Identification

Title

2008 Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) site condition monitoring surveys of East Coast of Scotland SSSI and Ramsar sites

Abstract

Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), in association with the other country agencies, has established a series of common standards for the monitoring of sites of nature conservation interest. These common standards apply to statutory sites notified as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and to areas designated as part of the Natura 2000 series including Special Areas of Conservation (SAC), together with Ramsar sites listed under the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance. Many of the notified marine features of SSSI lie outwith the current suite of marine SAC and have yet to be subject to marine condition monitoring assessments (at the time of publication). The principal aim of this research was to formulate cost-effective and pragmatic solutions to the future monitoring of the sites that would meet the requirements of agreed monitoring standards. Specific objectives of the research were to: - derive biotope maps of each site to show the location of features, biotopes and species of interest; - establish an appropriate baseline biological dataset that will permit an assessment of current site condition, and be a basis for comparison with future monitoring surveys; - gather and present sufficient data for SNH to form a judgement on the current condition of the qualifying features - develop simple cost-effective survey methods and guidance that could be used in the future by non-specialist staff, and which would be suitable for each of the study sites - revise where necessary the SNH lagoon feature guidance developed in 2007. The project encompassed 15 designated features in total at 11 sites: Cromarty Firth SSSI and Ramsar, Inner Moray Firth Ramsar, Longman and Castle Stuart Bay SSSI, Munlochy Bay SSSI, Whiteness Head SSSI, Moray and Nairn Coast Ramsar, Rosehearty to Fraserburgh Coast SSSI, Montrose Basin SSSI and Ramsar and Firth of Forth SSSI. The features covered were intertidal mudflats and sandflats, seagrass beds and lagoons. Survey work was undertaken in August to October 2008. A baseline of biological data has been established to facilitate future condition assessment of the features, including mapping and sampling techniques. Site specific guidance has been developed to aid future monitoring by SNH staff. The approach taken to achieve these objectives was to establish a series of re-locatable stations and transects that reflect the biological and environmental diversity of the features of these sites

Resource type

dataset

Resource locator

Unique resource identifier

code

GB-SCT-SNH-ME-000118-MRSNH01300000012-EAST

codeSpace

Dataset language

eng

Spatial reference system

code identifying the spatial reference system

urn:ogc:def:crs:EPSG::4326

Additional information source

Trendall, J.R., Bedford, G.S., Tarrant, D.C., Fortune, F. & Saunders, G. (2011). Baseline survey and mapping of intertidal features within selected Scottish East Coast SSSI and Ramsar Sites. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No.447.

