ecosystem integrity”

Main difficulty we have is to change current management practices from a sectoral, short-term perspective with

humans independent of ecosystems to ecosystem-based, long-term perspectives where humans are integral to

ecosystems.

Key principles that underpin our policy of applying the ecosystem approach to the marine environment are:

• sustainable development – the needs of future generations should not be compromised by the needs of people today;

• integrated management – looking at the wider picture so that all those who manage or influence the marine environment work together at all levels with a common understanding;

• conservation of biological diversity – conserving and enhancing biological diversity within the UK and contributing to the conservation of global biodiversity;

• robust science – understanding the processes and influences that impact on the marine environment and using research to inform policy-making and marine management;

• the precautionary principle – sensibly erring on the side of caution where the scientific evidence is not conclusive; and

• stakeholder involvement – involving all stakeholders so that they are an integral part of the decision-making process.

To demonstrate whether our seas are clean and safe, we need to do monitoring

programmes• Metals and organics : in water, sediment and biota• Biological effects: e.g. EROD, imposex, fish disease• Microbiological contamination : bathing waters and

shellfish growing areas• Eutrophication: nutrients, chlorophyll, oxygen, nuisance

species• Radionuclides• Oil and chemical spills• Litter• NoiseNeed assessment criteria to decide whether status is good and

AQC to show results are reliable.

Monitoring Programmes to understand ocean processes and establish whether the seas are Healthy and Biologically

Diverse

• circulation, pH, temperature and salinity• sedimentary processes, and nature of the seabed• benthic habitats• the state of the pelagic marine food web (microbes,

plankton up to those at the top end such as birds and cetaceans and turtles)

AQC and assessment criteria less developed

Periodic assessments to demonstrate progress towards our vision

I II III IV V

Cli

ma

te

ch

an

ge

Climate change 20 12 7 10 16

Temperature changes (local) 1 1 1 1 0

Salinity changes (local) 1 1 1 1 0

Changes in water flow, wave action & emergence regime (inshore/local)

1 1 1 1 0

Contamination by hazardous substances 8 8 7 8 6

Radionuclide contamination 1 1 1 1 1

De-oxygenation 3 7 4 4 0

Nitrogen & phosphorus enrichment 5 5 4 4 3

Organic enrichment 5 7 4 4 2

Electromagnetic changes 3 3 3 3 2

Litter 5 5 4 5 5Underwater noise 4 4 4 4 3Barrier to species movement 3 3 3 3 1

Death or injury by collision 3 3 3 3 3

Siltation rate changes 3 9 5 5 3

Habitat damage 12 20 11 11 9Habitat loss 15 8 7 10 7Visual disturbance 0 0 0 0 0

Genetic modification 1 1 1 0 0

Introduction of microbial pathogens 3 3 3 2 2

Introduction of non-indigenous species & translocations

8 8 7 6 6

Removal of species (target & non-target) 16 24 13 13 11

Hy

dro

log

ica

l

pre

ss

ure

s (

loc

al)

Po

llu

tio

n &

oth

er

ch

em

ica

l

pre

ss

ure

s

Oth

er

ph

ys

ica

l

pre

ss

ure

s

Ha

bit

at

ch

an

ge

sB

iolo

gic

al

pre

ss

ure

s

To achieve the vision, need to know what the main pressures are and how to reduce them.

Recent OSPAR assessment of pressures on the 5 OSPAR regions points to climate change, fishing and habitat damage and loss

Actions to control the activities likely to cause harm

• impact assessments before a marine industry can operate, and licenses to minimise impact• national regulations and spatial planning• A whole range of EC legislation requires monitoring programmes and measures Water Framework Directive Birds and Habitats Directive PPC Directive Common fisheries policy

Marine Strategy Framework DirectiveConsolidated into a Marine Bill

The UK Marine Bill

• UK’s first comprehensive marine planning system• Efficient licensing of activities• A Marine Management Organisation

• Network of marine protected areas

• Better local fisheries and environmental management• Better protection for migratory and freshwater fish• EEZ

To put in place measures to achieve Good Environmental Status in Europe’s seas by 2020

‘Good Environmental Status means the environmental status of marine waters where these provide ecologically diverse and dynamic oceans and

seas which are clean, healthy and productive within their intrinsic conditions, and the use of the marine environment is at a level that is sustainable, thus safeguarding the potential for uses and activities by

current and future generations...’

What does the Directive commit us to?

The structure, functions and processes of the constituent marine ecosystems, together with the associated physiographic, geographic, geological and climatic factors, allow those ecosystems to function fully and to maintain their resilience to human-induced environmental change.

Marine species and habitats are protected, human-induced decline of biodiversity is prevented and diverse biological components function in balance;

hydro-morphological, physical and chemical properties of the ecosystems, including those properties which result from human activities in the area concerned, support the ecosystems as described above.

Anthropogenic inputs of substances and energy, including noise, into the marine environment do not cause pollution effects

2008 20202010 2012 2014 2015 2016

Directive transposed

Initial assessment of UK seas

GES defined, including targets

and indicators

Monitoring programme established

Programme of measures

implemented

GES achieved for UK seas

Summary: Directive’s requirements

What are the regional requirements?

