BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT MCZ

1. BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT 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. • 12 Responses (6 short, 6 full) • 9 out of 12 respondents indicated they were from North Devon • Sector affiliation shown below:

4. 1 38 2 37 3 36 4 35 BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT SAC Responses Criteria number No response Mean score ≥50% unsure Creation Pioneer Self-sufficient 5 34 6 33 • BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT MCZ 34% Creation Pioneer Self-sufficient 32 8 7 31 9 12 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 BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT SAC Responses Criteria number No response Mean score ≥50% unsure Set up Plans & management Involving people Decision making Resources Monitoring Results 3 31 5 • BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT MCZ 34% Creation Pioneer Self-sufficient 23 7 37 12 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? …BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT MCZ SET UP

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

14. Do you have any thoughts or ideas on how MPAs could be set up more successfully? “The present processes are necessary to allow all stakeholders to heave representation.” “Greater academic input from universities, the MBA etc.” …BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT MCZ SET UP “The MCZ process was flawed in three main ways: 1. It used the Ecological Network Guidance as a prescriptive tool and that tool was developed to satisfy the scientifically indefensible goal of an 'ecologically coherent network'. 2. Commercial interests were brought to the fore very early in the process and experienced scientists were generally not able to contribute substantially (sometimes because of lack of availability). 3. Any deviation (that may have been meaningful) form the ENG was not permitted.” “From an early meeting I recall that we were unsure what the objective was so it was difficult to identify a pathway. I am still unsure what the ultimate goal is.” Two further responses in the notes section below…..

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

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

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

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

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

23. Do you have any thoughts or comments on how management plans and site objectives could be improved? “Co-production of knowledge, measures, communications and benefits.” “I don't even know if a final plan is in existence, maybe I need to find time to do more research!” “It’s become glaringly obvious over the years that IFCA’s are NOT there to help the fishing industry or listen to their concerns. Indeed, their agenda appears to be quite the opposite. They criminalise our fishermen and seem only interested in prosecutions. They certainly don’t work alongside the industry which is vital for a sustainable fishery. Trust within the Industry towards the local IFCA’s is at an all time low. Most of them seem to comprise of graduates with a marine biology degree who know nothing about the fishing industry and who operate with their own green agenda regardless of the socio-economic costs to the fishing industry. Conservation needs to be more proportionate, something our IFCA’s appear to have little interest in achieving.” “Conservation advice packages and condition assessments of sites should be produced by Natural England. They are the starting blocks for management plans. Lack of resources and funding hinders the productions of such products.” …BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT MCZ PLANS & MANAGEMENT “Yes. Are these processes underway, if so by whom and to whom are they reporting, could they include local interest groups and the media.” “The well-established hierarchy of goal(s), objectives, tasks in a management plan need to be addressed and populated.” One further response in the notes section below….. “I would like to know more when its finished.”

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

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

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

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

28. Do you have any thoughts or comments on how we could better involve people in MPA management? “Tell them about it, the who what where why and when. Guide them about options, don't assume we know anything about what's been going on, most don't.” “Public awareness of marine protected areas is a major issue. There is not enough awareness of the existence of sites. If people knew the sites were there then they would be more inclined to show an interest in how they are managed.” “Better interpretation. Engage with groups that are regularly engaging with the public ie. National Trust, AONB, Biosphere, interest groups and give us tools to engage better with the public. This could be videos for social media, interpretation displays in educational centres etc.” …BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT MCZ INVOLVING PEOPLE “Get this linked up with all the other marine and tourism groups.” “Criteria 29 - hard to say, although I suspect few stakeholders feel ownership or responsibility for the MPA.” “Run stakeholder engagement events to discuss the progress of the MPA's in North Devon around the implementation cycle (designation, management, monitoring).” “Co-production, co-management and co-creation of ideas surrounding future plans for the MPA.” “Sessions in various places are a good idea but awareness needs to be heightened.” “Scheme(s) to endorse the activities of commercial organisations that play an active role within the MCZ - either as users or promoters - endorsement schemes.” “Listen to fishermen and learn from their knowledge.”

