5.1.3    Generic management options

To assist in determining what type of actions need to be taken in managing activities which may affect the bottlenose dolphins, a series of broad management responses has been drawn up and agreed by the sites relevant authorities. These are shown in Table 7. below.

Following consultation of the draft management plan the sites relevant authorities agreed the following general approach that they would take when considering what changes, if any, to existing management of activities is required.

Where there is a lack of information about existing activities (i.e. there is insufficient information to determine whether or not they are adversely impacting the bottlenose dolphins) then there should be some investigation (research) for possible impacts. In the absence of evidence one way or the other, it should not be assumed that the conservation of the dolphin population is compatible with current site use. However, the pattern of existing use has to be recognised. Therefore, the existing level of the activity should be maintained (as far as is possible) at current levels or less (i.e. not increased) until there is some conclusion as to what levels are acceptable.

An increase in intensity of a current activity, significant change in distribution of a current activity or the development of a new activity should be treated as or in a way analogous to that for a plan or project. i.e. the increase or change should not be viewed as acceptable until it has been shown that it will not adversely affect site integrity.

Surveillance and / or monitoring of activities is required for activities that are known to adversely affect the bottlenose dolphins or for which there is uncertainty but a mechanism for effect is known. This will allow some early warning of potential increases in activity and provide a baseline of information if there is ever a need to investigate the cause of a loss of favourable condition.

It was appreciated that the degree to which each relevant authority could conduct surveillance or monitoring would vary, being influenced by available resources and the scope of the activity. The degree to which existing statutory and institutional arrangements enabled activities to be “maintained at current levels” would also vary. This was particularly noted as being the case for fisheries and also various recreational activities not subject to formal management or regulation.

Where a management response requires some form of action this is given in section 5.2 or section 5.3 after the rationale for each factor. A summary of all actions, comprising all of the actions generated in section 5 is provided in section 6.

For most factors there is considerable uncertainty as to whether they are, or are not, having an effect on the bottlenose dolphins. Showing irrefutably that an activity is adversely affecting the bottlenose dolphins is very difficult indeed; the low level of knowledge, scientific capabilities and available resources all conspire to hinder this. Even where there is some information - for example through examination of the few bottlenose dolphin strandings suitable for autopsy - it is very difficult to determine the factors contributing to a dolphin’s death. A high parasite burden may, for example be as a result of natural causes, anthropogenic causes such as pollution induced immunosuppression, or a combination of both.

It is essential that the ‘precautionary principle’ [103] is followed on behalf of the dolphins, to take actions early enough to minimise potentially serious or irreversible effects. Management decisions will need to take into account reasonable predictions of likely affects of human activities on the animals, despite a paucity of supporting scientific evidence

Table 7.      Generic Management Options

[103] Precautionary Principle: “Even if it has not been demonstrated, but an activity is considered ‘likely’ to have a significant impact on the feature, appropriate actions should be taken to manage that activity to prevent the impact”. (This is just one of many differing definitions of the ‘Precautionary Principle’. Whilst most of the site’s relevant authorities sign up to this definition it should not be taken that all relevant and competent authorities relevant to Cardigan Bay cSAC site management would also.)