OSPAR currently reviewing its priorities to ensure it supports the delivery of the Directive

“Member States sharing a marine region...shall cooperate to ensure that... the measures required to achieve...this Directive...are coherent and coordinated across the marine region...”

UK keen to use the Oslo and Paris Convention (OSPAR) as the forum to deliver all key regional elements of the Directive

Monitoring Programme – 2014

Monitoring programme to measure progress toward achieving GES to be set up by 2014

focus for 2014 will be on filling any gaps rather than creating a whole new monitoring programme

Standardised methods for monitoring and assessment to be developed across the EUChallenge for EMECO

Determination of Good Environmental Status – 2012

•11 high level descriptors of GES set out in the Directive

• Member States to set out how GES will be defined for their marine waters by 2012

• Common criteria and standards to underpin GES across the EU to be agreed with Commission and other Member States by 2010. ICES/JRC looking at each descriptor of GES

“Concentrations of contaminants are at levels not giving rise to pollution

effects”

“Populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish are within safe

biological limits”

“Biological diversity is maintained”

Regional Coordination aspectsMember States need to make every effort to ensure that:(a) assessment methodologies are consistent across the Marine Region or Sub Region; ‑ (e.g. OSPAR CEMP)

(a)transboundary impacts and transboundary features are taken into account. (e.g. Modelling )

In OSPAR, considerable experience available (e.g. On the eutrophication modelling work - ICG EMO)Opportunities for EMECO ??

Descriptors New monitoring: can EMECO help ?

(1) Biological diversity is maintained. The quality and occurrence of habitats and the distribution and abundance of species are in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions

Biodiversity-related monitoring at an early stage. More will be needed.

(2) Non-indigenous species introduced by human activities are at levels that do not adversely alter the ecosystems

More monitoring and research needed.

(3) Populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish are within safe biological limits, exhibiting a population age and size distribution that is indicative of a healthy stock

CFP monitoring need enhancement ?

(4) All elements of the marine food webs, to the extent that they are known, occur at normal abundance and diversity and levels capable of ensuring the long-term abundance of the species and the retention of their full reproductive capacity

Research needed, and associated criteria and methodological standards required

Descriptors New monitoring: can EMECO help ?

(5) Human-induced eutrophication is minimised, especially adverse effects thereof, such as losses in biodiversity, ecosystem degradation, harmful algal blooms and oxygen deficiency in bottom waters

Established monitoring programmes and assessment criteria, but temporal and spatial coverage weak

(6) Sea floor integrity is at a level that ensures that the structure and functions of the ecosystems are safeguarded and benthic ecosystems, in particular, are not adversely affected

Research and good assessment criteria needed.

(7) Permanent alteration of hydrographical conditions does not adversely affect marine ecosystems

What does this mean ?

(8) Concentrations of contaminants are at levels not giving rise to pollution effects

Some established monitoring programmes and some assessment criteria, but temporal and spatial coverage weak

Descriptors New monitoring: can EMECO help ?

(9) Contaminants in fish and other seafood for human consumption do not exceed levels established by Community legislation or other relevant standards

Levels established under relevant directives

(10) Properties and quantities of marine litter do not cause harm to the coastal and marine environment

Knowledge of litter in sea and on seabed is poor. Understanding of harm to biota also poor. Research needed ?

(11) Introduction of energy, including underwater noise, is at levels that do not adversely affect the marine environment

Understanding of impacts of noise poorly understood. Assessment criteria lacking. Research needed

Integrated Assessment of the marine environment

Until recently, the focus was on the impacts of individual activities.What policy-makers want to know now, and what the MSFD also requires, is an assessment of how all the various natural and anthropogenic pressures act together to get a better appreciation of the overall status of the marine environment.Charting Progress, the first integrated assessment of UK Seas done in 2005, showed how difficult this is !!

Difficulties with making Integrated Assessments:Can EMECO help ??

• Lack of monitoring data (plus poor spatial and temporal coverage) e.g. sampling done at hotspots during infrequent cruises

• Lack of information on pressures and impacts e.g. How much litter is on the sea floor and is it causing harm

• Difficulty in combining different types of information to estimate overall status (one out all out principle a fallback ??)

• Lack of scientific knowledge on how ecosystems function and inter-relate

New Monitoring Tools to enhance assessments of status

Still a heavy reliance on discrete measurements which involve people going out in boats to take samples. These techniques and associated methods frequently built into EC Directives.

However, new monitoring tools that can provide continuous information are now becoming better established.e.g. Smart buoys, side-scan radar, satellites, continuous plankton recorder.Models: getting better, particularly when ground-truthed regularly with real data.

These new tools can help address the temporal and spatial limitations of traditional monitoring programmes

OSPAR Eutrophication assessment of the North East Atlantic.

Mainly using traditional monitoring of nutrients, chlorophyll, nuisance species and oxygen concentrations

Chlorophyll a, April 2005 (Merged SeaWifs-Modis-Meris image).

Chlorophyll a concentration estimated from the MERIS satellite sensor presented as monthly means for (top-right) for March 2008 (centre) right June 2008 and (top-right) October 2008 and (bottom) as 90 percentile for the growing season March-October 2008. Data from European Space Agency and ACRI-

ST processed by MUMM for MARCOAST project.