Recreational Disturbance Study in relation to roosting and breeding wildfowl, waders and seabirds

Transcription

1 Consultants Brief Recreational Disturbance Study in relation to roosting and breeding wildfowl, waders and seabirds for 700 Days Scheme - Morecambe Bay s Coastal Communities Scheme. 1. Aim 1.1. Morecambe Bay Partnership and the 700 Days Board wish to appoint consultants to complete a recreational disturbance study to support the development of an improved visitor management strategy around Morecambe Bay The aim of this work is to ensure that the 700 Days Scheme maximises the potential for appropriate access to the coast and yet does not damage or interfere with sensitive wildlife sites We hope the study will help us to address a number of issues, including these key issues: o Large numbers of wading birds and wildfowl are a potential spectacle that is of interest to visitors and local people alike. Which sites may have potential for appropriate and respectful enjoyment of this natural heritage facet of the Bay? o Which sites are the most sensitive and under the greatest threat? o With the limited funding available, how do we prioritise resources to make the biggest positive impact to improve the management of the whole study area of the Bay for wading birds and wildfowl? 1.4. The consultants are requested to o produce an evidenced-based approach to improve management of the sites as identified on the attached map and listed in section 2 below o identify issues and opportunities for recreational access, and o set out what best practise management would look like The consultants will be asked to provide an independent and objective view and to work in liaison with the Morecambe Bay Partnership team, RSPB, Natural England and other local stakeholders including WeBS

2 counters, local bird clubs, the Morecambe Bay Wildfowlers Liaison Group and other partners. 2. Key Sites 2.1. Phase 1 The most important sites to target for this study are listed below. This draws on the wader roost study conducted last year and local knowledge of breeding sites. These key sites are highlighted on the map (attached as Appendix 1). West Shore Walney South Walney Reserve (multiple roosts) Foulney (including Rampside) Glaxo, Canal Foot Chapel Island West Plain East Plain Kent Estuary Marshes Hest Bank / Bolton-le-Sands Morecambe Seafront Roosts (Multiple Roosts) Heysham Heliport Red Nab Middleton Aldcliffe / Heaton Plover Scar 2.2. Phase 2 Further funding is being sought to extend the study to include Piel Island and sites in Wyre District. If this funding is confirmed then the following sites should also be included: Piel Island Lane End Fluke Hall Arm Hill Rossall Point 3. Fieldwork and Technical Report In relation to the key sites listed above, the required outputs are to 3.1. Carry out fieldwork and produce a technical report covering the following points: 3.2. Characterise the issues at each of the key sites. Recreational Disturbance Study page 2 Last Edit: 27 March 2014

3 3.3. Provide an evidenced based review of the relative impact of different types of recreational 1 disturbance Propose a site-by-site action plan of measures to reduce impacts from recreational disturbance K implementation funding has been identified. Prioritise the measures that will have the greatest impact. Present a simple action plan of options Present the final study to partners in a presentation to the 700 Days Board or a similar technical group Present recommendations for further studies, and options for funding future work to improve management and increase active enjoyment Develop proposals for a Bay-wide long-term action plan. This should provide evidence to demonstrate where there is a need for further measures (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) to protect sites to enhance the potential for appropriate and respectful enjoyment of the natural heritage of sites to improve the monitoring and evaluation of sites to develop new opportunities for the involvement of volunteers and the community other measures. 4. Visitor Economy and non-technical Report Building on an analysis of work detailed above, the consultants are asked to prepare a non-technical summary document that highlights the main findings in relation to the key sites. This should 4.1. Enable local businesses to understand types and levels of recreation that occur in the Bay and associated opportunities for these businesses Encourage nature tourism and green businesses Outline clearer guidance for recreational users on where and when to access bird spectacles, which areas to use or avoid and what to be mindful of when enjoying the Bay. 1 This includes activities that aren t managed by existing regulations e.g. walking (+/- dogs), angling, watersports, jetski, kitesurfing, birdwatching. Recreational Disturbance Study page 3 Last Edit: 27 March 2014

4 4.4. Present the final study to partners in a presentation to the Morecambe Bay Annual Conference or Nature Tourism Business Network or a similar non-technical group. 5. Price and Payment Schedule 5.1. The total cost for phase 1 of project is to be no more than 25,000 (excluding VAT) If further funding is confirmed, the total cost for phase 2 of project is to be no more than 5,000 (excluding VAT) The schedule for payment will be agreed at the inception meeting. 6. Deadlines and Outputs 6.1. A draft technical report is required by 16 March 2015 in digital format A draft non-technical summary report is required by 16 April 2015 in digital format The final technical report is required by 15 June 2015 in digital format and one hard copy. The final report should be clearly written, with accompanying illustrations as appropriate The final non-technical summary report is required by 26 June 2015 in digital format. 7. Project Timetable 7.1. The fieldwork for this contract is to begin in May 2014 and to be complete by May A timetable is given below: Deadline for submission 9 am on 11 April 2014 Inception & planning meeting To be confirmed Fieldwork May 2014 to May 2015 Draft technical report 16 March 2015 Final technical report 15 June 2015 Draft non-technical summary report 16 April 2015 Final non-technical summary report 26 June 2015 Recreational Disturbance Study page 4 Last Edit: 27 March 2014

