marine monitoring handbook - jnccdata.jncc.gov.uk/.../marine-monitoring-handbook.pdf · the 1990s...
TRANSCRIPT
-
Marine Monitoring HandbookMarch 2001
-
Marine Monitoring HandbookMarch 2001
Edited by Jon Davies (senior editor), John Baxter, Martin Bradley, David Connor, Janet Khan, Eleanor Murray, William Sanderson,
Caroline Turnbull and Malcolm Vincent
-
Joint copyright(text only):Joint Nature Conservation CommitteeEnglish NatureScottish Natural HeritageEnvironment & Heritage Services (DoE NI)Countryside Council for WalesScottish Association for Marine Science
ISBN 1 86107 5243
-
Preface 7
Acknowledgements 9Contact points for further advice 9
Preamble 11Development of the Marine Monitoring Handbook 11Future progress of the Marine Monitoring Handbook 11
Section 1 Background Malcolm Vincent and Jon Davies 13Introduction 14Legislative background for monitoring on SACs 15The UK approach to SAC monitoring 16The role of monitoring in judging favourable condition 17Context of SAC monitoring within the Scheme of Management 22Using data from existing monitoring programmes 23Bibliography 25
Section 2 Establishing monitoring programmes for marine features Jon Davies 27Introduction 28What do I need to measure? 28What is the most appropriate method? 37How do I ensure my monitoring programme will measure any change accurately? 40Assessing the condition of a feature 51A checklist of basic errors 53Bibliography 54
Section 3 Advice on establishing monitoring programmes for Annex I habitats Jon Davies 57Introduction 60Reefs 61Estuaries 70Sandbanks which are slightly covered by seawater all the time 79Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide 87
5
Contents
-
Large shallow inlets and bays 94Submerged or partly submerged sea caves 101Lagoons 110
Section 4 Guidance for establishing monitoring programmes for some Annex II species Jon Davies 119Introduction 121Grey seal Halichoerus grypus 122Common seal Phoca vitulina 125Bottlenose dolphin Tursiops truncatus 129
Section 5 Advice on selecting appropriate monitoring techniques Jon Davies 133Introduction 135Monitoring spatial patterns 136Monitoring biological composition 148Future developments 161Bibliography 161
Section 6 Procedural guidelines Caroline Turnbull and Jon Davies 163
6
-
7
Preface
The 1990s saw a ‘call to action’ for marine biodiversity conservation. The global Convention onBiological Diversity, the European Union’s Habitats Directive, and recent developments to the Oslo andParis Convention have each provided a significant step forward. In each case marine protected areas areidentified as having a key role in sustaining marine biodiversity.
The Habitats Directive requires the maintenance or restoration of natural habitats and species ofEuropean interest at favourable conservation status, with the management of a network of Special Areasof Conservation (SACs) being one of the main vehicles for achieving this. Among the habitats andspecies specified in the Annexes I and II of the Directive, several are marine features and SACs havealready been selected for many of these in the UK. But to manage specific habitats and species effec-tively there needs to be clear understanding of their distribution, their biology and ecology and theirsensitivity to change. From such a foundation, realistic guidance on management and monitoring canbe derived and applied.
One initiative now underway to help implement the Habitats Directive is the UK Marine SACs LIFEProject, involving a four year partnership (1996–2001) between English Nature, Scottish NaturalHeritage, Countryside Council for Wales, Environment and Heritage Service, Joint Nature ConservationCommittee, and Scottish Association for Marine Science.
The overall goal of the Project is to establish management schemes on 12 of the candidate marine SACsites. A key component of the Project is to assess the interactions that can take place between humanactivities and the Annex I and II interest features on these sites. This understanding will provide for bet-ter management of these features by defining those activities that may have a beneficial, neutral or harm-ful impact and by giving examples of management measures that will prevent or minimise adverseeffects.
Task 3.2 of the UK Marine SACs project set out to ‘identify and develop appropriate methods forrecording, monitoring and reporting natural characteristics and conditions of Annex I/II interests andrelevant environmental factors’. A key output of Task 3.2 is a ‘published book on monitoring methodsand procedures’ to be used as guidance by the UK government’s statutory nature conservation agencystaff and their key partners in drawing up monitoring schemes for European Marine Sites. The MarineMonitoring Handbook fulfils this requirement.
The Marine Monitoring Handbook addresses the principles behind, and the procedures for, monitor-ing Annex I habitats, and selected Annex II species, within marine SACs in British waters to assess theircondition in accordance with the relevant requirements of the Directive and the UK’s common stan-dards for site monitoring.
The Marine Monitoring Handbook provides guidance on the different options and their relative costsand benefits and describes the current best practice for monitoring Annex I habitats and for the bot-tlenose dolphin, grey seal and common seal within marine SACs, to assist in the assessment of theircondition. It draws on the information provided by the field trials undertaken under Task 1.2 of the UKMarine SACs project to ensure all advice has a sound practical basis. The Handbook is intended to pro-vide a toolkit for marine site monitoring, enabling those carrying out monitoring to select and use appro-priate methodologies. It is not prescriptive about the nature of the monitoring required but enables goodmonitoring decisions to be taken in the light of resource availability and other practicalities.
Dr Malcolm VincentProjects DirectorJoint Nature Conservation Committee
-
8
-
Acknowledgements
Many people have assisted in the production of the Handbook. Dr Keith Hiscock (Marine Biological Association) initiated the project and oversaw the production of
the first version in 1997. Eleanor Murray (English Nature) further developed the Handbook during thefirst two years of the UK Marine SACs Project.
The Marine Monitoring Group (Martin Bradley, Environment and Heritage Service Northern Ireland;David Connor, JNCC; Janet Khan, - Scottish Natural Heritage; Eleanor Murray, English Nature; and BillSanderson, Countryside Council for Wales) put considerable time and effort into the whole productionof this Handbook.
John Torlesse, the UK Marine SACs project co-ordinator, and Malcolm Vincent (JNCC) provided com-ments on earlier draft texts, and much-needed encouragement throughout the preparation and produc-tion of this volume.
The following people provided comments on the draft text: Eamonn Kelly and Ian Reach (JNCC), PaulBrazier, Rohan Holt and Mandy McMath (Countryside Council for Wales), Paul Gilliland (EnglishNature), and John Baxter, Ben James and Alexander Downie (Scottish Natural Heritage).
Emily Strong (English Nature) started the revision of the procedural guidelines and did much of theinitial literature research. Kate Bull (JNCC) copy-read the text and provided considerable assistancewith the final production.
Contact points for further advice
The source of advice will depend on the nature of the query. In general:
• For clarification of any points in the text in this Handbook, queries should be addressed to theauthors who are listed under each section, including the Procedural Guidelines;
• General queries, queries of a UK nature, or advice on common standards monitoring for marineSACs should be addressed to Jon Davies (JNCC); or
• Any query specific to one of the countries of UK should be addressed to the relevant person on theMarine Monitoring Group (see Acknowledgements above).
9
-
10
-
11
Preamble
Development of the Marine Monitoring HandbookWhile the monitoring of terrestrial protected areas in the United Kingdom has a long history, the mon-itoring of protected marine areas has been limited to a very few localities. As a result there has, to date,been no single volume available which provides guidance on the monitoring of marine protected areas.The selection and, in due course, designation of marine Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) under theEC Habitats Directive, has highlighted the need for comprehensive guidance on the monitoring of themarine environment.
The Marine Monitoring Handbook is a stage in the development of such comprehensive guidance, andhas been developed by the UK Marine SACs project through a series of literature reviews, workshopsand practical trials. The overall approach to monitoring taken in the Handbook is that adopted by theUK nature conservation agencies in their Common Standards for Monitoring of designated sites. TheHandbook utilises this approach to analyse the possible monitoring requirements of marine protectedareas designated as SACs, summarises the principles of good monitoring practice, and analyses theappropriateness of available monitoring techniques. In addition, Procedural Guidelines have been pre-pared for a wide range of techniques to assist practitioners to carry out monitoring.
The Handbook has been organised in sections at different levels of detail designed to offer assistanceto a range of users, from those who need to be aware of the general approach to be taken in marine mon-itoring, to those who will need to design, commission, or undertake the monitoring. This organisationof the Handbook is summarised in Figure i.
The Handbook is a toolkit for the monitoring of marine SACs. It does not attempt to prescribe moni-toring programmes for particular features listed on Annex I or Annex II of the Habitats Directive. Theoptimum type and level of monitoring on sites across the SAC network has still to be determined, andthis is likely to be an important component of future work within the UK.
