PHOTO COMING SOON
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.
This habitat aligns with the description provided by EUNIS ART_A2.7
For these habitats the artificial nature is determined by the underlying substrate, most restoration activities will fall under the net gain definition of recreated natural habitats. Situations that fall under artificial will be limited but not impossible and include any base substrate that falls under artificial in the definition above. Example: floating habitat creation systems where the underlying substrate is artificially contained.
Assessors should identify EUNIS Level 4 and Level 5 to identify high value and irreplaceable habitats. Crucially, EUNIS Level 5 provides the additional detail needed to separate higher and lower value habitats for certain habitat complexes and allow for the identification of Annex 1 and Section 41 Priority Habitats (for example separating High energy littoral rock from High energy littoral rock on peat and clay exposures).
How to Create / Enhance to a "Good" condition
⚠️ Important Note
The design and management of coastal habitats will have specific competency requirements which should be demonstrated where these habitats are targeted in the SSM.
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 |