Contact: Alan Inder, ext 6759 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The following decisions are sought:

(i) That the draft Management Scheme for the Solent European Marine Sites for submission to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs be approved.

(ii) That in the exercise of its functions the County Council ensures continued compliance with the Habitats Regulations.

2. Reason

2.1 This decision supports Aim 2 of the Corporate Strategy (Stewardship of the environment) by seeking approval of a Management Scheme which helps to ensure that the County Council complies with the Habitats Regulations 1995 in the operation of its functions within or close to the Solent European Marine Sites.

2.2 The Executive Member for Recreation and Heritage considered the report on 13 May 2004 and supported the recommendations.

3. Other Options Considered and Rejected

3.1 (i) taking no action (rejected, because it would represent a failure to discharge the responsibilities of the County Council); or

(ii) not approving the draft Management Scheme (rejected, as there are no reasons to justify it).

4. Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Decision Maker or Other Executive Member Consulted - None.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - Not applicable.

6. Reason(s) for the Matter being dealt with if Urgent - Not applicable.

Approved by: .................................... Date: ...............................

Councillor T K Thornber

Contact: Alan Inder, ext 6759 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The coastlines of the Solent are extensively covered with nature conservation designations of European importance; collectively these designated sites are known as the Solent European Marine Sites (SEMS). The County Council is one of more than 30 `relevant authorities' that are required by the Habitats Regulations 1994 to exercise their functions so as not to cause any damage or deterioration to SEMS features of interest. In 2000 the relevant authorities combined to form a Management Group and agreed to produce a Management Scheme to ensure that they complied with the requirements of the Habitats Regulations. The draft Management Scheme has been circulated to the individual authorities for their formal comments, prior to submission to the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). This report summarises the Management Scheme and the process followed in preparing it, outlines the involvement of the County Council, and recommends that current management practices be maintained to ensure continued compliance with the Habitats Regulations. It should be noted that further work may be required, jointly with other authorities, to investigate the effects on the Solent European Marine Sites of access to the coast.

2. Corporate Strategy

2.1 This report supports Aim 2 of the Corporate Strategy (Stewardship of the environment) by seeking approval of a Management Scheme which helps to ensure that the County Council complies with the Habitats Regulations 1995 in the operation of its functions within or close to the Solent European Marine Sites.

3. The Solent European Marine Sites

3.1 The Solent contains the following internationally important nature conservation sites:

(i) Solent candidate Maritime Special Area of Conservation;

(ii) Portsmouth Harbour Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ramsar Site;

(iii) Chichester and Langstone Harbours SPA and Ramsar Site; and

(iv) Solent and Southampton Water SPA and Ramsar Site.

3.2 These sites have been designated because of their important habitats and features, including estuaries, saltmarsh, mudflats, shingle and lagoons, and for the flora and fauna they support, including internationally important populations of wintering birds. The County Council's extensive portfolio of coastal landholdings includes many areas that are within or adjacent to these designated sites.

3.3 These sites are protected under European law through the Birds and Habitats Directives, which are transposed into UK law through the Habitats Regulations 1994. The main aim of the legislation is to promote the maintenance of biodiversity, whilst taking into account economic, social and cultural requirements, and regional and local characteristics. The Habitats Regulations place special responsibilities on `relevant authorities' which in the Solent include all the local and harbour authorities, and the Environment Agency, English Nature, Southern Water, Trinity House and the Sea Fisheries Committees, totalling more than 30 authorities. The Regulations require relevant authorities to exercise their functions in ways that ensure that no damage or deterioration is caused to the SEMS habitats and species.

4. The Management Scheme Process

4.1 Government advice recommends, especially in a complex and busy area like the Solent, that the relevant authorities produce a management scheme to ensure their functions are exercised to ensure compliance with the Habitats Directive. In 2000, the relevant authorities in the Solent area agreed to prepare a Management Scheme and to form a Management Group to guide the process. They also agreed to fund a Project Officer to coordinate the various meetings and inputs, and to draft the Management Scheme documents. The Project Officer, appointed in November 2000, has been based in the County Council's Environment Department.

4.2 The Management Scheme has been drafted and sent to all the relevant authorities for approval, with the aim of sending it to DEFRA at the end of June 2004 for signing off. The Management Scheme summary is attached to this report, and is also available to download from the Solent Forum website - http://www.solentforum.hants.org.uk/. The full Management Scheme was available for download from 30 April 2004.

4.3 Compared to other European Marine Sites, the management structure set up in the Solent to prepare the Management Scheme has been relatively complex, reflecting the local circumstances. The Management Group has been advised by a Strategic Advisory Group of stakeholders. In addition, due to the diverse nature and geographical spread of the SEMS, five cluster groups were set up to drive and steer the work. The County Council has

been represented on the Management Group and on four of the cluster groups: North West Solent; Southampton Water; Portsmouth Harbour; and Chichester and Langstone Harbours.

Process

4.4 The process has followed five main stages:

Stage 1 - Foundation Document

4.5 The Foundation Document, which was published in February 2002, described the basic information and principles on which the Management Scheme was founded, including the legislative background, reasons for designation, responsibilities of the relevant authorities, and the agreed process for producing the Scheme.

Stage 2 - Analysis of Regulation 33 Advice

4.6 As the statutory nature conservation agency, English Nature produced advice under Regulation 33 of the Habitats Regulations which set out the conservation objectives for the SEMS and the operations which may cause deterioration of habitats or disturbance to species. This was then analysed by the relevant authorities in order to identify: key operations (to which SEMS features are highly vulnerable); key activities that caused key operations; and responsibilities for managing activities.

Stage 3 - Activity Proformas

4.7 Each relevant authority completed a proforma for each of the activities for which they are responsible in their cluster that provided information on: the location, frequency and intensity of the activity; how the activity is managed; and what monitoring is carried out on the activity and its impacts.