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

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

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

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

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

34. Do you have any thoughts or comments on how we could improve decision making? “An MCZ authority is needed for each MCZ. That 'authority' may be one or several existing statutory authorities. It is informed by 'a user group'. It has a process for receiving reports (monitoring etc.) and other submissions and feeding those into adaptive management. It is able to commission studies and monitoring to inform adaptive management based on the objectives developed.” …HARTLAND POINT TO TINTAGEL MCZ DECISION MAKING “Too many agencies involved. One stop shop access to decisions etc, charged with publicising outcomes & raising public awareness.” “Criteri156 - while those in the fishing industry are likely aware of the relevant IFCA byelaws, it is unlikely that those in other sectors (e.g. tourism, recreation) are aware of the designation or its impacts on them (and vice versa). a Criteria 30 - once again, hard to say but presume this is the case.” “IFCA’s need a governing body. At the moment they investigate themselves.” “Make them more visual and apparent to visitors and locals.” “IFCA? Biosphere? Not sure who is 'in charge' really.”

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

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

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

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

39. Do you have any thoughts or comments on how MPA management could be better resourced? “Management needs to be supported by staff with relevant knowledge and experience of the ecology and special features of the area. If not available, that information needs to be obtained. Financially, there may be subscription schemes but, really, management needs to be resourced through Government organisations.” “Criteria 25 - there are no dedicated staff to this site, although I'm sure the staff of individual organisations are well skilled in their own sphere. The only UK designations I am aware of that have resulted in staff being employed to directly manage are NNRs and Natura 2000 sites. Where staff are employed to directly manage the sites and enforce the designation, it generally results in a better environmental outcome.” …BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT MCZ RESOURCES “The IFCA and Natural England need more staff and access to inshore survey vessels and equipment to carry out effective monitoring and enforcement.” “There are so many small groups all doing similar rolls in North Devon and they need to be under one umbrella.” “My understanding is that people are currently poached from other organizations but I don't really know.” “Devon and Severn IFCA need more staff to police these sites.”

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

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

43. 23. Is enforcement of management rules undertaken? …BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT MCZ MONITORING

44. Do you have any thoughts or comments on how marine protected areas could be monitored better? “Criteria 27-28 - the IFCA monitor some fishing activity and I believe there is some environmental monitoring done periodically. Criteria 37 - there is no management plan Criteria 23 - there is no mgt plan although IFCA do enforce their byelaws.” “Presumably IFCAS is the main agency at work here but hardly relevant to inter-tidal MCZ, & we lack any local marine expertise to lead and promote drive for monitoring.” …BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT MCZ MONITORING “Proactive surveillance, iVMS being rolled out and stakeholder engagement increased to promote trust and increase reporting of infringements.” “Are you serious? Fishing vessels are tracked, monitored and prosecuted on a regular basis, even if the evidence is spurious to say the least.” “'Monitoring' should include quality (biodiversity features), compliance and governance.”

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

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

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

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

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

50. Do you have any thoughts or ideas on how we could achieve better results? “Criteria 31 - there is no mgt plan and no clear objectives. It is unlikely the site is in favourable condition as it was only recently designated with 'recover' GMAs included. Criteria 33 - there are no clear objectives. However it has changed some fishing activity (e.g. that affecting spiny lobster) which is an important impact of the designation. Criteria 34 - this question is unclear - the designation is moving things in a good direction in terms of environmental protection (e.g. limiting take of spiny lobster) although hard to say in terms of broader 'effect’.” …BIDEFORD TO FORELAND POINT MCZ RESULTS “Diving in the MPA is as good as it ever was I have noticed no improvement or deterioration in sites dived on an annual basis.” “The questions are comprehensive and cover a large range of aspects, so to collate a good overall picture will require participation by a range of organisational representatives.” “Yes start work on the MPA and publicise it.” “Communication regarding value and the success of the MPA is largely undertaken in relation to whether (or not) conservation and management objectives are being achieved.”