Furthermore, as our practical knowledge of monitoring increases, and the marine monitoring require-ments are addressed in greater detail within the European Union, the guidance set out in the Handbookis likely to change. The Handbook should, therefore, be considered as a live working document.
Future progress of the Marine Monitoring HandbookDuring 2001, further work will be carried out to improve the coverage and content of the Handbook. Inparticular:
• we will increase the number and range of Procedural Guidelines to cover all the techniques listedin Section 6 of the Handbook;
• we will revise Sections 3 and 4 of the Handbook, taking account of further work to identify themost cost-effective design of monitoring programmes for particular Annex I habitats and Annex IIspecies, and the level of skills needed to carry out the work;
• we will improve the level of guidance in relation to Annex II species;
• we will provide a glossary of terms and a bibliography divided by topic.
The Marine Monitoring Handbook will be maintained on the JNCC Internet site(http://www.jncc.gov.uk), and this electronic version will be the most up-to-date copy available.Modifications to the Handbook, following the further work referred to above, will be incorporated intothis version. We will provide a ‘notice board’ on this website to enable users to provide feedback on theHandbook. A mechanism, probably e-mail, will be established to alert users when new material, or revi-sion of existing material, is published.
-
12 Marine Monitoring Handbook
Comments on this text, and suggestions for improvement, will be welcomed. All comments should besent to Dr Jon Davies at JNCC ([email protected]) and, if necessary, they will be incorporated intolater electronic versions.
Figure i An overview of marine SAC monitoring, showing the relevant sources of advice in the Marine MonitoringHandbook (together with other published texts) and the anticipated readership. Country Agency - CA: UK Government’sConservation Agencies. Management group: most marine SACs will have a co-ordinating group of representatives from localrelevant authorities.
* Brown, A E, Burn, A J, Hopkins J J and Way, S F (1997) The Habitats Directive: selection of SpecialAreas of Conservation in the UK. JNCC Report 270. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough.** Cole-King, A (In prep.) UK Marine SACs Project: Setting Conservation Objectives for marine SACs.
Process Source of advice
Brown et al. 1997*
Cole-King et al.2000**
Sections 1, 3 & 4
Section 2
Sections 3, 4 & 5
Section 2
Proceduralguidelines
Section 2
SelectingSACs
Set the conservationobjectives and define
attributes describing thecondition of features
Establish themonitoring strategy
Select appropriatetechnique for eachattribute to monitor
Plan fielddeployment
Monitor the feature
Assess the condition ofthe feature
Audience
Country Agency(CA) HQ marine
staffCA local staff
CA HQ marine staff CA local staff
Management group
CA HQ marine staff CA local staff
Management group
CA HQ marine staff CA local staff
Management group
CA Field staffContractors
CA HQ marine staff CA local staff
-
13
1 BackgroundMalcom Vincent and Jon Davies
Introduction 14
Legislative background for monitoring on SACs 15
Summary 16
The UK approach to SAC monitoring 16
Conservation objectives 17
Sub-features 17
Attributes 18
Summary 19
The role of monitoring in judging favourable condition 19
Frequency of monitoring 19
Judging the condition of sites 20
Context of SAC monitoring within the Scheme of Management 22
Using data from existing monitoring programmes 23
The UK National Marine Monitoring Programme 23
Bibliography 25
-
Introduction
The European Community has adopted two Directives which aim to conserve nature within the territo-ry of the European Union. Firstly, Council Directive 92/43 EEC of 21 May 1992 on the Conservation ofnatural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (the Habitats Directive) requires that Member States desig-nate Special Areas of Conservation for specified habitats and the habitats of specified species of wildplants and animals. Secondly, Council Directive 79/409 EEC of 2 April 1979 on the Conservation ofwild birds (the Birds Directive) requires Member States to designate Special Protection Areas for theconservation of specified wild birds, and for regularly occurring migratory birds. Both these Directivesapply to the marine environment of the European Union as well as to the terrestrial and freshwater envi-ronments.
The requirement to designate Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Special Protection Areas(SPAs) is implemented in Great Britain by the Conservation (Natural Habitats etc.) Regulations 1994 andin Northern Ireland by the Conservation (Natural Habitats, etc.) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 1995.These Regulations make provision for the implementation of the Directives in the marine environment,including the preparation of Schemes of Management (hereafter called Management Schemes) formarine SACs and SPAs. The Regulations refer to marine SACs and SPAs collectively as Europeanmarine sites. The Regulations, and the Management Schemes prepared under them, are intended tomaintain the conservation value of the European marine sites for the particular habitats or species forwhich they were designated.
Monitoring of European marine sites is necessary to determine the condition of the sites, to indicatewhether management measures undertaken under the Management Schemes are proving effective, andto identify, where possible, any detrimental effects. Where such effects are recorded, they are likely toact as a trigger for further investigative studies to determine what, if any, remedial action can be taken.
The UK Marine SACs project has investigated methods and strategies to monitor the condition ofthose marine habitats and species listed on Annexes I and II of the Habitats Directive which occur inthe 12 trial sites covered by the project. As part of this investigation, a number of these methods weretested on site to examine their cost-effectiveness and practicality. The trials concentrated either onapplying developing technologies such as airborne remote sensing to SAC monitoring, or on new meth-ods for deploying existing techniques. It did not test techniques that are well established for site moni-toring.
The Marine Monitoring Handbook explains the need for monitoring on marine SACs, sets out theapproach to such monitoring which is being adopted by the United Kingdom, provides assistance withthe design of monitoring programmes, gives specific guidance on monitoring methods appropriate to arange of marine SAC habitats and species, and provides information on the practical application of themonitoring methods. Figure i on page 11 provides an overview of the monitoring process and showswhere in the Marine Monitoring Handbook advice may be sought.
The Handbook is intended, primarily, for those responsible for designing and implementing monitor-ing programmes for marine SACs (Box 1-1). While the guidance provided is relevant to the habitatattributes of marine SPAs, methods for assessing bird populations have already been published
a,band
are not included in this Handbook.
14 Marine Monitoring Handbook
Box 1-1 Aim
The Marine Monitoring Handbook provides advice on monitoring marine Special Areas ofConservation to assess their condition in accordance with the requirements of the HabitatsDirective and UK common standards for monitoring.c
-
Background 15
Legislative background for monitoring on SACs
The purpose of designating and conserving Special Areas of Conservation is to maintain or restore thehabitats listed on Annex I and the species listed on Annex II of the Directive to Favourable ConservationStatus. Favourable Conservation Status is defined in Article 1 of the Directive. In summary, for AnnexI habitats, it means that conditions have been established which will ensure that the extent and rangeof the habitat, and the populations of the constituent species of that habitat, will be maintained orincreased over time. For Annex II species, it means that conditions have been established which willensure that the viability, population size and range of that species will be maintained in the long term.
The term Favourable Conservation Status relates to the individual habitats and species over their nat-ural range within the European Union. However, because the selection of the European network ofSACs is seen as fundamental to achieving Favourable Conservation Status, the European Commissionconsiders that the concept should also be applied at the site level.
dA key purpose of SAC monitoring,
therefore, will be to determine whether Favourable Conservation Status of the habitats and species isbeing achieved at the level of individual SACs. The UK conservation agencies use the term favourablecondition to represent the concept of Favourable Conservation Status for the interest features of an indi-vidual SAC.
In addition to this general point, the Habitats Directive also includes a number of specific provisionswhich require the undertaking of monitoring on SACs. The most important of these are:
• Article 11Member States shall undertake surveillance of the conservation status of the natural habitats andspecies referred to in Article 2 with particular regard to priority natural habitat types and priorityspecies.
This Article requires Member States to undertake surveillance of the conservation status of the natu-ral habitats and species listed on the Annexes of the Directive, with particular regard to priority habi-tats and species. This surveillance requirement relates to the conservation status of the habitats andspecies throughout the territory of the Member State. It is reasonable to infer that the importance ofsurveillance of a given habitat or species on an individual marine SAC can be viewed as being pro-portionate to the importance of the site to the status of the habitat or species within the territory ofthe Member State as a whole.
• Article 17(1)1. Every six years from the date of expiry of the period laid down in Article 23, Member States shalldraw up a report on the implementation of the measures taken under this Directive. This report shallinclude in particular information concerning the conservation measures referred to in Article 6 (1) aswell as evaluation of the impact of those measures on the conservation status of the natural habitattypes of Annex I and the species in Annex II and the main results of the surveillance referred to inArticle 11. The report, in accordance with the format established by the committee, shall be for-warded to the Commission and made accessible to the public.
