Latest Newsletter

Documents marked need
Adobe Reader to view. In the unlikely event that it is not on your computer, it is available free of charge from:-

This page is validated to XHTML 1.0

This page is validated to CSS

Marine Bill Conference Report

This is a report of a Coastal Futures conference on the public consultation and preparation for a draft Marine Bill. This report looks first at the key issues and subjects which the Marine Bill is expected to deal with; and then, secondly, at the unresolved issues which confront the drafting of this Bill.

The conference was held in London on 25th October 2005 and was attended by officials from all main government departments (DEFRA, ODPM, DTI), agencies (Environment Agency, English Nature, CEFAS) and a host of other organisations, such as Sea Fishery Committees and Fishermen's Organisations, Marine Conservation Society, The Wildlife Trusts and environmental consultants.

The draft Marine Bill.

The Government has announced that it is to issue the draft of a Marine Bill in November 2006, and is currently going through a process of consulting upon and deciding what issues the Bill should address, and how these issues should be tackled. This Bill has been widely trailed by the Government, and is regarded as a once in a decade opportunity to secure major legislation in this area. The draft Bill will then be the subject of further consultation, and will be introduced as an actual Bill sometime in the second half of the present Parliament (i.e. 2007/08).

The issues which the Bill is expected to address are:

1. Marine spatial planning (MSP)
2. Integrated coastal zone management (ICZM)
3. Consents and licences
4. Fisheries management
5. Marine nature conservation, including Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)
6. A marine management organisation (MMO)

Briefly, a word about each of the above:

1: Marine Spatial Planning.

Marine spatial planning (MSP) means a planning system for the sea and its potential human uses. In a sense, it is analogous to the planning system on land. However a marine planning system will be different because the sea is not like the land. Apart from the fact that we do not live there, our knowledge of the nature of the sea and its resources is greatly more limited than our knowledge of the terrestrial world. This restricts our ability to determine planning priorities and uses, and thus to make firm decisions.

Nevertheless it is widely believed that a marine planning system needs to be introduced, and that such a planning system would need to take account of the following:

1. EU and international laws, such as the Water Framework Directive, the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive (SEA), and the Oslo/Paris Convention (OSPAR).
2. The needs of the marine ecosystem.
3. The location of various resources (e.g. aggregates, fisheries, oil and gas and so forth).
4. The need for a coherent mapping of uses and resources.
5. The need for a means by which to determine and licence the various uses of the sea and to resolve conflicts.

The concept of marine spatial planning is both new and fluid. It is therefore difficult to define precisely. However government has been experimenting with the concept in relation to the Irish Sea, and has been undertaking a research project known as the Irish Sea Pilot. This work attempts to bring together information on all of the items listed above, and also attempts to see whether they can be assembled into a workable framework for effective planning and decision-making (i.e. where resources are located, and where to permit certain activities or to prohibit them).

Further details about the Irish Sea Pilot can be seen at www.abpmer.co.uk/mspp and the Irish Sea Draft Regional Plan at the above website.

2: Integrated Coastal Zone Management.

Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) is not a policy as such, but rather a concept. Its purpose is to connect and integrate planning and decisions on the use of the coastal zone i.e. the area roughly 10km either side of high water. In other words, ICZM attempts to improve how we manage our activities on land with regard to their effects on the sea, and vice versa.

The concept, which is essentially a planning tool, has been described a "zipper" between land and sea, and it is generally believed that when marine and terrestrial policies are integrated, or "zipped together", the environment should be regarded as being of primary concern.

It is expected that a Marine Bill will recognise Integrated Coastal Zone Management as a key planning tool, and thus be part of the wider planning framework that is involved in the concept Marine Spatial Planning.

3: Consents and Licences.

The system for consents and licences to pursue development and/or activities involving the sea is currently complex and fragmented e.g. some activities need 3 or more consents, and each of these may have to be obtained from different Government Departments and/or Devolved Administrations.