Classification of spatial data and services

Topic category

biota

biota

Keywords

Keyword set

keyword value

Keyword set

keyword value

Keyword set

keyword value

originating controlled vocabulary

title

GEMET - INSPIRE themes, version 1.0

reference date

date type

revision

effective date

2008-01-06

Keyword set

keyword value

originating controlled vocabulary

title

SeaDataNet P021 parameter discovery vocabulary

reference date

date type

revision

effective date

2009-11-16

Keyword set

keyword value

originating controlled vocabulary

title

INSPIRE THEMES

reference date

date type

creation

effective date

2011-02-16

Keyword set

keyword value

originating controlled vocabulary

title

UNESCO

reference date

date type

creation

effective date

2003-01-01

Keyword set

keyword value

originating controlled vocabulary

title

GEMET

reference date

date type

creation

effective date

2011-07-06

Keyword set

keyword value

originating controlled vocabulary

title

MEDIN

reference date

date type

creation

effective date

2012-02-14

Keyword set

keyword value

originating controlled vocabulary

title

Gardline

reference date

date type

creation

effective date

2012-03-16

Keyword set

keyword value

originating controlled vocabulary

title

International Standards Organisation ISO19115 Topic Categories

reference date

date type

revision

effective date

2005-04-27

Keyword set

keyword value

originating controlled vocabulary

title

Global Change Master Directory Science Keywords V5

reference date

date type

creation

effective date

2006-08-31

Keyword set

keyword value

originating controlled vocabulary

title

INSPIRE

reference date

date type

creation

effective date

2017-05-12

Geographic location

West bounding longitude

-4.6143

East bounding longitude

-1.2524

North bounding latitude

58.2402

South bounding latitude

55.5908

Extent

Extent group

authority code

title

Charting Progress 2 Sea Areas

reference date

date type

creation

effective date

2009-06-18

code identifying the extent

Northern North Sea

Extent group

authority code

title

International Hydrographic Bureau, Limits of Oceans and Seas

reference date

date type

creation

effective date

1954-01-01

code identifying the extent

North Sea

Extent group

authority code

title

SeaDataNet vertical extent keywords

reference date

date type

revision

effective date

2010-01-01

code identifying the extent

infralittoral

Extent group

authority code

title

SeaDataNet vertical extent keywords

reference date

date type

revision

effective date

2010-01-01

code identifying the extent

littoral

Temporal reference

Temporal extent

Begin position

2008-08-15

End position

2008-10-09

Dataset reference date

date type

publication

effective date

2009-02-05

Frequency of update

notPlanned

Quality and validity

Lineage

Overview Surveys were completed between August and October 2008, during spring tides. Survey methods were adopted where possible, from previous site condition monitoring surveys and other standard techniques and adapted where necessary. Logistics The timing of the field survey programme was restricted to the latter half of 2008, consequently many of the low tides fell at sunrise and sunset, limiting considerably the available survey window for accessing the lower-shore. Weather was mixed, with several of the surveys necessarily completed in stormy weather, during heavy rain and under low light conditions as a result of the limited time available. Aerial photography Ortho-rectified aerial imagery was due to be commissioned as part of this survey in order to enable detailed survey planning and as an essential component of biotope mapping. However, due to consistently poor weather conditions and the coincidence of low tides with sunrise and sunset as a result of the late time of year surveys were commissioned, aerial photography was not possible. Site selection - Transects: Locations were selected to correspond with areas of high visual heterogeneity or where previously reported surveys were likely to provide opportunities for comparative assessments. Drainage channels and other sources of fresh or brackish water were avoided where practicable in order to reduce the likelihood of encountering unusual, transient or otherwise modified infaunal communities. Site selection - Mapping stations: In the absence of aerial photography, all sample stations (transects, dig-over, visual and cores) were were planned prior to each survey using GIS mapping software. These were either selected at random for a sampling area agreed with SNH staff for each site, using random co-ordinate generation software and GIS, or were selected to correspond to historic sampling stations surveyed by previous researchers. Each of these sites were allocated for core sampling, digover, or visual sampling. Careful planning ensured that low shore stations were sampled at low water to ensure the fullest cover of the intertidal area. Whilst walking between stations, if a biotope change was observed in the visible surface features, additional ad hoc digover stations were completed. Some sampling locations were modified from planned locations in the field in order to allow for site specific features and conditions, for example, dangerously soft sediment, or features of particular interest such as seagrass. At each location sampled a series of proforma forms were completed for sediment sampling stations, transects and lagoons. Field Survey - Transects: Transects were deployed from the upper-shore to the lower-shore. Relocation