This Article requires Member States to prepare a report by June 2000,1and every six years afterwards,
on the measures taken to achieve the conservation of SACs, and also to undertake an evaluation ofthe effect of these measures on the conservation status of Annex I habitats and Annex II species.Monitoring is needed in order to carry out this evaluation. The main results of the surveillance car-ried out under Article 11 are also to be included in the Report.
In addition to the requirements of the Habitats Directive, Article 8 of the EC Water FrameworkDirective will require Member States to ensure the establishment of programmes for monitoring the sta-tus of protected areas (including SACs). The purpose of such monitoring is to gauge whether the water-related ecological requirements (e.g. the water quality) of the SACs are being met.
1 The report due in June 2000 has been deferred for one year to June 2001.
-
Summary The EC legislation requires the condition of the habitats and species for which an SAC has been desig-nated to be monitored, in a manner which enables the condition of the feature to be estimated, andwhether management measures undertaken on the site are proving effective in achieving theirfavourable condition.
The UK approach to SAC monitoring
In the United Kingdom, an approach to the monitoring of wildlife sites which have been designatedunder both national and EC legislation has been developed which meets the requirements for monitor-ing of SACs. In this approach, a distinction is made between surveillance and monitoring.
Because the purpose of SACs is to contribute to achieving Favourable Conservation Status for thehabitats and species for which they were selected, work undertaken to assess whether SACs are makingthe contribution expected of them falls into the category of monitoring as defined in Box 1-2.
The Annex I habitats and Annex II species for which SACs have been selected are referred to collec-tively in the United Kingdom as interest features. Table 1-1 lists those marine interest features whichoccur in the United Kingdom and are covered by this handbook.
Table 1-1 Marine interest features occurring in the UK for which advice on monitoring the feature’s condition is providedin Sections 3 and 4 of this handbook.
The approach to monitoring SACs in the UK is based on the requirement to assess whether the inter-est feature for which the site has been selected is in favourable condition. Favourable condition is thestate which needs to be achieved by an interest feature and corresponds to Favourable ConservationStatus at the level of the individual SAC (Figure 1-1).
Favourable condition, therefore, is the ‘formulated standard’ referred to in the definition of monitor-ing given in Box 1-2, and has to be defined for each interest feature on each SAC. To accomplish this,and to achieve as far as possible a full alignment with management measures and controls establishedunder Management Schemes, the UK has formulated standards based on the conservation objectivesdeveloped for each interest feature on each SAC.
16 Marine Monitoring Handbook
Box 1-2 Definitions
Surveillance is a continued programme of biological surveys systematically undertaken toprovide a series of observations in time.Monitoring is surveillance undertaken to ensure that formulated standards are being maintained.
Annex I habitats
Sandbanks which are slightly covered by seawater at all times
Mudflats and sandflats not covered byseawater at low tide
Reefs
Submerged or partially submerged sea caves
Lagoons
Estuaries
Large shallow inlets and bays
Annex II species
Phoca vitulina (Common seal)
Halichoerus grypus (Grey seal)
Tursiops truncatus (Bottlenose dolphin)
-
Figure 1-1 Diagrammatic representation of the UK’s approach to setting a conservation objective for a marine SAC feature.
Conservation objectivesThe Habitats Directive implies that conservation objectives will be developed for SACs, and explicitlyrefers to these in the context of appropriate assessment of plans and projects under Article 6. The UK’snational implementing Regulations have developed the concept further and require the country natureconservation agencies to advise all relevant authorities of the conservation objectives for each marineSAC. A conservation objective is a statement of the nature conservation aspirations for the interest fea-tures on an SAC, expressed in terms of broad targets that define favourable condition.
e
The process of defining favourable condition of an interest feature can be thought of as consisting oftwo elements:
1) Identifying the most important characteristics of the interest feature that define its condition.Depending on the feature concerned, this will usually include some combination of the:
– quantity of the feature, for example the extent of habitat, or habitat of the species, or abundance ofthe species, and related characteristics such as range of distribution, and whether its spatial occur-rence is patchy or continuous;
– quality of the feature, for example for a habitat, the presence or abundance of component species,or the quality of inorganic components of the habitat such as substrata; for a species population,measures of quality could include characteristics such as age or size structure, productivity rate,and even aspects of the ‘health’ of individuals;
– processes supporting the feature, such as physical environmental factors like water quality, watermovement (levels and flows) or sediment processes, where they are of overriding importance to thecondition of a habitat or species; for example, the salinity patterns observed in a lagoon.
2) Identifying the state or value, or range of values, for the selected characteristics which the featureneeds to have if it is to be considered as being in favourable condition. These values need to recog-nise, so far as possible, the fluctuations which are part of the feature’s natural dynamics.
As a guide, and in the absence of information on which to base a different conclusion, the ‘value’ ofthe characteristics at the time when the feature was selected is assumed to be representative offavourable condition. The United Kingdom refers to the characteristics described above as attributes.
Sub-featuresThe marine Annex I habitats are very broadly defined habitats that are often represented by large andcomplex sites. To effectively describe, monitor and manage such complex features, it has been neces-sary to divide some of them into smaller units called sub-features. Sub-features are distinctive biologi-
Background 17
Average particle sizeanalysis parameters similar
to baseline
Feature
Sub-tidalsand bank
Conservationobjective
Targets
No decrease fromestablished baseline
Depth should not deviatesignificantly from baseline
Number of biotopes shouldnot deviate from baseline
Average density should notdeviate from baseline
Attributes
Extent
Density ofeelgrass
Topography
Range ofbiotopes
Sedimentcharacter
Condition
Favourablecondition
Mai
ntai
nsu
b-tid
alsa
ndba
nkin
favo
urab
leco
nditi
on,
whe
reth
e:
-
cal communities (e.g. eelgrass beds, maerl beds, horse-mussel reefs), or particular structural or geo-graphical elements of the feature (see Figure 1-2). Sub-features have often proved helpful, both in thedevelopment of conservation objectives, and of monitoring programmes, to separate the feature into anumber of constituent sub-features, and then to identify attributes and targets for the sub-features. Theuse of sub-features has been found to be particularly helpful for those marine Annex I features that rep-resent whole physiographic units,
2and permits a level of flexibility in the application of the UK’s
Common Standards Monitoring which has been found necessary when applying the standards at the sitelevel.
Figure 1-2 An example of how complex Annex I features (bold italic) are divided into sub-features (normal text) for a largeSAC.
AttributesAs explained above, conservation objectives for each feature on each SAC are developed by identify-ing the attributes which describe and support the (sub) feature, and by the setting of values, or a rangeof values, for each of these which reflect the best judgement as to what is required to define the fea-ture as being in good condition. It is quite impractical to set conservation objectives for every con-ceivable attribute for a particular feature and, even if this were done, the cost of monitoring all ofthese to assess the condition of the feature would be prohibitive.
For this reason, conservation objectives are developed for those attributes considered to be essential.The nature conservation agencies in the United Kingdom are currently increasing their experience indeveloping conservation objectives for marine interest features, and the understanding of whichattributes are the most important may need to change as our understanding improves. Examples ofattributes are given in Box 1-3. The United Kingdom refers to the attribute values which help todefine favourable condition as targets.
In practice, in the marine environment it has proved useful to consider attributes in meaningfulgroups under a range of sub-features.
18 Marine Monitoring Handbook
2 Estuaries, large shallow inlets and bays, caves, and lagoons.
Plymouth Sound and estuaries SAC
Estuarine bedrock, boulder and cobble communities
Large shallow inlet and bay
Intertidal rock and boulder shore communities
Subtidal rocky reef communities
Kelp forest communities
Subtidal mud communities
Subtidal sandbank communitiesEstuaries
Intertidal mud communities
Subtidal mud communities
Intertidal mixed muddy sediment communities
Subtidal mixed muddy sediment communities
Subtidal sandbank communities
Saltmarsh and reedbed communities
Sandbanks which are slightlycovered by seawater all of the time
Eelgrass bed communities
Gravel and sand communities
Muddy sand communities
-
SummaryA summary of the approach used to define favourable condition for an interest feature on an individualSAC is, therefore, as follows:
1) Identify and define any sub-features that are important components of the feature.
2) Identify the attributes for the interest feature, and any sub-features, which are considered, on bestjudgement, to be essential to assess its condition.
3) Set targets for those attributes.