There is therefore a need for a regulatory system that is efficient, transparent, and easy for people to understand. Such a system should mesh with a need for an ecosystem approach to planning. The ecosystem approach has been defined as:

"An ecosystem-based approach to management represents a new and more strategic way of thinking. It puts the emphasis on a management regime that maintains the health of ecosystems alongside appropriate human use of the marine environment, for the benefit of current and future generations. This requires setting clear environmental objectives both at the general and specific level, basing management of the marine environment on the principles of sustainable development, conservation of biodiversity, robust science, the precautionary principle and stakeholder involvement." Ref, DEFRA, Safeguarding Our Seas, section 1.17.

For further details of the publication, Safeguarding Our Seas: A strategy for the conservation and sustainable development of our marine environment, published by DEFRA, May 2002, see: www.defra.gov.uk/environment/water/marine/uk/stewardship/

4: Fisheries Management.

Fisheries Management involves Inshore Fisheries which extend out to 6 nautical miles from the shore and they are managed by the Sea Fishery Committees, organised on a regional basis (12 in all); and, Offshore Fisheries which extend out to 200 nautical miles (managed by DEFRA).

The Coastal Futures conference only considered Inshore Fisheries, although it was argued by some representatives that the jurisdiction of the Sea Fishery Committees should extend to 12 nautical miles and this should be addressed by the Marine Bill.

This present report by MARINET will address both inshore and offshore fisheries.

a) Inshore Fisheries:

Inshore waters around the UK coast contain some of the most valuable fisheries and fragile ecosystems. Fishing in these waters has greatly increased, but the integration of the management of these fisheries and marine nature conservation has yet to be fully realised.

This has led both to degradation of the ecosystem as well as lost potential for the fishing industry due to unsustainable practices.

A Marine Bill needs to provide a legislative framework where the aims and objectives of the inshore fisheries managers (Sea Fishery Committees or their successors) are clarified, made more proactive towards the ecosystem method of management, and properly funded. It has also been argued that the jurisdiction of these managers should extend from 6 to 12 nautical miles.

These issues are enlarged upon in a Report by the Prime Minister's Strategy Unit, March 2004, titled Net Benefits: a sustainable and profitable future for UK fishing, see: www.strategy.gov.uk/downloads/su/fish/index.htm

b) Offshore Fisheries:

Although not discussed at this conference, offshore fisheries and their impact on the marine environment are of vital importance, both as an economic resource for the UK and in terms of marine conservation. The area under the UK jurisdiction extends to 200 nautical miles, although the fishery itself is covered by the EU Common Fishery Policy and is open to other EU countries.

Most of the offshore fisheries in the UK marine economic zone (200 nautical miles) are either in a state of collapse due to over-fishing or are experiencing severe pressure. This is largely due to the EU Common Fishery Policy (which allows other EU countries to intensively fish within the UK marine economic zone of 200 nautical miles) and the CAP policy of quotas which results in the "by-catch problem" whereby large numbers of mature and immature fish are returned to sea dead (the "by-catch" sometimes being in excess of 50% of the actual catch). Intensive fishing and trawling also damages both the seabed and the marine life living there, further undermining the marine ecosystem.

The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution addressed the whole question of the impact of fishing on the marine environment in its Report, Turning the Tide, published in January 2005, and recommended a completely new strategy for the management of UK seas. This involves the abolition of the automatic right of fishermen to fish all waters, and the development of a conservation approach to the marine environment (the ecosystem approach) whereby around 30% of all UK seas would become a network of non-extractive areas (including no fishing) in which the rationale would be to regenerate the marine ecosystem, and thereby to restore the offshore fishery to a truly sustainable basis.

Unfortunately, this conference gave no consideration to the Royal Commission Report or its proposals (which are well-researched and documented), and therefore it was unclear how the Marine Bill will be expected to address this reality.

The Royal Commission Report, which contains an excellent description of the ecosystem approach to the management of the UK seas can be seen at: www.rcep.org.uk/fishreport.htm

5: Marine Nature Conservation.

It is widely accepted that the present range of Marine Reserves, based on the EU Habitats Directive, is insufficient. There are approximately 36 sites identified as full or candidate marine Special Areas of Conservation under the Habitats Directive, but all of these are linked to the coastline or are in close proximity to it. At the present time, there are no marine nature reserves in offshore waters.

The concept of a Marine Protected Area already exists under the OSPAR Convention www.ospar.org/eng/html/welcome.html  These would be marine reserves at a regional and international level.

