Andrew Bruce Gill

The coexistence between offshore wind and fisheries has raised questions about potential impacts on species that are fished. We systematically evaluated the offshore wind farm (OWF) literature for evidence of effects leading to impacts on commercial fisheries species. First, we collated evidence of environmental effects of OWFs on fisheries species and then determined whether these could be interpreted as impacts using fishery‐scale and organism‐scale parameters for pelagic finfish, demersal and reef‐associated roundfish, demersal flatfish, elasmobranchs and shellfish. We appraised consistency and level of agreement of direct evidence and explored the body of indirect evidence. A total of 1268 documents featured evidence of OWF effects on fisheries species, with only 60 documents (274 species records) providing direct evidence. Evidence on finfish far outweighed that for shellfish. Demersal and reef‐associated roundfish were the best‐studied group, while elasmobranchs were poorly evidenced. Most studies considered population rather than stock parameters. There was limited evidence of impacts, owing to inconclusive results and inconsistent effects within the parameters assessed—illustrating the importance of looking across the evidence base rather than focussing on individual studies. Hence, there is currently insufficient direct evidence to confidently determine OWF impacts on fisheries species. Overwhelmingly, the evidence deals with indirect effects, although these should not be disregarded as they can highlight plausible impacts on fisheries species, which could guide research and monitoring targeted at understanding the impacts of OWF—a pressing concern given the increased policy commitment of many nations to these two marine sectors sharing marine space.

As the world develops sources of renewable energy, there is an intensifying interest in offshore wind energy production. The Northeast U.S. Continental Shelf (NES) ecosystem has favorable wind dynamics, with active development of wind energy. In this study, we present species distribution models that consider both occupancy and biomass responses for a broad spectrum of fish and macroinvertebrate taxa (n = 177). Building upon prior analyses, habitat was differentiated into overall and core habitats based on statistical distributions of habitat scores. Overall habitat was used to show each species' regional distribution based on fishery-independent survey captures between 1976 and 2019, whereas core habitat represented where the focus of the species' abundance was located as a subset of overall habitat. Wind energy developments may modify the water column in ways that impact lower-trophic-level productivity; therefore, added attention was given to the response of forage species. Over 20% of species showed preferential use of putative and potential wind development areas, including a disproportionate number of forage taxa. Principal usage varied by season, with forage species like Atlantic Menhaden Brevoortia tyrannus and Atlantic Mackerel Scomber scombrus preferentially using the lease areas in spring and Round Herring Etrumeus teres and longfin inshore squid Doryteuthis pealeii using lease areas in autumn. For species with relatively low usage of the lease areas, there was a tendency for the usage related to overall habitat to be lower than usage for core habitat; in contrast, for species with high usage of the lease areas, that usage was higher for overall habitat than for core habitat. The area of habitat tended to have positive trends across species, with these positive trends being disproportionately higher among forage taxa. These results frame the importance of wind lease areas for species in the NES, particularly forage taxa that fulfill many important ecological functions.

The marine environment is a complex system, and with growing human demand, the sustainable use of multiple marine resources is continually challenged. The increasing complexity of overlapping marine activities causes pressures on the environment. Here, we review the fundamental aspects for effective marine management, particularly the role of science and scientific evidence to inform marine policy and decision making. The outcomes of internal expert workshops were used to analyse currently applied marine management practices in the UK using four marine sectors in English waters based on the expertise: environmental impact assessments; dredge and disposal operations; marine protected areas; and offshore renewable energy. Strengths, weaknesses, and commonalities between these sectors were assessed in terms of their effectiveness for marine management. Finally, we make recommendations based on the outputs to better inform effective yet sustainable marine management. The importance of increasing accessibility to data, hypothesis-driven environmental monitoring, streamlining funding opportunities and ensuring effective dissemination of data to ensure scientific outcomes and achieve increased robustness of assessments is emphasised. We also recommend that assessment drivers align with the outputs and approaches should be holistic and engage with the public to ensure a shared understanding and vision.

Nature-based solutions are widely advocated for freshwater ecosystem conservation and restoration. As increasing amounts of river restoration are undertaken, the need to understand the ecological response to different measures and where measures are best applied becomes more pressing. It is essential that appraisal methods follow a sound scientific approach. Here, experienced restoration appraisal experts review current best practice and academic knowledge to make recommendations and provide guidance that will enable practitioners to gather and analyse meaningful data, using scientific rigor to appraise restoration success. What should be monitored depends on the river type and the type and scale of intervention. By understanding how habitats are likely to change we can anticipate what species, life stages, and communities are likely to be affected. Monitoring should therefore be integrated and include both environmental/habitat and biota assessments. A robust scientific approach to monitoring and appraisal is resource intensive. We recommend that appraisal efforts be directed to where they will provide the greatest evidence, including ‘flagship’ restoration schemes for detailed long-term monitoring. Such an approach will provide the evidence needed to understand which restoration measures work where and ensure that they can be applied with confidence elsewhere.