4) Formulate conservation objectives for the feature based on the aggregation of all the selected attrib-utes and their targets.
These conservation objectives then define favourable condition for the feature.
The role of monitoring in judging favourable condition
Monitoring the selected attributes provides the information to compare their actual values at the timeof recording with the target values, to enable an assessment of whether or not the feature (or sub-fea-ture) is in favourable condition.
The United Kingdom uses this approach in the monitoring of all sites designated under national andEC nature conservation Directives, and refers to the approach as Common Standards Monitoring . Theapproach has a number of advantages:
• At a local level, it provides a framework for those responsible for developing and implementingmonitoring programmes to do so with the confidence that this framework is supported nationallyand is being implemented throughout the country.
• It enables judgements to be made about the condition of features which are consistent between oneperson and another, and between one site and another.
• Collecting, managing and exchanging monitoring information using accepted standards can be doneat a much lower cost than would otherwise be possible, and use of the standards also facilitates thecomparison of results over time and between different localities.
• It enables the UK to report on the condition of each feature at the national level to the EC.
Frequency of monitoringThe Habitats Directive requires Member States to report on the status of the habitats and species ofCommunity interest every six years. In conformity with this, the UK has adopted the practice of moni-toring all designated sites, including SACs, on a six-year cycle. Within this overall six-year monitoringcycle, each interest feature within a site must be monitored, preferably within the same year, but cer-
Background 19
Box 1-3 Examples of Attributes
Extent of the feature
Diversity of constituent biotopesExtent of important constituent biotopesDistribution of important constituent biotopesSpecies composition of important biotopes
Important topographic features such as bathymetryWater temperatureTurbidityNutrient statusSediment (or other substratum) character
-
tainly within a three-year period.Some features within sites will be monitored more frequently than this. Marine SAC features particu-
larly will need more frequent monitoring in forthcoming years to adequately establish their inherentvariation and better judge the appropriateness of target values already set, or define target values forthose attributes where there are few existing data.
Judging the condition of sitesThe condition of designated features is judged to fall into one of seven categories (see Box 1-4). The firsttwo of these are termed favourable and features which are assessed as falling into these categories meetthe requirements of favourable condition. The remainder do not.
The Common Standards Monitoring model for designated nature conservation sites adopted by theUnited Kingdom also includes the monitoring of management measures and activities, but these are notincluded within the Handbook. The Common Standards Monitoring procedures are summarised in Box 1-4.
20 Marine Monitoring Handbook
-
Background 21
FEATURES TO BE MONITOREDThe features to be monitored and reported willbe, in the case of Natura 2000, the features forwhich the site is designated.
For monitoring purposes, the special interestof the site may not always be dealt with as a sin-gle entity since many sites have a complex mixof Annex I habitats or Annex II species, whichprovide the justification for the designation ofthe site. However, the individual features ofinterest should be identified, monitored andreported on separately. These interest featuresare described in the notification documents andare the reasons for designating the site. UntilSACs are formally designated the interest fea-tures are those for which the site was selected.
CONSERVATION OBJECTIVESConservation objectives will be prepared for inter-est features on all sites. Each objective will definewhat constitutes favourable condition of each fea-ture by describing broad targets which should bemet if the feature is to be judged favourable.
Each interest feature of a site will have one ormore attributes that can be used to help defineFavourable Condition. For species these mayinclude population size, structure, habitatrequirements and distribution. Attributes of habi-tats may include area covered, key species, com-position and structure and supporting processes.
Broad targets will be identified for thoseattributes that most economically defineFavourable Condition of the interest feature.Because all features are subject to some degreeof change, the targets may express how muchchange we would accept while still consideringthe feature to be in Favourable Condition. If afeature changes to the extent that it falls outsidethe thresholds expressed then this acts as a trig-ger for remedial action or further investigation.
MONITORING CYCLEThe overall cycle will ensure that the interestfeatures will be monitored at least once withinsix years. However, for any particular site eachinterest feature should be monitored within athree-year period.
Within the overall monitoring cycle, it will beuseful to form a view of the overall condition ofthe features within a proportion of the statutorysites on a more frequent basis. Each interest fea-ture within a site should therefore be monitored,preferably within the same year, but certainlywithin a three-year period.
JUDGING THE CONDITION OF SITESThe condition of site features will be assignedagainst the following categories:Favourable – maintained. An interest featureshould be recorded as maintained when its con-servation objectives were being met at the previ-ous assessment, and are still being met.
Favourable – recovered. An interest feature canbe recorded as having recovered if it has regainedFavourable Condition, having been recorded asunfavourable on the previous assessment.
Unfavourable – recovering. An interest featurecan be recorded as recovering after damage if ithas begun to show, or is continuing to show, atrend towards Favourable Condition.
Unfavourable – no change. An interest featuremay be retained in a more-or-less steady state byrepeated or continuing damage. It is unfavourablebut neither declining nor recovering. In rare cases,an interest feature might not be able to regain itsoriginal condition following a damaging activity,but a new stable state might be achieved.
Unfavourable – declining. Decline is anotherpossible consequence of a damaging activity. Inthis case, recovery is possible and may occureither spontaneously or if suitable managementinput is made.
Partially destroyed. It is possible to destroy sec-tions or areas of certain features or to destroyparts of sites with no hope of reinstatementbecause part of the feature itself, or the habitator processes essential to support it, has beenremoved or irretrievably altered.
Destroyed. The recording of a feature asdestroyed will indicate the entire interest fea-ture has been affected to such an extent thatthere is no hope of recovery, perhaps because itssupporting habitat or processes have beenremoved or irretrievably altered.
These categories will be used to assess andreport on the condition of features of interest.
Judgements on the overall condition of a fea-ture will be influenced by a variety of factorsand in some cases a feature may be assessed asbeing in Favourable Condition when only someof the targets set for it have been met.
REPORTING ARRANGEMENTSA full report will be produced once every sixyears. The monitoring framework will generateinformation on the condition of features acrossthe statutory site network as a whole, or on thestatus of features within individual sites, andwill be used to fulfil reporting requirementsunder the Habitats Directive (and otherInternational Conventions).
Box 1-4 Some key aspects of the framework of Common Standards Monitoring
-
Context of SAC monitoring within the Scheme of Management
Figure 1-3 Outline of the process of establishing a management scheme incorporating a monitoring programme on an SAC,showing the organisations responsible for each stage (after Anon 1998
f). Conservation Agency: Countryside Council for
Wales, English Nature, Environment and Heritage Service (Northern Ireland), Scottish Natural Heritage. Relevant Authority:the specific competent authority
3which has powers or functions which have, or could have, an impact on the marine envi-
ronment within or adjacent to a SAC. Management Group comprises the relevant authorities and conservation agency members. DETR: Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
22 Marine Monitoring Handbook
3 A competent authority is any minister, government department, public or statutory undertaker, public body orperson holding public office that exercises statutory powers.
The context of monitoring within the Management Scheme prepared for an individual SAC is illustrat-ed in Figure 1-3. The monitoring of the condition of SACs is co-ordinated by the statutory nature con-servation agencies, though other authorities may actually carry out monitoring activities where this isappropriate.
Conservation Agency advises onthe conservation objectives andon activities that may damage or
disturb the feature
Conservation Agencies monitorthe condition of features
Conservation Agencies report thecondition of features on a SAC to
Management Group & JNCC[This may trigger a change to the
site’s management]
JNCC reports the condition ofeach feature in UK to DETR for
submission to the EC
Relevant authority monitors thecompliance with management
measures [This may trigger a change to
the site’s management]
Management group agrees amanagement scheme to attain the
conservation objectives, and tomanage other uses to ensure theyare compatible with the Directive’s
requirements
Management scheme is effectedthrough voluntary action and thestatutory powers of the relevant
authorities
-
Using data from existing monitoring programmes
The United Kingdom has a long history of long-term investigations in the marine environment, both ata local and national scale. Universities and research institutes have generally pursued local pro-grammes such as the benthic investigations by the University of Newcastle’s Dove Marine Laboratory offthe coast of NE England (Buchanan and Moore 1986).
gNational monitoring programmes have been
undertaken by statutory agencies, usually as part of their regulatory functions; for example, the Ministryof Agriculture, Fisheries and Food monitor the physio-chemical parameters of seawater in relation tothe disposal of contaminants (MAFF 1994).
hExisting monitoring programmes are expected to make a
significant contribution to SAC monitoring, in terms of providing data at a site where sampling stationsfall within the SAC boundary, and provide wider contextual information on the state of the environ-ment. Also, these existing programmes can make an important contribution to the development of SACmonitoring strategies and the interpretation of results. When developing site-based objectives, theselong-term programmes can contribute data on the variability of an attribute to help set realistic targets.During a monitoring programme, comparing the results gathered at a local level with any national trendsmay provide additional insights into an explanation of a local change. It is, therefore, prudent for thoseestablishing SAC monitoring schemes to undertake a comprehensive review to identify any existinglong-term programmes that may contribute to future monitoring effort. National monitoring in themarine environment is undertaken inter alia under the auspices of the Marine Pollution Managementand Monitoring Group (MPMMG)
4established by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the
Regions. One such scheme is the UK National Marine Monitoring Programme.