However, the concept of Marine Protected Areas being advanced by those in the conference is more akin to the existing Special Area of Conservation which is based on protecting a particular habitat and/or species, rather than the ecosystem in general.

Further details of this limited version of the Marine Protected Area from Wildlife and Countryside Link.

6: Marine Management Organisation.

The concept of a Marine Management Organisation (MMO) is one of the specific proposals originating from the idea and need for a Marine Bill.

However, at this conference there was no clear consensus as to what this Organisation should actually be responsible for and be expected to do.

Certainly it would handle Marine Spatial Planning, but this concept is itself new and fluid and there is still no consensus on how this planning system would actually work. As to other functions - such as issuing licences and consents, taking on an enforcement role, holding data and information, actively gathering data and undertaking research - all of these are considered to be possibilities, but these functions are already done in a piecemeal fashion by other Government Agencies, Departments and organisations. So the question is whether the new Marine Management Organisation would take on these duties itself, or simply leave them with the existing operators and merely play a co-ordinating role.

In other words, should the Marine Management Organisation be a strong organisation, taking a dominating and leading role; or, should it be a weaker organisation which simply attempts to offer guidance and direction to the existing network in order to "up its game" ?

For further information about government thinking on the nature of the Marine Management Organisation, contact Gillian.underwood@defra.gsi.gov.uk

Unresolved Issues.

There is no clear consensus at the present time as to the exact nature of the Marine Bill. It is commonly stated to be a remarkable opportunity to make real progress in the management of the UK marine environment, but it appears that the whole idea of the Bill is being looked at by the various sectoral interests (Sea Fishery Committees, County Planning Authorities, Government Departments, Government Agencies, Conservation Agencies and non-governmental organisations) from their own particular point of view, and no one really has a larger strategic perspective.

If this continues, the Marine Bill will be akin to a paper tiger rather than a real one.

Whilst it is true to say that the structure of marine management is complicated and involves many parties (see the Irish Sea Pilot, as a case in point), and whilst it is similarly true that detailed knowledge and data about the marine environment remains seriously deficient (thus making decision-making in planning difficult), it must be said that that none of these problems are insurmountable.

The serious decline that has befallen the health and well-being of the UK marine environment in recent years is a combination of the dominance of short-sighted sectoral interests, and the failure of Government to show any real political will to lead and resolve the problems.

This same malaise seems to threaten the present Marine Bill. For example, if English Nature continues to control nature conservation, the Sea Fishery Committees to control inshore fishing, the Local Authorities to undertake "integrated coastal management", and the various Government Departments to control their own patch (e.g. DTI with oil and gas, DEFRA with fisheries, ODPM with marine aggregates, and so forth), then what will the Marine Bill and the Marine Management Organisation actually be about? In short, what will actually change?

At the conference MARINET made this observation, and suggested that if we really are to take a major step forward then Government has to take responsibility for what is happening now and for what will happen in the future.

MARINET suggests that Government is in no position to lead and take responsibility until it organises itself into a form that can shoulder and manage such responsibility. This means that Government must actually create a Ministry of the Sea, with its own Secretary of State (a senior member of the Cabinet) who is able to grasp the whole range of issues firmly, and thus provide the sense of direction, policy and purpose necessary to resolve the problems which confront us.

We need a strong sense of political will at the present time, which results in a strong sense of political authority and responsibility. We need a Secretary of State who can resolve the outstanding issues leading to the decline of our offshore fisheries at EU level and our inshore fisheries at national level, we need a Secretary of State who can licence development and direct economic activity in a manner which is truly sustainable i.e. give meaning to the ecosystem approach to marine management. And, we need a Secretary of State who can direct a marine planning system with authority and vision so that the coherence and expertise which is so evidently lacking at the present time becomes a reality.

Yes, the Marine Bill is a marvellous opportunity. However, it will mean nothing unless we are honest with ourselves about the problems and their causes. And, it will mean nothing unless we are bold enough to create the institution, with real authority and funding, which will tackle the problems with genuine solutions. Are we at this point today? If this conference is the measure of the truth, the answer is no.

Report by Stephen Eades, October 2005.