proforma were completed detailing site descriptions, transect relocation coordinates, and transect marker height relative to chart datum. The location of the start and end of each biotope, as well as the approximate midpoint were also recorded. Along each transect potential biotope changes were identified, where possible. All positional data was recorded using GPS. The distance along the transect was also recorded where possible and where large distances from upper to lowershore were encountered, calculations of distance were derived from GPS coordinates. The shore was levelled using a surveyor’s level to measure the height of each biotope boundary and midpoint. The height data were subsequently converted to heights above chart datum. Distinctive zones were identified on the basis of visual features along the length of the transect and sample stations were established at the estimated mid-point of each zone. At each sampling station along the transect there was an assessment of sediment surface features; dig-over sampling; core sampling; and an assessment of sediment character and redox layer. Where possible each transect was videoed to provide detail on the main features, context and location. Photographic and/or video records were also collected for each sampling station. Photographs were also taken for relocation purposes. Based upon substrata and abundance of species present along the transect, biotopes were assigned to areas of shore within each transect according to Connor et al, 2004. Shore profiles were subsequently plotted, incorporating the additional monitoring information such as biotope details. Visual assessment At transect and mapping stations, sediment surface features were assessed within five replicate, randomly located 0.25m2 quadrats, and photographic records were taken. Within the quadrats percentage cover or counts were made of species and also of conspicuous casts, mounds or burrows indicative of a species presence (e.g. Arenicola marina or Lanice conchilega casts or Scrobicularia plana marks). Each species recorded was later assigned an abundance measure according to the MNCR SACFOR scale. The nature of the habitat and substrate in each quadrat was also recorded using the a field sediment key provided. Identification of species in the field was aided using a species ID guides. Biotopes were assigned post survey once all sample data had been collated. Digovers Digover samples consisted of a 0.25m x 0.25m sediment area dug to a depth of 20cm, and sieved through a 1mm mesh sieve. Retained infauna was counted and identified in the field by trained personnel, with reference to bespoke identification sheets, and later assigned a MNCR SACFOR abundance. Any unidentifiable specimens were preserved in 5% formalin and identified later. Where sediment was too coarse for samples to be effectively sieved directly during the digover, the sample was resuspended in seawater and returned back to the sieve repeatedly until fines had been removed. The remaining sediment was then examined for conspicuous fauna. Cores At each core station eight replicate core samples (10.3cm diameter x 20cm depth) were collected and pooled. The samples were sieved using a 1mm mesh size and preserved in 5% formalin. Macrobenthos were subsequently sorted, identified and quantified in the laboratory. Sediment type and redox layer The sediment type at each sampling station was assessed in the field by reference to the Field Sediment Key. The depth of the reduction-oxidation layer was determined by digging a straight sided hole and measuring the depth of any obvious black layer. Field Survey - Spot sampling Spot sample stations were selected at random using GIS prior to survey, in order to establish a representative coverage across all appropriate features/biotopes. In addition, when a predetermined transect or sample station was considered to be inaccessible a spot sampling approach was adopted. During spot sampling, assessments were made of surface features, sediment type, and redox layer. At a number of spot sampling stations dig-over and core samples were also taken. Field Survey - Lagoon monitoring A walkover lagoon survey was undertaken at Alness and Skinflats at low tide. Key features were identified such as barriers and culverts, and supporting photographic records were gathered. Evidence of human activities were also recorded. Where practicable and appropriate, the salinity of the lagoon water was measured at a number of relocatable positions using a refractometer to record salinity gradients within each lagoon system. Where appropriate intertidal areas were encountered sediment sampling was undertaken within the lagoon area. At each station a 0.5 x 0.5m quadrat was placed randomly within the intertidal area and a record was made of substrate type and visible epifauna. Subsequently a dig-over was undertaken within each quadrat and visible infauna was recorded. Two surveyors examined the marine biota at the survey stations, with station locations selected randomly within the lagoon. No work was carried out in the subtidal. No aerial imagery was available to determine the extent of the lagoon features. The boundaries of small scale lagoon features were tracked using a handheld GPS, to derive extent at time of survey, within the limited timeframe available for collection of survey data. Field Survey - Sub-features Features within the sites, which were not designated features but were considered of importance for nature conservation, or for rapid site condition evaluation purposes, included Zostera spp. beds and Mytilus edulis beds. Five