SEPA update for SFCC annual meeting. Alistair Duguid
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•400 views
Talk provided for the annual Scottish Fisheries Co-ordination Centre Meeting. Held at the Scottish Centre for Ecology and the Natural Environment, Loch Lomond. 4th-5th Feb 2015
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Similar to SEPA update for SFCC annual meeting. Alistair Duguid
Similar to SEPA update for SFCC annual meeting. Alistair Duguid (20)
More from Scottish Fisheries Co Ordination Centre
More from Scottish Fisheries Co Ordination Centre (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
SEPA update for SFCC annual meeting. Alistair Duguid
- 1. SEPA update, February 2015 Alistair Duguid
- 2. Outline • Fish team update • Classification • Rivers • Barriers • Lochs • River Basin planning update • 2nd RBMP consultation
- 3. River Fish Classification • FCS2 Scotland • Now fully integrated into annual classification • Method statement available on UKTAG website • Issues identified with wide rivers • Results available through Scotland’s Environment website http://www.environment.scotland.gov.uk/
- 4. Fish barrier classification update • Change from catchment area blocked, to river length • Issues identified with overestimating potential habitat available in headwaters • GIS comparison of stream width, slope and salmon distribution being carried out • to assess whether we can improve prioritisation • Smartphone app in development to improve information
- 6. Loch classification • Major progress underway • Data set collated- SEPA, MSS, SNH • NORDIC gillnet methodology • 35 lochs, wide range of sites
- 7. Loch classification • Data tested using Irish FIL2 classification tool • Poor results- lower species diversity, and different loch types in Scotland • Funding available to repeat the model building on Scottish data set • Project underway with AFBI (N. Ireland) • Due to deliver by April
- 8. Loch classification- input data set • Fish metrics • Species metrics (CPUE, BPUE, size) • Functional guilds (piscivore, phytophilic etc.) • Abiotic metrics • Landuse • Geographic (depth, area, altitude, distance to sea etc.) • Hydrology & morphology • Water chemistry • Alkalinity • Cholorphyll A • Total phosphorus • pH • Define a pressure gradient • Eutrophication
- 10. Next steps… • Define pristine lochs, • Use these to develop a Scottish typology, based on cluster analysis of fish metrics • Create separate classification for each typology
- 11. Can we use eDNA as a substitute? • Gillnetting is expensive, time consuming, destructive and unpopular • SEPA pilot project with RZSS has shown that shed DNA can be identified in water samples • Other countries developing detailed protocols • Inferring relative abundance of species may be possible • Testing reduced list of fish metrics in classification to assess potential
- 12. Current Condition & Challenges where are we now?
- 13. Principles for developing the second plans • Our aim is to achieve good status by 2027 unless not technically feasible, disproportionately costly or where environmental recovery takes longer • Reviewing and updating the RBMP is an opportunity to: • Learn from the successes and failures from the 1st plan • Apply a better understanding of the benefits and costs of measures (prioritise) • Review the balance of measures between the second and third cycles
- 14. Developing strategic implementation for these measures • Approaches for water pollution from land contamination and toxic pollution • Scenarios for • Rural diffuse pollution • Restoring physical condition of beds, banks and shores • Restoring fish passage at man-made barriers • Consultation now open. Deadline for responses is 9th April for Scotland RBD, 9th June for Solway/Tweed • See online tool at www.sepa.org.uk/about_us/consultations.aspx
- 15. Second river basin plans consultation Waterbodies where improvements are required for barriers to fish movement Proposed barrier measures (number and %) Baseline scenario Step change 1 scenario Step change 2 scenario Consultation tool provides data in various formats – easy to export!
Editor's Notes
- Second Plans must be published by 22nd December 2015. From the end of December this year we need to be consulting formally on the Second plans. This is a component of the engagement which has been ongoing for the last year and will continue into 2015 - with advisory groups, sectors and stakeholders which contributes to plan development and refinement. CCF results have been used to inform the second plan. Response to CCF has been generally positive… responses are being compiled into a digest report
- Done a lot of implementation – some has worked and some hasn’t. Need to learn from the first plans We have more ecological evidence to base the objectives of the second plan on than we did previously. Understanding of what is required has improved a lot for all types of impact from pilot catchment to physical conditions, toxics and all the rest Better evidence to carry out an informed prioritisation of measures- less ad hoc The consultation we are developing is not a draft plan. It is a focused consultation on the significant water management issues that require a step change in approach or effort – have been identified during earlier risk assessment process
- Pressures/ Measures in the second plan have been organised in five main themes Co-ordinating with sectors, eg. Q&S, hydro, forestry
- Looking at how to approach the problems in a strategic way For example for Toxics and Urban pollution, we will focus on: Focus on improving understanding of the extent of the problem, identifying key hotspots through better co-ordination. Strengthening the legislative delivery framework. For DP and physical condition & fish passage we have looked at creating a series of scenarios based on different funding levels/ increasing ambition Based on our understanding of the best way to prioritise action, and the likely costs associated with the required measures.
- Interactive maps set out which measures are set for each period, under different scenarios. This depends on a series of prioritisations for all of the different themes. Tell us if you agree (or where you disagree!)