The UK National Marine Monitoring ProgrammeThe UK National Marine Monitoring Programme
5(NMMP) was devised in response to the 1986 House
of Lords Select Committee on Marine Science and Technology, who recommended that a commonapproach to monitoring should be established. This should provide all the information required to com-ply with the full range of national and international commitments (e.g. under the OSPAR Conventionand EC Directives). Overall responsibility for the NMMP rests with the MPMMG. The NMMP isdescribed in the Green Book,
iwhich includes procedural guidelines for the collection, processing and
analysis of samples.6
Sampling is undertaken annually by the Environment Agency and Centre for Environment, Fisheriesand Aquaculture Science in England and Wales, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and theFisheries Research Service in Scotland, and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development andthe Environment and Heritage Service in Northern Ireland. It focuses on stable depositional sedimentsites and records data on sediment chemistry, biological communities, bioaccumulation of mercury,cadmium and lead, and their ecological effects. Samples are collected at each of approximately 115 sta-tions around the UK (Figure 1-4): there are 40 estuarine sites, 45 intermediate (coastal) sites and 30 off-shore sites. The programme has become biology-led because the prevailing biological assemblage is con-sidered to integrate and reflect the effects of the wide range of physical and chemical conditions occur-ring at each site. However, a perceived weakness is the difficulty of linking cause and effect. A NationalMarine Biology Analytical Quality Control Scheme (NMBAQC) was established in 1992 and has under-taken various exercises and workshops involving more than 25 laboratories to establish quality assur-ance standards for the biological aspects of the NMMP. Similar schemes exist for chemical monitoring(NMCAQC) and ecotoxicological monitoring (NMEAQC).
Background 23
4 See: http://www.environment.detr.gov.uk/marine/mpmmg/index.htm5 See: http://www.marlab.ac.uk/NMPR/NMP.htm for a list of links and http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/s-
enviro/viewpoints/5change-ltrs/3nmmp/5-3.html for an explanation.6 The Green Book is a controlled document distributed by Fisheries Research Service, Marine Laboratory,
Aberdeen: contact Dr Gill Rodger ([email protected]). The text may be downloaded from: http://www.mar-lab.ac.uk/greenbook/GREEN.htm
http://www.environment.detr.gov.uk/marine/mpmmg/index.htmhttp://www.marlab.ac.uk/NMPR/NMP.htmhttp://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/s-enviro/viewpoints/5change-ltrs/3nmmp/5-3.htmlhttp://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/s-enviro/viewpoints/5change-ltrs/3nmmp/5-3.htmlhttp://www.marlab.ac.uk/greenbook.green.htm
-
These schemes provide a potential model for establishing quality assurance measures in SAC monitoring.
Figure 1-4 Location of the National Marine Monitoring Programme (NMMP) sample sites in the UK. Key: ● - cSAC (pre moderation
7); ❏ - NMMP sites within cSACs; ■ - NMMP sites (see http://www.environment-
agency.gov.uk/s-enviro/viewpoints/5change-ltrs/3nmmp/5-3a.html).
Biological survey in the NMMP is based on macrobenthic sampling using grab and core sampling ofsubtidal sediment biotopes. Being quantitative counts of individual organisms, the results lend them-selves to the use of diversity indices and multivariate analysis to indicate ‘health’ and extent of change.Analyses of the entire data set provide an indication of any national trends in the ‘health’ of these bio-logical communities. The first holistic NMMP report on this spatial survey, National MonitoringProgramme Survey of the Quality of UK Coastal Waters,
jwas published in November 1998.
24 Marine Monitoring Handbook
7 The original UK list of cSACs was reviewed at the EC Atlantic Biogeographic Region meeting at Kilkee, Irelandin October 1999; the UK is currently revising its list following this meeting.
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/s-enviro/viewpoints/5change-ltrs/3nmmp/5-3a.html
-
These national results will provide an important context for assessing the significance of any localisedchange recorded during a SAC monitoring study.
Bibliography
a Cranswick, P A, Pollitt, M S, Musgrove, A J and Hughes, R C (1999) The Wetland Bird Survey 1997–98: Wildfowland Wader Counts. BTO/WWT/RSPB/JNCC, Slimbridge.
b Walsh, P M, Halley, D J, Harris, M P, del Neyo, A, Sim, I M W, and Tasker, M L (1995) Seabird monitoring hand-book for Britain and Ireland. JNCC/RSPB/ITE/Seabird Group, Peterborough.
c Anon (1998) A Statement on Common Standards Monitoring. Joint Nature Conservation Committee,Peterborough.
d European Commission (2000) Managing Natura 2000 sites – the provisions of Article 6 of the ‘Habitats’ Directive92/43/EEC. European Commission, Brussels.
e Anon (1998) A Statement on Common Standards Monitoring. Joint Nature Conservation Committee,Peterborough.
f Anon (1998) Natura 2000: conservation through partnership. English Nature, Peterborough.g Buchanan, J B and Moore, J J (1986) A Broad Review of Variability and Persistence in the Northumberland
Benthic Fauna 1971–85. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 66, 641–657.h MAFF (1994) Monitoring and surveillance of non-radioactive contaminants in the aquatic environment and
activities regulating the disposal of wastes at sea, 1991. Aquatic Environment Monitoring Report, MAFFDirectorate of Fisheries Research, Lowestoft.
i Marine Pollution Monitoring Management Group (2000) UK National Marine Monitoring Programme: GreenBook. Marine Pollution Monitoring Management Group, Aberdeen.
j Marine Pollution Monitoring Management Group (1998) National Monitoring Programme: Survey of the Qualityof UK Coastal Waters. Marine Pollution Monitoring Management Group, Aberdeen.
Background 25
-
26
-
27
2 Establishing monitoringprogrammes for marinefeatures
Jon Davies
Introduction 28
What do I need to measure? 28What attributes should I select? 31What is the target condition? 36
What is the most appropriate method? 37Precision and Accuracy 39
How do I ensure my monitoring programme will measure any change accurately? 40Natural change 41Spatial pattern 41Permanent sample stations 43Locating samples – random or not? 44Nested sampling 46How many samples do I need to take? 47Power analysis 49
Assessing the condition of a feature 51
A checklist of basic errors 53
Bibliography 54
-
28 Marine Monitoring Handbook
Introduction
There are four stages in a monitoring programme to assess the condition of the interest features ofmarine SACs:
(1) establish what to monitor
(2) determine the most appropriate technique to use
(3) organise the deployment of the technique in the field
(4) assess the condition of the feature
The process is summarised in Figure 2-1.
What do I need to measure?
As explained in Section 1 of the Handbook, the aspiration for the features on UK marine SACs isfavourable condition as defined by the targets set for a range of selected attributes. The targets providethe framework to be tested in a monitoring programme. The process of developing conservation objec-tives for marine SACs is described in a separate report
aand will not be repeated here; the process
Figure 2-1 Summary of the SAC monitoring process
-
Establishing monitoring programmes for marine features 29
is illustrated in Figure 2-2. The monitoring programme is analogous to a scientific investigation wherethe hypothesis under test is whether the targets have been achieved; the feature is then considered to bein favourable condition.
1A monitoring programme must therefore make a series of measurements to test
the hypothesis that each attribute is in favourable condition and therefore enable a judgement to bemade on the status of the whole feature. Common Standards Monitoring
brequires a discrete data gath-
ering exercise (that may nevertheless require several field visits) during the reporting cycle to evaluatethe condition of the feature.
Figure 2-2 A hypothetical example of a feature and its conservation objective, showing the attributes and targets (adaptedfrom Ecoscope 2000a).
cThis diagram will also apply to a sub-feature (see Section 1).
In practice, information on targets2
is often presented in the form of a table, which shows the rela-tionship between feature, sub-feature, attribute and target, together with any site/attribute specific com-ments. An example is shown below in Box 2-1.
