Impact of human activities on benthic biotopes and species

Executive Summary 1. The Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) has been developed since 1998. Defra funding has supported a core part of its work, the Biology and Sensitivity Key Information Sub-programme. This report relates to Biology and Sensitivity work for the period 2001-2004. 2. MarLIN Biology and Sensitivity research takes information on the biology of species to identify the likely effects of changing environmental conditions linked to human activities on those species. In turn, species that are key functional, key structural, dominant, or characteristic in a biotope (the habitat and its associated species) are used to identify biotope sensitivity. Results are displayed over the World Wide Web and can be accessed via a range of search tools that make the information of relevance to environmental management. 3. The first Defra contract enabled the development of criteria and methods of research, database storage methods and the research of a wide range of species. A contract from English Nature and Scottish Natural Heritage enabled biotopes relevant to marine SACs to be researched. 4. Defra funding in 2001-2004 has especially enabled recent developments to be targeted for research. Those developments included the identification of threatened and declining species by the OSPAR Biodiversity Committee, the development of a new approach to defining sensitivity (part of the Review of Marine Nature Conservation), and the opportunity to use Geographical Information Systems (GIS) more effectively to link survey data to MarLIN assessments of sensitivity. 5. The MarLIN database has been developed to provide a resource to 'pick-and-mix' information depending on the questions being asked. Using GIS, survey data that provides locations for species and biotopes has been linked to information researched by MarLIN to map the likely sensitivity of an area to a specified factor. Projects undertaken for the Irish Sea pilot (marine landscapes), in collaboration with CEFAS (fishing impacts) and with the Countryside Council for Wales (oil spill response) have demonstrated the application of MarLIN information linked to survey data in answering, through maps, questions about likely impacts of human activities on seabed ecosystems. 6. GIS applications that use MarLIN sensitivity information give meaningful results when linked to localized and detailed survey information (lists of species and biotopes as point source or mapped extents). However, broad landscape units require further interpretation. 7. A new mapping tool (SEABED map) has been developed to display data on species distributions and survey data according to search terms that might be used by an environmental manager. 8. MarLIN outputs are best viewed on the Web site where the most up-to-date information from live databases is available. The MarLIN Web site receives about 1600 visits a day. 9. The MarLIN approach to assessing sensitivity and its application to environmental management were presented in papers at three international conferences during the current contract and a 'touchstone' paper is to be published in the peer-reviewed journal Hydrobiologia. The utility of MarLIN information for environmental managers, amongst other sorts of information, has been described in an article in Marine Pollution Bulletin. 10. MarLIN information is being used to inform the identification of potential indicator species for implementation of the Water Framework Directive including initiatives by ICES. 11. Non-Defra funding streams are supporting the updating of reviews and increasing the amount of peer review undertaken; both of which are important to the maintenance of the resource. However, whilst MarLIN information is sufficiently wide ranging to be used in an 'operational' way for marine environmental protection and management, new initiatives and the new biotopes classification have introduced additional species and biotopes that will need to be researched in the future. 12. By the end of the contract, the Biology and Sensitivity Key Information database contained full Key Information reviews on 152 priority species and 117 priority biotopes, together with basic information on 412 species; a total of 564 marine benthic species.

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.