Development and validation of a shipboard system for measuring high-resolution vertical profiles of aqueous dimethylsulfide concentrations using chemical ionization mass spectrometry

A sampling and analytical system has been developed for shipboard measurements of high-resolution vertical profiles of the marine trace gas dimethylsulfide (DMS). The system consists of a tube attached to a CTD with a peristaltic pump on deck that delivers seawater to a membrane equilibrator and atmospheric pressure chemical ionization mass spectrometer (Eq-APCIMS). This allows profiling DMS concentrations to a depth of 50 m, with a depth resolution of 1.3-2 m and a detection limit of nearly 0.1 nmol L-1. The seawater is also plumbed to allow parallel operation of additional continuous instruments, and simultaneous collection of discrete samples for complementary analyses. A valve alternates delivery of seawater from the vertical profiler and the ship�s underway intake, thereby providing high-resolution measurements in both the vertical and horizontal dimensions. Tests conducted on various cruises in the Mediterranean Sea, Atlantic, Indian, and Pacific Oceans show good agreement between the Eq-APCIMS measurements and purge and trap gas chromatography with flame photometric detection (GC-FPD) and demonstrate that the delivery of seawater from the underway pump did not significantly affect endogenous DMS concentrations. Combination of the continuous flow DMS analysis with high-frequency hydrographic, optical, biological and meteorological measurements will greatly improve the spatial/temporal resolution of seagoing measurements and improve our understanding of DMS cycling.

A methodology for the assessment of local-scale changes in marine environmental benefits and its application

Local-scale planning decisions are required by the existing Environmental Impact Assessment process to take account of the implications of a development on a range of environmental and social factors, and could therefore be supported by an ecosystem services approach. However, empirical assessments at a local scale within the marine environment have focused on only a single or limited set of services. This paper tests the applicability of the ecosystem services approach to environmental impact appraisal by considering how the identification and quantification of a comprehensive suite of benefits provided at a local scale might proceed in practice. A methodology for conducting an Environmental Benefits Assessment (EBA) is proposed, the underlying framework for which follows the recent literature by placing the emphasis on ecosystem benefits, as opposed to services. The EBA methodology also proposes metrics that can be quantified at local scale, and is tested using a case study of a hypothetical tidal barrage development in the Taw Torridge estuary in North Devon, UK. By suggesting some practical steps for assessing environmental benefits, this study aims to stimulate discussion and so advance the development of methods for implementing ecosystem service approaches at a local scale.

The potential use of mapped extent and distribution of habitats as indicators of Good Environmental Status (GES)

The Healthy and Biologically Diverse Seas Evidence Group (HBDSEG) has been tasked with providing the technical advice for the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) with respect to descriptors linked to biodiversity. A workshop was held in London to address one of the Research and Development (R&D) proposals entitled: ‘Mapping the extent and distribution of habitats using acoustic and remote techniques, relevant to indicators for area/extent/habitat loss.’ The aim of the workshop was to identify, define and assess the feasibility of potential indicators of benthic habitat distribution and extent, and identify the R&D work which could be required to fully develop these indicators. The main points that came out of the workshop were: (i) There are many technical aspects of marine habitat mapping that still need to be resolved if cost-effective spatial indicators are to be developed. Many of the technical aspects that need addressing surround issues of consistency, confidence and repeatability. These areas should be tackled by the JNCC Habitat Mapping and Classification Working Group and the HBDSEG Seabed Mapping Working Group. (ii) There is a need for benthic ecologists (through the HBDSEG Benthic Habitats Subgroup and the JNCC Marine Indicators Group) to finalise the list of habitats for which extent and/or distribution indicators should be considered for development, building upon the recommendations from this report. When reviewing the list of indicators, benthic habitats could also be distinguished into those habitats that are defined/determined primarily by physical parameters (although including biological assemblages) (e.g. subtidal shallow sand) and those defined primarily by their biological assemblage (e.g. seagrass beds). This distinction is important as some anthropogenic pressures may influence the biological component of the ecosystem despite not having a quantifiable effect on the physical habitat distribution/extent. (iii) The scale and variety of UK benthic habitats makes any attempt to undertake comprehensive direct mapping exercises prohibitively expensive (especially where there is a need for repeat surveys for assessment). There is a clear need therefore to develop a risk-based approach that uses indirect indicators (e.g. modelling), such as habitats at risk from pressures caused by current human activities, to develop priorities for information gathering. The next steps that came out of the workshop were: (i) A combined approach should be developed by the JNCC Marine Indicators Group together with the HBDSEG Benthic Habitats Subgroup, which will compile and ultimately synthesise all the criteria used by the three different groups from the workshop. The agreed combined approach will be used to undertake a final review of the habitats considered during the workshop, and to evaluate any remaining habitats in order to produce a list of habitats for indicator development for which extent and/or distribution indicators could be appropriate. (ii) The points of advice raised at this workshop, alongside the combined approach aforementioned, and the final list of habitats for extent and/or distribution indicator development will be used to develop a prioritised list of actions to inform the next round of R&D proposals for benthic habitat indicator development in 2014. This will be done through technical discussions within JNCC and the relevant HBDSEG Subgroups. The preparation of recommendations by these groups should take into account existing work programmes, and consider the limited resources available to undertake any further R&D work.