5 Technical Presentation Non-technical Presentation To be arranged once report complete To be arranged once report complete 7.2. The successful contractors should initially discuss the scope of the research with the client to agree a detailed timetable for the work. 8. Project Management 8.1. The contractor will report to the client immediately if there are any unforeseen delays which may limit the ability to complete the work to schedule As part of the contract, the contractor is required to attend meetings with the client as detailed below Inception meeting with the client and project team for an initial briefing to agree the scope of the project and identify any operational difficulties that might be encountered A minimum of two liaison meetings with key stakeholders the project team can offer introductions as part of the inception process A mid term review meeting to ensure satisfactory progress and discuss initial results A meeting to discuss the draft report and agree any changes A meeting to present the results to the 700 Days Board and discuss the findings of the final report before it is signed off The contractors will be expected to submit a draft report. The client will then comment on the draft report before it is finalised The client requires 1 hard copy and a digital copy of the final report, which should be fully proof-read. GIS data should be supplied in Map Info or ArcView, and a digital copy in Microsoft Word and/or PDF format on disk. A copy of any presentation materials used in the final reports, meetings and/or seminars (slides, overhead projection transparencies, etc.) will be required by the client for retention The client will hold the copyright on the work and its publication (including copyright on the brand and design). The report or the Recreational Disturbance Study page 5 Last Edit: 27 March 2014

6 information from this research cannot be quoted from or used in any other project work without the written permission of the client Any information supplied by the client to the contractor during the project must be returned no later than one month after the end of the contract period. 9. Work proposals and submission 9.1. Interested consultants should submit a work proposal to arrive by 9 am on 11 April Late submissions will not be accepted. Submissions should be sent by to sb@morecambebay.org.uk and will be acknowledged Anticipated competencies of the chosen consultant team are: Expertise relating to mapping, data analysis, sensitivity mapping. Competence in report writing and bird data analysis techniques. Awareness of best practise management from elsewhere. Experience in conducting similar work. Relevant local knowledge The proposal should be as brief as possible and demonstrate Your understanding and summary of the task The approach and methodology proposed A work plan including a schedule of tasks, timetable and milestones Value for money Expertise in undertaking similar research Team structure lead and contributors Costs including a breakdown of each consultant s role, day rate, number of days working on the project, purchases, travel costs and other expenses. What systems you have in place to ensure that you can meet the deadlines e.g. who you will collaborate with in case of illness or other delays. CVs (2 pages max) for the consultants who will work on the project. Contact details of two referees who can be contacted to confirm the consultants expertise, experience and track record The client will require consultants to include proof of professional indemnity insurance cover in the sum of at least 0.25million. Recreational Disturbance Study page 6 Last Edit: 27 March 2014

7 10. Contract manager: The contract is being let by Susannah Bleakley, Executive Director Morecambe Bay Partnership. Contact: or The technical contract manager is Jeremy Sutton, RSPB. If you require any further information on technical aspects of the brief, please contact Jeremy on , mobile: or by Resources and Reference Materials: The following documents will be provided (in digital format) at the inception meeting. These set the context within which this work should be conducted: Wader and wildfowl roost study an extract from this is attached as Appendix Days Business Plan The Landscape Conservation Action Plan (the LCAP) for Headlands to Headspace. Recreational Disturbance Study page 7 Last Edit: 27 March 2014

8 12. Appendix 1 Recreational Disturbance Study Area Morecambe Bay - Recreational Disturbance Study Legend Sites Roost Roost and breeding Breeding Subject to additional funding Scale (at A4): 1:175,000 Map produced by Bart Donato, Cumbria Team Date: 27/03/2014. Contains, or is derived from, information supplied by Ordnance Survey. Crown copyright and database rights Ordnance Survey Recreational Disturbance Study page 8 Last Edit: 27 March 2014

9 Appendix 2 Extract from the Wader Roost Study Disturbance issues Graph 1 Graph showing types of disturbance recorded on WeBS counts at wader roosts round Morecambe Bay Walking along shore Dogwalking along shore Dogs off-lead on inter-tidal Number of sites Birdwatchers/photographers Angling Motor vehicles on intertidal Cyclists Horseriding along shore Camping Small powerboats/jetskis Canoeing/kayaking Other boats (sail boats/ferries) Windsurfing Kitesurfing Rowing boats Planes/helicopters/microlites Graph 1 shows the types of disturbance noted by WeBS counters at each of the roosts. Land-based disturbance types are shown in brown, water-based disturbance in blue and airbased disturbance types in pink. Disturbance caused by people walking, dog-walking and by off-lead dogs was reported from the greatest number of sites and, as Table 7 shows, these activities occurred most frequently. However, it must be borne in mind that the WeBS counts are done at the weekend when recreational activity is at its highest and the graph is not a true reflection of the main causes and frequency of disturbance. A clearer picture will come out of a subsequent study into recreational disturbance around Morecambe Bay. Table 7 Frequency of disturbance on WeBS counts as reported by WeBS counters Type of disturbance No. sites/89 Every count >half the counts half the counts <half the counts Land-based Walking along shore Dogwalking along shore Dogs off-lead on inter-tidal Birdwatchers/photographers Angling Motor vehicles on intertidal Cyclists Horseriding along shore Camping 1 Water-based Small powerboats/jetskis Canoeing/kayaking Other boats (sail boats/ferries) Windsurfing Kitesurfing Rowing boats Air-based Planes/helicopters/microlites People walking on the shore at Rape Haw Horses at Potts Corner, Middleton 26 Recreational Disturbance Study page 9 Last Edit: 27 March 2014