The following is a short summary of the habitat type and how to create/enhance it to a "good" condition. For an informed position, please refer to official up-to-date EUNIS documentation or the UK Government's Condition Assessment Sheet.
The sedentary polychaete Sabellaria alveolata (honeycomb worm) builds tubes from sand and shell. On exposed shores, where there is a plentiful supply of sediment, S. alveolata can form honeycomb reefs on boulders and low-lying bedrock on the mid to lower shore. These S. alveolata reefs are quite distinct from the mosaic of seaweeds and barnacles or red seaweeds (EUNIS A1.2) generally associated with moderately exposed rocky shores though many of the same species are present. These include the anemone Actinia equina, the barnacles Semibalanus balanoides and Elminius modestus, the limpet Patella vulgata, the top shell Gibbula cineraria and the winkle Littorina littorea. The whelk Nucella lappilus and the mussel Mytilus edulis is also present on the boulders whereas the polychaete Lanice conchilega is restricted to the associated sediment areas. Scour resistent red seaweeds including Palmaria palmata, Corallina ifficinalis, Mastocarpus stellatus, Chondrus crispus, Ceramium nodulosum, Osmundea pinnatifida, Polysiphonia spp. and coralline crusts can also be present where suitable substrata exsist. Brown and green seaweeds also present include Fucus serratus, Fucus vesioculosus, Cladostephus spongiosus, Enteromorpha intestinalis and Ulva lactuca.
This aligns with the description provided by EUNIS A2.7 (and see A2.71 especially)
How to Create / Enhance to a "Good" condition
There are a set of criteria that are used to judge the condition of this habitat. These are listed below.
| Indicator | Good (3 points) | Moderate (2 points) | Poor (1 point) |
A | Coastal processes | Coastal processes are functioning naturally. No evidence of human physical modifications which are impacting the habitat. | Artificial structures present, for example groynes, that are impeding the natural movement of sediments or water, affecting up to 25% of the habitat. | Artificial structures present, for example groynes, that are impeding the natural movement of sediments or water, affecting more than 25% of the habitat. |
B | Presence and abundance of invasive non-native species | Not more than one invasive non-native species is ‘Occasional’ on the SACFOR scale or is occupying more than 1% of the habitat. No high-risk species indicative of suboptimal condition present, see Footnote 1 for details. | No invasive non-native species are present above ‘Frequent’ on the SACFOR scale or they occupy between 1-10% of the habitat. No high-risk species indicative of suboptimal condition present, see Footnote 1 for details. | One or more invasive non-native species are present at an ‘Abundant’ level on the SACFOR scale; they occupy more than 10% of the habitat; or a high-risk species indicative of suboptimal condition is present – GB Non-native Species Secretariat should be notified, see Footnote 1 for details. |
C | Water Quality | No visual evidence of pollution. There are no nuisance algal growths that are likely to be attributable to nutrient enrichment. Consider seasonality of survey timing2. | Visual evidence of low to moderate levels of pollution. Elevated algal growth with increases in cover that may indicate nutrient enrichment. Consider seasonality of survey timing2. | Visual evidence of high algal growth that is indicative of nutrient enrichment. Signs of eutrophication that would impede bird feeding. Consider seasonality of survey timing2. |
D | Non-natural structures and direct human impacts | No evidence of impacts from direct human activities, or they occupy <1% of the habitat area (for example, pontoons, moorings, boats, crab tiles, bait digging or anchoring scars). | Evidence of impacts from direct human activities occupies 1-10% of the habitat area (for example, pontoons, moorings, boats, crab tiles, bait digging or anchoring scars). | Evidence of impacts from direct human activities occupies >10% of the habitat area (for example, pontoons, moorings, boats, crab tiles, bait digging or anchoring scars). |
E | Litter (when examining a beach strandline / mean high water line or intertidal rocky shore) | Following the Marine Conservation Society (MCS) beach litter survey method, the number of items of litter does not exceed 0.0036 m−1 min−1 person−1, equivalent to up to 20 items per person per 100 m per hour. See Footnote 3 for details. | Following the MCS beach litter survey method, the number of items of litter does not exceed 0.0078 m−1 min−1 person−1, equivalent to between 21 and 47 items of litter per per person per 100 m per hour. See Footnote 3 for details. | Following the MCS beach litter survey method, the number of items of litter exceeds 0.0078 m−1 min−1 person−1, equivalent to more than 47 items of litter per person per 100 m per hour. See Footnote 3 for details. |
Condition Assessment Result |
TOTAL SCORE 12-15 (75-100%) = GOOD CONDITION |
TOTAL SCORE 8-11 (50-75%) = MODERATE CONDITION |
TOTAL SCORE 5-7 (0-50%) = POOR CONDITION |