1 Brown (2000)sprovides an excellent and comprehensive explanation of how the Common Standards Model is
used for condition monitoring, including a detailed account of methods and appropriate statistical proceduresto evaluate a feature’s condition.
2 All features are subject to some change and so the targets may express how much change we would acceptwhilst still considering the feature to be in favourable condition. These will serve as a trigger mechanism sothat when changes that fall outside the thresholds expressed are observed or measured some further investiga-tion or remedial action is taken.
-
30 Marine Monitoring Handbook
Fea
ture
or
Su
b-F
eatu
re
Fea
ture
:S
ubt
idal
san
dba
nks
Su
b fe
atu
re:
Eel
gras
s be
d
com
mu
nit
ies
Att
ribu
te
Ext
ent
Sed
imen
t ch
arac
ter
Top
ogra
ph
y
Ext
ent
Wat
er c
lari
ty
Ch
arac
teri
stic
spec
ies-
den
sity
of Z
oste
ra
mar
ina
Mea
sure
Are
a (h
a) o
f su
btid
al s
and
ban
k co
mm
un
itie
sm
easu
red
per
iod
ical
ly (
freq
uen
cy t
o be
det
erm
ined
).
Par
ticl
e si
ze a
nal
ysis
(P
SA
). P
aram
eter
sin
clu
de
per
cen
tage
san
d/s
ilt/
grav
el, m
ean
and
med
ian
gra
in s
ize,
an
d s
orti
ng
coef
fici
ent,
use
d t
o ch
arac
teri
se s
edim
ent
typ
e. S
edim
ent
char
acte
r to
be
mea
sure
dd
uri
ng
sum
mer
, on
ce d
uri
ng
rep
orti
ng
cycl
e.
Dep
th d
istr
ibu
tion
of
san
dba
nks
fro
m
sele
cted
sit
es, m
easu
red
per
iod
ical
ly
(fre
quen
cy t
o be
det
erm
ined
).
Are
a (h
a) o
f ee
lgra
ss b
ed c
omm
un
itie
s m
easu
red
du
rin
g p
eak
grow
th p
erio
d t
wic
ed
uri
ng
rep
orti
ng
cycl
e.
Ave
rage
lig
ht
atte
nu
atio
n m
easu
red
p
erio
dic
ally
th
rou
ghou
t th
e re
por
tin
g cy
cle
(fre
quen
cy t
o be
det
erm
ined
).
Ave
rage
den
sity
, mea
sure
d d
uri
ng
pea
kgr
owth
per
iod
tw
ice
du
rin
g re
por
tin
g cy
cle.
Targ
et
No
dec
reas
e in
ext
ent
from
an
esta
blis
hed
bas
elin
e, s
ubj
ect
ton
atu
ral
chan
ge.
Ave
rage
PS
A p
aram
eter
ssh
ould
not
dev
iate
si
gnif
ican
tly
from
an
es
tabl
ish
ed b
asel
ine,
su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
.
Dep
th s
hou
ld n
ot d
evia
te
sign
ific
antl
y fr
om a
n
esta
blis
hed
bas
elin
e, s
ubj
ect
to n
atu
ral
chan
ge.
No
dec
reas
e in
ext
ent
from
an
esta
blis
hed
bas
elin
e, s
ubj
ect
to n
atu
ral
chan
ge.
Ave
rage
lig
ht
atte
nu
atio
nsh
ould
not
dec
reas
e si
gnif
ican
tly
from
an
es
tabl
ish
ed b
asel
ine,
su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
.
Ave
rage
den
sity
sh
ould
not
dev
iate
sig
nif
ican
tly
from
an
esta
blis
hed
bas
elin
e, s
ubj
ect
ton
atu
ral
chan
ge.
Com
men
ts
Ext
ent
of t
he
feat
ure
is
a re
por
tin
g re
quir
emen
t of
th
e H
abit
ats
Dir
ecti
ve. M
onit
orin
g w
ill
nee
d t
o ta
ke a
ccou
nt
of t
he
dyn
amic
nat
ure
of
the
feat
ure
bu
t re
du
ctio
n i
n e
xten
t m
ay i
nd
icat
e lo
ng-
term
chan
ges
in t
he
ph
ysic
al c
ond
itio
ns
infl
uen
cin
g th
e fe
atu
re.
Sed
imen
t ch
arac
ter
def
ined
by
par
ticl
e si
ze a
nal
ysis
is
key
to
the
stru
ctu
re o
f th
e fe
atu
re, a
nd
ref
lect
s al
l of
th
e p
hys
ical
pro
cess
esac
tin
g on
it.
P
arti
cle
size
com
pos
itio
n v
arie
s ac
ross
th
e fe
atu
rean
d c
an b
e u
sed
to
ind
icat
e sp
atia
l d
istr
ibu
tion
of
sed
imen
t ty
pes
thu
s re
flec
tin
g th
e st
abil
ity
of t
he
feat
ure
an
d t
he
pro
cess
es
sup
por
tin
g it
.
Dep
th a
nd
dis
trib
uti
on o
f th
e sa
nd
ban
ks r
efle
cts
the
ener
gy
con
dit
ion
s an
d s
tabi
lity
of
the
sed
imen
t, w
hic
h i
s ke
y to
th
est
ruct
ure
of
the
feat
ure
. D
epth
of
the
feat
ure
is
a m
ajor
in
flu
ence
on t
he
dis
trib
uti
on o
f co
mm
un
itie
s th
rou
ghou
t.
Th
e ex
ten
t an
d d
istr
ibu
tion
of
seag
rass
bed
s p
rovi
des
a l
ong-
term
inte
grat
ed m
easu
re o
f en
viro
nm
enta
l co
nd
itio
ns.
Wat
er c
lari
ty i
s im
por
tan
t fo
r m
ain
tain
ing
the
eelg
rass
bed
s, a
nd
thu
s th
e st
ruct
ure
of
the
feat
ure
. C
lari
ty d
ecre
ases
th
rou
ghin
crea
ses
in a
mou
nts
of
susp
end
ed o
rgan
ic/i
nor
gan
ic m
atte
r.W
ater
cla
rity
is
alre
ady
bein
g m
easu
red
in
th
e sh
allo
w i
nle
ts
and
bay
s fe
atu
re, b
ut
has
to
be m
easu
red
on
all
eel
gras
s be
ds.
An
ear
ly i
nd
icat
or o
f se
agra
ss u
nd
er s
tres
s is
a r
edu
ctio
n i
n
biom
ass,
i.e
. th
e n
um
ber
and
len
gth
of
leav
es. D
ensi
ty i
s p
refe
rred
as
a su
rrog
ate
for
biom
ass,
bei
ng
less
des
tru
ctiv
e,
base
d o
n b
asel
ine
surv
ey t
o es
tabl
ish
th
e re
lati
onsh
ip b
etw
een
den
sity
an
d b
iom
ass
at a
sit
e.
3 S
cott
ish
Nat
ura
l H
erit
age
use
th
e ex
pre
ssio
n S
ite
Att
ribu
te T
able
4 T
he
full
tab
le i
s p
ubl
ish
ed i
n: A
non
(20
00)
Ply
mou
th S
oun
d a
nd
Est
uar
ies
Eu
rop
ean
Mar
ine
Sit
e. E
ngl
ish
Nat
ure
’s a
dvi
ce g
iven
un
der
Reg
ula
tion
33(
2) o
f th
eC
onse
rvat
ion
(N
atu
ral
Hab
itat
s &
c.)
Reg
ula
tion
s 19
94. E
ngl
ish
Nat
ure
, Pet
erbo
rou
gh.
Box
2-1
An
exa
mp
le o
f p
art
of t
he
Fav
oura
ble
Con
dit
ion
Tab
le3
for
the
subt
idal
san
dba
nk
feat
ure
in
Ply
mou
th S
oun
d c
SA
C4 .
Th
e fi
rst
thre
e at
trib
ute
s ap
ply
to t
he
wh
ole
feat
ure
in
th
e S
AC
; th
e re
mai
nin
g at
trib
ute
s on
ly a
pp
ly t
o th
e ee
lgra
ss b
ed c
omm
un
ity
sub-
feat
ure
.
-
What attributes should I select?As explained in Section 1, the UK considers favourable condition to be favourable conservation statusat the level of the individual SAC. Why is this important and how does it relate to the choice of attrib-utes for monitoring? Part of the answer lies in the requirements of the Habitats Directive, which defineswhat is meant by favourable conservation status, and is set out in Box 2-2.