High Level Environmental Screening Study for Offshore Wind Farm Developments – Marine Habitats and Species Project

High level environmental screening study for offshore wind farm developments – marine habitats and species This report provides an awareness of the environmental issues related to marine habitats and species for developers and regulators of offshore wind farms. The information is also relevant to other offshore renewable energy developments. The marine habitats and species considered are those associated with the seabed, seabirds, and sea mammals. The report concludes that the following key ecological issues should be considered in the environmental assessment of offshore wind farms developments: • likely changes in benthic communities within the affected area and resultant indirect impacts on fish, populations and their predators such as seabirds and sea mammals; • potential changes to the hydrography and wave climate over a wide area, and potential changes to coastal processes and the ecology of the region; • likely effects on spawning or nursery areas of commercially important fish and shellfish species; • likely effects on mating and social behaviour in sea mammals, including migration routes; • likely effects on feeding water birds, seal pupping sites and damage of sensitive or important intertidal sites where cables come onshore; • potential displacement of fish, seabird and sea mammals from preferred habitats; • potential effects on species and habitats of marine natural heritage importance; • potential cumulative effects on seabirds, due to displacement of flight paths, and any mortality from bird strike, especially in sensitive rare or scarce species; • possible effects of electromagnetic fields on feeding behaviour and migration, especially in sharks and rays, and • potential marine conservation and biodiversity benefits of offshore wind farm developments as artificial reefs and 'no-take' zones. The report provides an especially detailed assessment of likely sensitivity of seabed species and habitats in the proposed development areas. Although sensitive to some of the factors created by wind farm developments, they mainly have a high recovery potential. The way in which survey data can be linked to Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) sensitivity assessments to produce maps of sensitivity to factors is demonstrated. Assessing change to marine habitats and species as a result of wind farm developments has to take account of the natural variability of marine habitats, which might be high especially in shallow sediment biotopes. There are several reasons for such changes but physical disturbance of habitats and short-term climatic variability are likely to be especially important. Wind farm structures themselves will attract marine species including those that are attached to the towers and scour protection, fish that associate with offshore structures, and sea birds (especially sea duck) that may find food and shelter there. Nature conservation designations especially relevant to areas where wind farm might be developed are described and the larger areas are mapped. There are few designated sites that extend offshore to where wind farms are likely to be developed. However, cable routes and landfalls may especially impinge on designated sites. The criteria that have been developed to assess the likely marine natural heritage importance of a location or of the habitats and species that occur there can be applied to survey information to assess whether or not there is anything of particular marine natural heritage importance in a development area. A decision tree is presented that can be used to apply ‘duty of care’ principles to any proposed development. The potential ‘gains’ for the local environment are explored. Wind farms will enhance the biodiversity of areas, could act as refugia for fish, and could be developed in a way that encourages enhancement of fish stocks including shellfish.

Making modelling count - increasing the contribution of shelf-seas community and ecosystem models to policy development and management

Marine legislation is becoming more complex and marine ecosystem-based management is specified in national and regional legislative frameworks. Shelf-seas community and ecosystem models (hereafter termed ecosystem models) are central to the delivery of ecosystem-based management, but there is limited uptake and use of model products by decision makers in Europe and the UK in comparison with other countries. In this study, the challenges to the uptake and use of ecosystem models in support of marine environmental management are assessed using the UK capability as an example. The UK has a broad capability in marine ecosystem modelling, with at least 14 different models that support management, but few examples exist of ecosystem modelling that underpin policy or management decisions. To improve understanding of policy and management issues that can be addressed using ecosystem models, a workshop was convened that brought together advisors, assessors, biologists, social scientists, economists, modellers, statisticians, policy makers, and funders. Some policy requirements were identified that can be addressed without further model development including: attribution of environmental change to underlying drivers, integration of models and observations to develop more efficient monitoring programmes, assessment of indicator performance for different management goals, and the costs and benefit of legislation. Multi-model ensembles are being developed in cases where many models exist, but model structures are very diverse making a standardised approach of combining outputs a significant challenge, and there is a need for new methodologies for describing, analysing, and visualising uncertainties. A stronger link to social and economic systems is needed to increase the range of policy-related questions that can be addressed. It is also important to improve communication between policy and modelling communities so that there is a shared understanding of the strengths and limitations of ecosystem models.