HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ

1. HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ November 2018

2. THE COMPASS 1 Identify important areas for species & habitats 2 Identify stakeholders & their interests 3 Set up stakeholder participation process 4 Assess condition of important areas for species & habitats 5 Create socio-economic baseline 6 Identify pressures impacting species & habitats 7 Set MPA boundary based on areas of ecological importance 8 Establish zoning for activities 9 Establish management rules for zoned areas 10 Create a management body to set and monitor strategy 11 Create a management committee to implement the strategy 12 Establish environmental MPA objectives 13 Established socio-economic MPA objectives 14 Identify benefit sharing rules 15 Develop alternatives for displaced activities 16 Create clear lines of responsibility for governance 17 Ensure the MPA has legal status 18 Publicly communicate about the MPA 19 Support an active & inclusive stakeholder engagement process 20 Develop a management plan 21 Ensure adequate MPA staff 22 Ensure adequate infrastructures and equipment 23 Enforce management rules 24 Create a business plan fund long-term MPA management 25 Capacity build skills needed to run the MPA 26 Create education programme linked to MPA objectives 27 Monitor biological, social and economic factors 28 Monitor management activities against performance 29 Build a sense of responsibility for the MPA by stakeholders 30 Demonstrate the authorities take responsibility for the MPA 31 Effectively implement the management plan 32 Sustain & build on community involvement 33 Demonstrate that MPA is achieving objectives 34 Demonstrate that MPA is improving ecological condition 35 Demonstrate that MPA is providing socio-economic benefits 36 Report progress to the community 37 Update management plan/rules based on monitoring data 38 Create sustainable income stream to cover management costs WWF’s UK SEAS project is all about trying to improve how marine protected areas (MPAs) in the UK are managed. We hope to do this by testing new approaches to management in our case study areas in North Devon (with the North Devon Marine Pioneer) and in the Outer Hebrides. The first step in that journey is to understand how they are being managed at the moment, to gather baseline information on where we are doing really well, and where we could focus energy on improving. The Compass survey forms part of that baseline assessment. It’s a pretty neat technique. SELF-SUFFICIENT PHASE Progress is measured using 38 criteria that cover a range of management issues including things like setting objectives, collecting information, creating plans, involving stakeholders and monitoring etc. Each criteria is scored out of 3, from 0 = it is not being done, to 3 = it is being done really well. The criteria are arranged around the outside of the compass. The stages and criteria may vary somewhat from one MPA to the next, however to achieve effective MPA management all of them need to be considered at some point. A quick look at the results will tell you what stage the MPA is at (creation, pioneer or self-sufficiency) and what the MPA is doing well on and what it needs to improve. The tool can be used to track the course of MPA development over time and help managers with day-to-day organisation of their MPA by filling in the progress made year after year. CREATION PHASE The Compass divides the process of establishing an MPA into three stages: The “Creation phase”: In the UK we would call that the ‘designation process’. This involves gathering all the data needed and working with stakeholders to develop management rules. The “Pioneer phase”: The pioneer phase is when management becomes operational and the management team starts monitoring and building programmes to support delivery of the objectives. The “Self-sufficiency phase”: By this point the MPA is well on the way to technical, organisational and financial self-sufficiency and the environmental and social benefits of the MPA are being felt. PIONEER PHASE

3. STEPS RESPONSES Original compass criteria edited to better reflect UK situation. Four ‘graduated’ answer categories created for each criterion. A full and a shorter version of the survey designed using SurveyMonkey. Online survey link sent to 120 contacts on the UKSEAS database and advertised on the CMS listserv in Aug 2018. Survey open for 2 months & reminders sent twice. Local meetings attended to encourage participation from key stakeholders. Data downloaded and analysed using excel. Mean scores added to compass. • 3 Responses (1 short, 2 full) • 2 out of 3 respondents indicated they were from North Devon • Sector affiliation shown below:

4. 1 38 2 37 3 36 4 35 HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ Responses Criteria number No response Mean score ≥50% unsure Creation Pioneer Self-sufficient 5 34 6 33 • HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ 27% Creation Pioneer Self-sufficient 32 8 7 31 9 3 30 1 10 1 29 11 28 12 27 13 26 14 25 15 24 16 23 17 18 22 19 21 20

5. 1 4 36 35 6 34 2 33 HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ Responses Criteria number No response Mean score ≥50% unsure Set up Plans & management Involving people Decision making Resources Monitoring Results 3 31 5 • HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ 27% Creation Pioneer Self-sufficient 23 7 37 3 17 1 28 1 20 27 12 38 13 25 24 22 8 21 9 14 15 11 26 10 18 30 19 16 32 29

6. 1. Were areas important for species and habitats of conservation value identified? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ SET UP

7. 4. Was the condition of important areas for species and habitats established? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ SET UP

8. 6. Were the pressures identified that impact important areas for species and habitats? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ SET UP

9. 2. Were stakeholders and their interests identified? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ SET UP

10. 3. Was a stakeholder participation process established? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ SET UP

11. 5. Was a socio-economic baseline report produced? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ SET UP

12. 7. Was the MPA boundary based on important areas of ecological interest …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ SET UP

13. 17. Does the protected area have legal status? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ SET UP

14. Do you have any thoughts or ideas on how MPAs could be set up more successfully? “Defra dropped the ball during the regional Finding Sanctuary process. They should have allowed the regional stakeholder groups to set management measures post identification of sites. This never happened, people got jaded, site designation has therefore meant little, and interest and support has therefore waned. Poor work by Defra when Finding Sanctuary was doing so well (up until 2010). Let stakeholders be supported by finance to more fully integrate with regulators (e.g. IFCAs) in decision making. Also make sure that the input of stakeholders is balanced (not biased towards those who shout loudest),and ensure that civil society that don't use the sea that much is also factored into decision-making process. Furthermore, enable funding of economic modelling of scenarios of management. For example, if trawling is banned, and potting and gill-netting allowed, what are the economic ramifications. What also are the tourism benefits of bag limits for recreational angling? Are there economic benefits that arise from such measures. etc. i.e. Don’t (as is the current case) create depressing economic impact assessments of management decisions based on economic loss of restriction, but instead balance this with the gain for those that will be enabled to use the site, and benefit from greater biological richness at the site.” …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ SET UP “They should be seen as a whole not a set of features.”

15. 20. Does the protected area have a management plan? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ PLANS & MANAGEMENT

16. 12. Does the MPA have objectives that consider environmental factors? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ PLANS & MANAGEMENT

17. 13. Does the MPA have objectives that consider socio-economic factors? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ PLANS & MANAGEMENT

18. 24. Does the MPA have a business plan describing how income can be generated to deliver the MPA objectives in the long term? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ PLANS & MANAGEMENT

19. 8. Does the protected area have well-defined spatial units (zones) that direct the type, location and/or time of allowable human activities? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ PLANS & MANAGEMENT

20. 9. Does the protected area have management in place for each zone as appropriate to meet the site's objectives as a whole? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ PLANS & MANAGEMENT

21. 15. Have alternative income generating activities been considered to compensate for displacement of damaging activities in the MPA? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ PLANS & MANAGEMENT

22. 26. Is there a planned education programme linked to the site's objectives and needs? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ PLANS & MANAGEMENT

23. Do you have any thoughts or comments on how management plans and site objectives could be improved? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ PLANS & MANAGEMENT “Start by doing one!”

24. 18. Are people aware of the MPA? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ INVOLVING PEOPLE

25. 19. Do deliberate (active and inclusive) opportunities for people to be involved in decision making exist? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ INVOLVING PEOPLE

26. 32. How satisfied are you with your involvement with MPA management? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ INVOLVING PEOPLE

27. 29. Do you think stakeholders feel a sense of responsibility for the MPA? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ INVOLVING PEOPLE

28. Do you have any thoughts or comments on how we could better involve people in MPA management? “Use the Community Voice Method.” …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ INVOLVING PEOPLE “Make it more interesting - help general public to understand their purpose.” “Public newsletter.”