Taking habitat features only, these definitions clearly suggest that an assessment of FCS must consid-er attributes relating to extent, structure, function and typical species. The Joint Nature ConservationCommittee commissioned a study
dto identify generic parameters for defining favourable condition of
each feature that equate to the broad definitions in Box 2-2. It provided useful guidance on the type ofgeneric attribute
5to consider in relation to the definitions of FCS. Adopting generic attributes will make
a valuable contribution to the implementation of the UK’s Common Standards for Monitoring program-me
bacross the site series. These ideas were explored at the UK Marine SACs Project European work-
shop held at Gatwickeand further developed as guidance by English Nature,
6who concluded that gener-
ic attributes would:
• ensure consistency of condition assessments;
• facilitate aggregation of condition assessments;
• assist in the identification of large scale change, for example across the Natura 2000 series.
Scottish Natural Heritage’s handbook on site condition monitoringf
suggests the habitat attributesshould consider the quantity and quality, where quality is further sub-divided into physical attributes,composition, structure, dynamics and function. For species, the attributes should be quantity, popula-tion dynamics, population structure, genetic diversity and habitat requirements. To provide a structuredapproach in the present Handbook, the following generic attributes are used: extent, biotic composition,biological structure and physical structure for Annex I habitats, and quantity, population dynamics,population structure and habitat requirements for Annex II species. Table 2-1 and Table 2-2 give exam-ples of how these generic attributes have been interpreted and then applied to candidate SACs in UK.In the UK, all reference to biological communities must use the terms in the national marine
Establishing monitoring programmes for marine features 31
Box 2-2 Definitions of favourable conservation status for Annex I habitats (Article 1e) and Annex II species (Article 1i)For a natural habitat, favourable conservation status occurs when:
• its natural range and area it covers within that range are stable or increasing; and
• the specific structure and functions, which are necessary for its long-term maintenance,exist and are likely to continue to exist for the foreseeable future; and
• the conservation status of its typical species is favourable.
For a species, favourable conservation status occurs when:
• the population dynamics data on the species concerned indicate that it is maintainingitself on a long-term basis as a viable component of its natural habitats; and
• the natural range of the species is neither being reduced nor is likely to be reduced for theforeseeable future; and
• there is, and will probably continue to be, a sufficiently large habitat to maintain its populations on a long-term basis.
5 A generic attribute is a summary term describing the broad theme from which site-specific attributes may bederived. For example, biotic composition (of a feature) is the generic attribute whereas, the species compositionof biotope x and the presence of species y would be site-specific representations.
6 Selecting attributes for Annex I habitats and Annex II species of marine SACs, paper by Paul Gilliland,Maritime Team, English Nature; [email protected]
-
32 Marine Monitoring Handbook
biotope classification,gand for species, all taxonomic nomenclature must follow the Species Directory
h
to ensure a consistent approach across the site series.
Summary
A monitoring strategy must measure at least one attribute of the extent, the biotic composition, the bio-logical structure and the physical structure of an Annex I habitat feature, and the quantity, the popula-tion dynamics, the population structure and the habitat requirements of an Annex II species.
-
Establishing monitoring programmes for marine features 33
Tabl
e 2-
1A
sel
ectio
n of
attr
ibut
es fo
r m
arin
e A
nnex
I fe
atur
es, t
oget
her
with
exa
mpl
es o
f how
they
hav
e be
en a
pplie
d to
a r
ange
of c
andi
date
SA
Cs
in th
e U
K
Gen
eric
att
ribu
te
Ext
ent
of f
eatu
re
Bio
tic
com
pos
itio
n
Bio
logi
cal
stru
ctu
re
Con
cep
tual
att
ribu
te
Are
a of
hab
itat
Pre
sen
ce a
nd
dis
trib
uti
onof
bio
top
es
Sp
ecie
s co
mp
osit
ion
of
biot
opes
Div
ersi
ty o
f bi
otop
es
Pop
ula
tion
siz
e/d
ensi
ty o
fch
arac
teri
stic
sp
ecie
s
Ext
ent
of s
pec
ific
bio
top
es
Str
uct
ura
l in
tegr
ity
ofse
lect
ed b
ioto
pes
Sp
atia
l p
atte
rn o
f bi
otop
es
Exa
mp
le a
ttri
bute
Ext
ent
Ran
ge a
nd
dis
trib
uti
on o
f ro
ckco
mm
un
itie
s (S
LR
, ML
R, M
CR
biot
opes
)
Sp
ecie
s co
mp
osit
ion
of
char
-ac
teri
stic
roc
ky s
car
biot
opes
:m
uss
el b
eds
and
tid
esw
ept
bou
lder
s w
ith
Fu
cus
cera
noi
des
Pre
sen
ce a
nd
dis
trib
uti
on o
f a
sele
ctio
n o
f bi
otop
es r
epre
sen
-ta
tive
of
the
Pen
Lly
n r
eefs
Ch
arac
teri
stic
sp
ecie
s –
the
spon
ges
Hal
iclo
na
ocu
lata
,H
alic
hon
dri
a p
anic
eaan
dH
ymen
iaci
don
per
leve
Ext
ent
of b
ritt
lest
ar b
eds
Str
uct
ura
l in
tegr
ity
of t
he
hor
se m
uss
el (
Mod
iolu
s m
odio
lus)
biog
enic
ree
f
Dis
trib
uti
on o
f m
ajor
com
mu
-n
itie
s w
ith
in t
he
estu
arie
s
Exa
mp
le t
arge
t
No
dec
reas
e in
ext
ent
from
an
est
abli
shed
bas
elin
e,su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
Ran
ge a
nd
dis
trib
uti
on s
hou
ld n
ot d
evia
te s
ign
ific
antl
yfr
om a
n e
stab
lish
ed b
asel
ine,
su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
Pre
sen
ce a
nd
abu
nd
ance
of
com
pos
ite
spec
ies
shou
ldn
ot d
evia
te s
ign
ific
antl
y fr
om t
he
esta
blis
hed
bas
elin
e,su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
Th
ese
biot
opes
sh
ould
alw
ays
be p
rese
nt.
Th
e su
ite
ofre
pre
sen
tati
ve b
ioto
pes
for
th
e P
en L
lyn
ree
fs i
s to
be
det
erm
ined
. Th
e lo
wer
lim
it f
or t
his
att
ribu
te w
ill
beth
e p
rese
nce
of
all
the
rep
rese
nta
tive
bio
top
es
Ave
rage
abu
nd
ance
sh
ould
not
dev
iate
sig
nif
ican
tly
from
an
est
abli
shed
bas
elin
e, s
ubj
ect
to n
atu
ral
chan
ge
No
dec
reas
e in
ext
ent
from
th
e es
tabl
ish
ed b
asel
ine
(ref
eren
ce),
su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
Targ
et a
nd
lim
its
for
this
att
ribu
te t
o be
det
erm
ined
:th
ese
wil
l d
epen
d o
n t
he
spec
ific
asp
ects
of
stru
ctu
ral
inte
grit
y ch
osen
for
eac
h s
elec
ted
bio
top
e
Th
e ta
rget
val
ue
for
the
broa
dsc
ale
dis
trib
uti
on o
f th
esa
nd
y an
d m
ud
dy
biot
opes
may
be
rep
rese
nte
d i
n t
he
form
of
a m
ap o
f th
e bi
otop
e d
istr
ibu
tion
or
as i
nd
icat
-ed
fro
m a
bro
adsc
ale
sam
pli
ng
grid
or
tran
sect
ser
ies
Exa
mp
le m
easu
re
Are
a (h
a) o
f th
e re
efs,
mea
sure
d p
erio
dic
ally
Var
iety
(ra
nge
) an
d d
istr
ibu
tion
(ap
pro
xim
ate
loca
-ti
on)
of b
ioto
pes
mea
sure
d d
uri
ng
late
sum
mer
/ear
ly a
utu
mn
, on
ce d
uri
ng
rep
orti
ng
cycl
e.
Pre
sen
ce a
nd
abu
nd
ance
of
char
acte
risi
ng
spec
ies,
mea
sure
d o
nce
du
rin
g re
por
tin
g cy
cle.