Stage 4 - Activity Inventory

4.8 For each cluster activity inventories were produced that summarised the location, extent, management, impacts and monitoring. A summary of all inventories was then produced that includes information on each activity under the following headings: introduction; management; impacts and issues; conclusions including management considerations. Nearly 50 activities are covered, including access, aggregates dredging, coast protection, dredging, flood defence, land reclamation, moorings, oil spill clean up, recreation (land- and water-based) and wildfowling.

Stage 5 - Management Scheme

4.9 The information from all the stages was brought together to produce the Management Scheme.

Outcomes

4.10 The assessment of the effectiveness of current management measures has been an important part of the Management Scheme process. This assessment concluded by assigning activities to one of the three categories:

Plans and Projects

4.11 During Stage 2 several types of `activity' were classified as `plans or projects', ie development, uses or activities that require permission, consent, licence or some other form of authorisation. This category included aggregates dredging, coast protection and flood defence, coastal development, land reclamation, and oil and gas exploration. As plans and projects are covered by other parts of the Habitats Regulations they required no further consideration within the Management Scheme although, for completeness, information on them is included in the activity inventories.

Management Systems in Place

4.12 With regard to many uses or activities, it was concluded that there were systems in place to manage them effectively to ensure compliance with the Habitats Regulations. In this category are agricultural runoff, barrage/sluice operation, beach cleaning, grazing, and outfall maintenance.

Key Risk Area Activities

4.13 Although at present there is no evidence to suggest that any activities are causing damage or deterioration to SEMS, certain types of activity have been identified as having the potential to pose the greatest risk to SEMS habitats or species. These are: access (including access, airborne sports, angling, educational field trips, land based recreation); bait digging; commercial shipping; dredging (including beneficial disposal of dredging, capital and maintenance dredging, foreshore recharges and other disposal of dredged spoil); fishing (including shellfish collection, dredging and laying and other forms of fishing); and water sports (including anchoring, boat repair and maintenance, moorings, navigation, other water sports, recreational power boating and sailing, slipway cleaning and maintenance). With regard to bait digging, a Topic Group was formed and a code of practice produced and circulated as a leaflet to angling clubs and tackle shops around the Solent. For the other `key risk area' activities, management considerations are given but no further action is proposed at present

Implementation

4.14 Unlike management schemes for other European Marine Sites, the SEMS Management Scheme does not propose any new management actions. One consequence of this outcome is that implementation will be relatively low key, and will not require significant resources. The Project Officer's contract expires at the end of June and will not be renewed. The Management Group and a re-formed Strategic Advisory Group will probably meet once a year to monitor changes and consider the need for further work. The Solent Forum has been asked to undertake the secretarial role associated with this.

5. The Roles of the County Council

5.1 The County Council has been involved at two levels: as a relevant authority, and as a large organisation with the corporate remit to take a broad perspective.

5.2 Like all relevant authorities, the County Council has a part to play concerning the responsible exercise of its statutory powers and functions in the regulation and control of activities. For the County Council this derives from its role both as a local authority and as a major coastal landowner. Some activities such as coastal development and oil and gas exploration were categorised as `plans or projects'. For other activities - such as access, land-based recreation, oil spills clean-up, and outfall maintenance - it was recognised that the County Council exercises a regulatory role as part of its statutory duties. Others including airborne sports, angling and bait digging were considered to be activities over which the County Council had some form of control, including byelaws.

5.3 For those activities that required further consideration in the Management Scheme (ie those listed above, except ones categorised as `plans or projects'), all except access were assigned to the category of `adequate management systems in place'. Of all the activities over which the County Council exercises some form of regulation or control, only activities within the access Topic were assigned to the `key risk area' category. This means that where reasonable evidence comes to light to suggest that there is damage or deterioration to SEMS habitats or species, and that these activities are a possible cause, the County Council must work with English Nature and other relevant authorities to investigate the cause and effect relationship. As a result it may be necessary to alter existing management measures or introduce new ones.

5.4 As a big authority covering a large geographical area, the County Council has also played a significant broader role in the preparation of the Management Scheme, particularly through providing funding, hosting the Project Officer and chairing the Management Group. Because of its wide ranging corporate role, which aims to balance stewardship of the environment with achieving economic prosperity, it has been essential for the County Council to help the Management Group achieve the difficult balance between effective conservation of the SEMS and maintenance of commercial activity such as ports and shipping, and important social activity such as recreation. In this regard the County Council has tried to be an `honest broker' particularly when tensions built up between the ports/harbours and English Nature in the later stages.

6. Conclusions

6.1 It has taken nearly four years for the Management Scheme to be produced, and at times progress has been difficult. This is to be expected in the Solent, where one of the most intensively developed and used coastal zones in the UK also has extensive nature conservation designations of European importance. The Project Officer, English Nature and the other relevant authorities deserve great credit for the efforts made to produce a draft Management Scheme that appears to be generally acceptable to all parties. It is hoped that no significant obstacles will emerge during the current consultation process that would prevent or delay submission of the Management Scheme to DEFRA for approval.

6.2 The assessment of those activities for which the County Council exercises some form of regulation or control has generally shown that adequate management systems are in place to ensure that no damage or deterioration is occurring to SEMS features. The one slight area of doubt concerns access, but only because this is an activity that poses a greater risk than most others, and not because any evidence exists to indicate that it is currently causing any problems. Together with the many other relevant authorities with some responsibility for managing access, the County Council will need to maintain a watching brief.

Recommendation

That the following course of action be supported:

(i) approving the draft Management Scheme for the Solent European Marine Sites for submission to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs; and

(ii) ensuring continued compliance with the Habitats Regulations in the exercise of the County Council's functions.

8747B/AI