Location

Groningen, The Netherlands

Event Website

http://fishpassage.umass.edu/

Start Date

22-6-2015 2:15 PM

End Date

22-6-2015 2:30 PM

Description

Abstract:

The Environment Agency (EA), a nondepartmental public body charged with environmental protection and regulation in England, implemented strategy and process to deliver tangible improvements to eel passage and screening across a range of impacting Sectors and individuals.

The Eels (England and Wales) Regulations 2009 came into force on 15 January 2010 to support the UK in implementing EC Council Regulation (1100/2007). Under this European Regulation, the UK must take actions to halt and reverse the decline in the European eel stock, aiming to meet a target set for the number of mature adult eels leaving each river basin to return to spawn at sea. The EC Eel Regulation requires UK to consider eel passage as part of the solution.

The EA has adopted a risk-based approach in implementing the Regulations. For legacy structures including obstructions and abstractions, a desktop prioritization process was undergone. This utilized standard metrics that could be consistently applied to a range of locations and scenarios. This ranked the circa 26,000 obstructions and 21,000 abstractions into High, Medium and Low categories, final Quality Assurance being applied by operational staff locally. These categories related to the risk to eel and therefore to the timeline for implementing site improvements. No improvement measures were sought for sites in those parts of river catchments that had a low likelihood of ever being naturally colonised by eel.

Sites were aggregated by purpose into broad Sectors. National fisheries staff were able to provide technical support to this process drawn from published EA guidance documents that included Best Practice solutions. A Cost Benefit Analysis tool was utilized to apply consistency, proportionality and rigour to the Sectors and individuals. When key CBA thresholds were not reached, an ‘Alternative Measures’ process was used to allow benefits for eel to still be realized. The number and variety of site improvements is discussed.

Share

COinS
 
Jun 22nd, 2:15 PM Jun 22nd, 2:30 PM

Session C2: Translating Regulation into Outcome

Groningen, The Netherlands

Abstract:

The Environment Agency (EA), a nondepartmental public body charged with environmental protection and regulation in England, implemented strategy and process to deliver tangible improvements to eel passage and screening across a range of impacting Sectors and individuals.

The Eels (England and Wales) Regulations 2009 came into force on 15 January 2010 to support the UK in implementing EC Council Regulation (1100/2007). Under this European Regulation, the UK must take actions to halt and reverse the decline in the European eel stock, aiming to meet a target set for the number of mature adult eels leaving each river basin to return to spawn at sea. The EC Eel Regulation requires UK to consider eel passage as part of the solution.

The EA has adopted a risk-based approach in implementing the Regulations. For legacy structures including obstructions and abstractions, a desktop prioritization process was undergone. This utilized standard metrics that could be consistently applied to a range of locations and scenarios. This ranked the circa 26,000 obstructions and 21,000 abstractions into High, Medium and Low categories, final Quality Assurance being applied by operational staff locally. These categories related to the risk to eel and therefore to the timeline for implementing site improvements. No improvement measures were sought for sites in those parts of river catchments that had a low likelihood of ever being naturally colonised by eel.

Sites were aggregated by purpose into broad Sectors. National fisheries staff were able to provide technical support to this process drawn from published EA guidance documents that included Best Practice solutions. A Cost Benefit Analysis tool was utilized to apply consistency, proportionality and rigour to the Sectors and individuals. When key CBA thresholds were not reached, an ‘Alternative Measures’ process was used to allow benefits for eel to still be realized. The number and variety of site improvements is discussed.

https://scholarworks.umass.edu/fishpassage_conference/2015/June22/33