29. 16. Is responsibility for the governance of the MPA clear? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ DECISION MAKING

30. 30. Do the relevant authorities take responsibility for the MPA? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ DECISION MAKING

31. 10. Does a management body exist that is empowered to set the MPA’s strategy, objectives and overall direction? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ DECISION MAKING

32. 11. Does a management committee exist that implements the strategy? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ DECISION MAKING

33. 14. MPAs generate "benefits" e.g. fish and recreational opportunities.  Were rules identified to help share access to these benefits? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ DECISION MAKING

34. Do you have any thoughts or comments on how we could improve decision making? “MMO does regulation and major industry licensing. It works reactively. IFCA does fisheries, and probably (given track record of Cornwall/Devon IFCAs) do it pro-actively and well with fisheries stakeholders. However, the MMO is really poor when it comes to regulating recreational activities that damage habitats that are rare or threatened inside OR outside MPAs (such as seagrass beds).” …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ DECISION MAKING

35. 21. Are there enough people employed to manage the site? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ RESOURCES

36. 22. Is the infrastructure and equipment needed to manage the site available? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ RESOURCES

37. 25. Do staff have the skills and training needed? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ RESOURCES

38. 38. Is there long term funding for the full cost of the MPA and its management/operating costs? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ RESOURCES

39. Do you have any thoughts or comments on how MPA management could be better resourced? “Tax the users of the sites. Car park fees to marine management. Boat access fees to marine management. Fishing, ports and other fees to marine management. We tax for many things, but not use and protection of the marine environment. IFCAs are too stretched, and need further capital and personal capacity to monitor activities at sea. LAs could do with wardens that monitor terrestrial access, and use by recreational users.” …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ RESOURCES “I'm a little unsure about what you mean by infrastructure and also staff - if staff is IFCA, MMO etc, I wouldn't have a clue if they've performed a capacity assessment.”

40. 27. Are biological, social and economic factors monitored which could be used in management? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ MONITORING

41. 28. Are management activities monitored against performance by those responsible for the management? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ MONITORING

42. 37. Has the management plan/rules for the protected area been reviewed and updated based on monitoring of the plan's progress? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ MONITORING

43. 23. Is enforcement of management rules undertaken? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ MONITORING

44. Do you have any thoughts or comments on how marine protected areas could be monitored better? “Use stakeholders that use the MPAs: Fishers, divers, surfers, etc.” …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ MONITORING “Q37 (reviewing the management rules) and Q23 (enforcing management rules) [Previously 48 and 49] haven't really started for this MPA yet as far as I'm aware. I can't really answer this. Ask the IFCA and NE.”

45. 31. Is the protected area meeting its objectives/in good condition, thanks to the implementation of the management plan or rules? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ RESULTS

46. 33. Is the MPA achieving its objectives (whether it has a management plan or not) …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ RESULTS

47. 34. Is the MPA delivering improved ecological effects? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ RESULTS

48. 35. Has the MPA generated any *socio-economic benefits?*Things like culture, jobs and recreational use …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ RESULTS

49. 36. Are the benefits of the MPA reported to the community? …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ RESULTS

50. Do you have any thoughts or ideas on how we could achieve better results? “The situation with this - and many MPAs speaks for itself. Indeed, one IFCA chief once put it to me that we need to 'operationalise' our MPAs. i.e. show they are working, doing something for someone, or something. That has happened in a few 'key' MPAs, and we need these geographically and politically selected such that the efforts of the 'node' or 'key' MPAs can spill-over into adjacent areas (perhaps). i.e. every 500km of coast 'needs a Lundy’.” …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ RESULTS