Abu
nd
ance
(%
cov
er)
of c
har
acte
rist
ic s
pon
gesp
ecie
s in
m2
quad
rats
alo
ng
two
tran
sect
s: m
eas-
ure
d t
wic
e d
uri
ng
rep
orti
ng
cycl
e
Are
a (h
a) m
easu
red
at
sam
e ti
me
du
rin
g th
e ye
ar,
once
du
rin
g th
e re
por
tin
g cy
cle
Th
ree
asp
ects
of
stru
ctu
ral
inte
grit
y h
ave
been
iden
tifi
ed f
or t
he
Mod
iolu
s m
odio
lus
reef
: 1)
con
tin
uit
y to
in
clu
de
the
area
, th
e p
erip
her
yra
tio
of t
he
reef
an
d/o
r t
he
inci
den
ce o
f sc
arin
g;2)
den
sity
/are
a co
vere
d b
y li
ve M
. mod
iolu
s; a
nd
3)
age
str
uct
ure
of
the
M. m
odio
lus
Pro
por
tion
s of
th
e m
ajor
com
mu
nit
ies
pre
sen
t in
des
crib
ed ‘z
ones
’ of
each
est
uar
y m
ay p
rovi
de
anap
pro
pri
ate
mea
sure
for
tar
get/
lim
it s
etti
ng
-
34 Marine Monitoring HandbookG
ener
ic a
ttri
bute
Ph
ysic
al s
tru
ctu
re
Con
cep
tual
att
ribu
te
Top
ogra
ph
y
Mor
ph
olog
ical
equ
ilib
riu
m(e
stu
arie
s on
ly)
Sed
imen
t ty
pe
and
sed
i-m
ent
stru
ctu
re
Wat
er q
ual
ity
(tem
per
atu
re, s
alin
ity,
nu
trie
nt
stat
us)
Wat
er c
lari
ty
Exa
mp
le a
ttri
bute
Bat
hym
etry
Mor
ph
olog
ical
equ
ilib
riu
m
Sed
imen
t ch
arac
ter
– gr
ain
size
Wat
er d
ensi
ty (
sali
nit
y an
dte
mp
erat
ure
)
Nu
trie
nt
stat
us
Wat
er c
lari
ty
Exa
mp
le t
arge
t
Dep
th d
istr
ibu
tion
sh
ould
not
dev
iate
sig
nif
ican
tly
from
an
est
abli
shed
bas
elin
e, s
ubj
ect
to n
atu
ral
chan
ge
No
sign
ific
ant
dev
iati
on f
rom
th
e in
tra-
an
d i
nte
r-
estu
arin
e T
P/C
S r
elat
ion
ship
, su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
Ave
rage
sed
imen
t p
aram
eter
s sh
ould
not
dev
iate
si
gnif
ican
tly
from
an
est
abli
shed
bas
elin
e, s
ubj
ect
ton
atu
ral
chan
ge
Ave
rage
den
sity
sh
ould
not
dev
iate
sig
nif
ican
tly
from
an e
stab
lish
ed b
asel
ine,
su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
No
sign
ific
ant
dev
iati
on f
rom
th
e es
tabl
ish
ed b
asel
ine,
subj
ect
to n
atu
ral
chan
ge
Ave
rage
lig
ht
atte
nu
atio
n s
hou
ld n
ot d
evia
te
sign
ific
antl
y fr
om a
n e
stab
lish
ed b
asel
ine,
su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
Exa
mp
le m
easu
re
Dep
th d
istr
ibu
tion
of
san
dba
nks
fro
m s
elec
ted
site
s, m
easu
red
per
iod
ical
ly
Tid
al P
rism
/Cro
ss-s
ecti
on r
atio
(T
P/C
S r
atio
), m
eas-
ure
d p
erio
dic
ally
Par
ticl
e si
ze a
nal
ysis
: par
amet
ers
incl
ud
e %
san
d/s
ilt/
grav
el, m
ean
an
d m
edia
n g
rain
siz
e an
dso
rtin
g co
-eff
icie
nt,
use
d t
o ch
arac
teri
se s
edim
ent
typ
e, m
easu
red
per
iod
ical
ly
Ave
rage
tem
per
atu
re a
nd
sal
init
y m
easu
red
per
iod
-ic
ally
in
th
e su
btid
al, t
hro
ugh
out
the
rep
orti
ng
cycl
e
Ave
rage
ph
ytop
lan
kton
con
cen
trat
ion
in
su
mm
er,
mea
sure
d a
nn
ual
ly
Ave
rage
lig
ht
atte
nu
atio
n m
easu
red
per
iod
ical
lyth
rou
ghou
t th
e re
por
tin
g cy
cle
-
Establishing monitoring programmes for marine features 35
Tabl
e 2-
2 A
sel
ectio
n of
attr
ibut
es fo
r m
arin
e A
nnex
II s
peci
es, t
oget
her
with
exa
mpl
es o
f how
they
hav
e be
en a
pplie
d to
a r
ange
of c
andi
date
SA
Cs
in th
e U
K. N
ote,
ther
e ar
e no
exam
ples
of t
he g
ener
ic a
ttrib
ute
‘pop
ulat
ion
stru
ctur
e’ m
entio
ned
in th
e pr
evio
us s
ectio
n.
Gen
eric
att
ribu
te
Qu
anti
ty
Pop
ula
tion
d
ynam
ics
Hab
itat
re
quir
emen
ts
Con
cep
tual
att
ribu
te
Pop
ula
tion
siz
e
Rec
ruit
men
t
Pop
ula
tion
via
bili
ty7
Gen
etic
div
ersi
ty
Are
a fo
r br
eed
ing
Ava
ilab
ilit
y of
hau
lou
tsi
tes
Are
a fo
r fe
edin
g
En
viro
nm
enta
l p
roce
sses
Exa
mp
le a
ttri
bute
Nu
mbe
r of
in
div
idu
als
Nu
mbe
rs o
f yo
un
g
Ad
ult
nu
mbe
rs
Ad
ult
sex
rat
ios
Gen
etic
div
ersi
ty
Ext
ent
of r
ocky
an
d c
oars
ese
dim
ent
shor
es
Dis
turb
ance
Ava
ilab
ilit
y of
foo
d (
fish
p
opu
lati
ons)
Wat
er q
ual
ity:
lev
els
of
nu
trie
nts
, pol
luta
nts
an
dp
ath
ogen
s
Exa
mp
le t
arge
t
No
sign
ific
ant
red
uct
ion
in
nu
mbe
rs f
rom
an
est
ab-
lish
ed b
asel
ine,
su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
No
sign
ific
ant
red
uct
ion
in
nu
mbe
rs o
f yo
un
g p
rod
uce
dfr
om a
n e
stab
lish
ed b
asel
ine,
su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
Mai
nta
in a
du
lt p
opu
lati
on
Mai
nta
in a
du
lt s
ex r
atio
s
Mai
nta
in g
enet
ic d
iver
sity
of
bree
din
g p
opu
lati
on
No
dec
reas
e in
ext
ent
from
an
est
abli
shed
bas
elin
e,su
bjec
t to
nat
ura
l ch
ange
No
incr
ease
in
act
ivit
ies
like
ly t
o ca
use
dis
turb
ance
En
sure
foo
d a
vail
abil
ity
is n
ot a
lim
itin
g fa
ctor
on
th
ep
opu
lati
on v
iabi
lity
of
dol
ph
ins
Att
ain
an
d m
ain
tain
a h
igh
wat
er q
ual
ity
stan
dar
d f
orth
e S
AC
Exa
mp
le m
easu
re
Cou
nt
nu
mbe
r of
sea
ls u
sin
g ae
rial
ph
otog
rap
hic
tech
niq
ues
Cou
nt
pu
ps
pro
du
ced
on
an
nu
al b
asis
or
on a
ver-
age
per
rep
orti
ng
cycl
e
Cou
nt
adu
lts
and
sex
rat
ios
to g
ain
an
ave
rage
per
rep
orti
ng
cycl
e
Per
iod
ic s
amp
lin
g of
gen
etic
mat
eria
l an
d u
se o
fD
NA
to
mea
sure
gen
etic
var
iabi
lity
8
Tota
l ar
ea (
ha)
, mea
sure
d o
nce
du
rin
g th
e re
por
tin
gcy
cle
Mon
itor
com
mer
cial
fis
h c
atch
es w
ith
in a
nd
ad
ja-
cen
t to
SA
C
Mea
sure
kn
own
nu
trie
nts
, pol
luta
nts
an
dp
ath
ogen
s w
ith
in t
he
SA
C
7A
viab
le p
opu
lati
on i
s co
nsi
der
ed a
sec
ure
an
d e
nd
uri
ng
pop
ula
tion
th
at i
s ab
le t
o su