replicate quadrats were placed in areas of perceived maximum density and photographed. A visual assessment of substrate and species present was completed, including an evaluation of population density. Species composition was determined in the field by trained personnel and with reference to identification guides. At two sites within the Cromarty Firth (Nigg and Alness) rapid assessments of the distribution of eelgrass were carried out. At Alness, three surveyors walked from the western to the eastern extent of the shore, each equipped with a GPS and periodically recording the presence of eelgrass at the lower, mid- and upper extent of the visual range respectively. At Nigg, a single surveyor with a GPS recorded eelgrass extent by walking around the margin of the visible eelgrass extent. At approximately 50m intervals, the surveyor deviated (where possible) outward and away from the eelgrass margin to confirm that no further plants were present outside the recording area. Once confirmed the surveyor returned in the direction of the eegrass bed edge and recorded the position where the plants were first encountered. Limitations Progress was slowed at many locations by extremely soft sediments and high clay content, restricting movement of surveyors between sites and slowing the sediment sieving process at sample sites. At some locations pre-planned stations on the lowershore were assessed as unsafe to access due to the presence of soft mud or the danger of being cut off by the water channels as a result of slow movement of the survey team. Time constraints due to limited daylight prevented a number of pre-planned sites from being surveyed and occasionally prevented a transect video from being recorded. The transect attempted at Dingwall was not completed for health and safety reasons, due to the dangers associated with working on soft sediments on an incoming tide. Survey work was commissioned late in the season and as a result of reducing day length a number of spring low tides coincided with sunrise or sunset therefore limiting the survey to only one side of low water. At sites with unfavourable access some daylight hours were necessarily spent walking to the shore to determine best approach to the site, but also reducing the available survey time. Data handling and analysis Samples taken from digover stations were subsequently analysed under a dissection microscope to identify the characteristic species present. Species names were assigned according to Howson and Picton, 1997. Biotopes were assigned once all data had been collated according to Connor et al., 2004. All survey data were entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Shore profiles were calculated through Excel. Data points were mapped using ArcGIS. All photographs and videos were logged. A record of all species recorded at each site (including surface features, dig over and core sampling) was taken, with a summary for each biotope provided. Quality Assurance procedures Consistency between surveys was maintained by the project leader and survey coordinator who were present on each survey. All survey data were checked at the end of each day to allow Quality Assurance (QA) for accuracy, legibility and completeness and were entered into formatted spreadsheets, providing a back up of data as soon as possible. Data entry was carried out by a two person team, with entries read out by one team member, and entered and read back by the second. Digital photographs were uploaded to a PC at the end of each day, and photograph logs cross referenced and checked. Video cassettes were also archived at the end of each day, and video logs cross referenced and checked for completeness. Positional data recorded in the field were backed up each day and plotted to allow QA of the positions. Unidentified macrobenthos samples were reviewed by all team members. If consensus identification was not reached, samples were retained for expert identification. Samples were fixed with formalin as soon as possible once collected. Report production and data management was controlled by Royal Haskoning’s quality management system under ISO 9001:2000.

Conformity

Data format

name of format

version of format

Constraints related to access and use

Constraint set

Use constraints

Not for navigational use; SNH copyright data which is available for re-use under government licence terms: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/

Constraint set

Limitations on public access

no restrictions to public access

Responsible organisations

Responsible party

contact position

Data Officer

organisation name

Royal Haskoning (UK Head Office)

full postal address

Rightwell House Bretton

Peterborough

PE3 8DW

telephone number

+44 (0)1733 334455

facsimile number

+44 (0)1733 262243

email address

dassh.enquiries@mba.ac.uk

responsible party role

originator

Responsible party

contact position

Data Manager

organisation name

Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), Headquaters

full postal address

Great Glen House, Leachkin Road

Inverness

IV3 8NW

telephone number

01463 725000

email address

data_supply@nature.scot

responsible party role

custodian

Metadata on metadata

Metadata point of contact

contact position

Data Manager

organisation name

Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH), Headquaters

full postal address

Great Glen House, Leachkin Road

Inverness

IV3 8NW

telephone number

01463 725000

email address

data_supply@nature.scot

responsible party role

pointOfContact

Metadata date

2024-03-28

Metadata language

eng