Analysis of the TIDE Estuarine Conflict Matrices

Recreation & Social use was scored as being a function of moderate importance.

ESTUARY ANALYSIS

For the purposes of the TIDE project the Weser has been divided into 6 zones including one relating to the anabranches, these zones covering the reaches stretching from the mouth of the estuary to the centre of the City of Bremen.

The majority of the intertidal and subtidal area within the estuary is included within the Natura 2000 designation, with only the upstream area of Zone 1 within the main urban and port area of Bremen excluded from this. Apart from the main urban and port area of Bremen located within Zone 1, other main urban and port centre is located in Zone 5 (Bremerhaven).

The majority of the remaining reach features agricultural usage with smaller urban centres, and with the main channel both constrained by flood protection structures and dredged in order to maintain navigation. Several large islands are present in the middle estuary (Zones 2 and 3), e.g. Harriersand and Strohauser Plate.

The conflict matrix process for the Weser (Figure 17) identified 29 high level conflicts with 4 of these scored at -10 or below), together with 19 strong synergisms, 2 of which were scored as very strong (e.g. 10 or above). However, whilst this means that the Weser was identified as having a considerably greater number of high level conflicts than the Elbe (29 interactions scoring -7 or below for the Weser compared to 12 high scoring interactions for the Elbe), this may to some extent be a result of the RWG weighting of topic area importance, which rated the four main topic areas of greater overall importance than the Elbe RWG (a score of 6.7 compared to 5.8 and a mean across the TIDE estuaries of 6.0). This potential skew is further borne out by a much greater number of strong synergisms than for the Elbe.

However, whilst this topic importance skew might be considered likely to have influenced the number of high level scoring interactions, it is of note that only 4 of the 29 were rated as severe (e.g. -10 or above) suggesting that there may be additional ameliorating factors influencing conflict severity.

The main interaction areas of user conflict were between conservation requirements and navigation needs, as well as between conservation requirements and infrastructure and commercial access, with archaeology also observed as impacting on navigation. Access onto the system, as well as flood protection needs and a range of activities associated with navigation requirements were recorded as having impacts with conservation needs, with infrastructure, agricultural run-off and residential development also impacting on conservation protection requirements. Navigation requirements also impacted on recreational activity, landscape and flood protection needs.

Despite this, a range of strong synergistic interactions were also produced by the analysis, including linkages between conservation requirements and landscape value and archaeology, as well as between landscape and recreation and within various navigation requirements. The provision of flood protection was also identified as being a benefit for ports related activity adjacent to the estuary.

Strong negative and positive associations for the Weser are provided in Tables 3 and 4.

Table 3: Strong negative associations between uses/users for the Weser Estuary.

Impact of		Impact On		Score
Category	Activity	Category	Activity
Conservation	Protected subtidal area	Access (e.g. disturbance)	Commercial	-7
Conservation	Protected subtidal area	Navigation	Channel stabilisation	-11
Conservation	Protected subtidal area	Navigation	Capital dredging	-8
Conservation	Protected subtidal area	Navigation	Maintenance dredging	-9
Conservation	Protected subtidal area	Infrastructure	Infrastructure on bed or in water column (e.g. pipes, cables, piers, marinas)	-7
Conservation	Protected intertidal area	Access (e.g. disturbance)	Commercial	-7
Conservation	Protected intertidal area	Infrastructure	Infrastructure on bed or in water column (e.g. pipes, cables, piers, marinas)	-7
Archaeology	Archaeology/history protected site	Navigation	Channel stabilisation	-8
Access (e.g. disturbance)	Recreational access on the banks & intertidal	Conservation	Protected intertidal area	-9
Access (e.g. disturbance)	Commercial	Conservation	Protected intertidal area	-7
Flood/coast protection	Flood bank (dyke/gabion/wall)	Conservation	Protected area adjacent to system	-8
Flood/coast protection	Flood bank (dyke/gabion/wall)	Conservation	Protected intertidal area	-11
Navigation	Channel stabilisation	Landscape	High value landscape feature	-9
Navigation	Channel stabilisation	Conservation	Protected subtidal area	-11
Navigation	Channel stabilisation	Conservation	Protected intertidal area	-11
Navigation	Channel stabilisation	Biological extraction	Commercial (e.g. fish & shellfish)	-7
Navigation	Channel stabilisation	Biological extraction	Recreational	-8
Navigation	Capital dredging	Conservation	Protected subtidal area	-8
Navigation	Capital dredging	Conservation	Protected intertidal area	-8
Navigation	Capital dredging	Flood/coast protection	Flood bank (dyke/gabion/wall)	-8
Navigation	Maintenance dredging	Landscape	High value landscape feature	-7
Navigation	Maintenance dredging	Conservation	Protected subtidal area	-9
Navigation	Maintenance dredging	Conservation	Protected intertidal area	-9
Navigation	Maintenance dredging	Flood/coast protection	Flood bank (dyke/gabion/wall)	-9
Infrastructure	Infrastructure on bed or in water column (e.g. pipes, cables, piers, marinas)	Conservation	Protected subtidal area	-7
Infrastructure	Infrastructure on bed or in water column (e.g. pipes, cables, piers, marinas)	Conservation	Protected intertidal area	-7
Agriculture	Agricultural run-off	Conservation	Protected subtidal area	-9
Agriculture	Agricultural run-off	Conservation	Protected intertidal area	-9
Residential	Housing adjacent to system	Landscape	High value landscape feature	-7

Table 4: Strong positive associations between uses/users for the Weser Estuary.

Impact of		Impact On		Score
Category	Activity	Category	Activity
Landscape	High value landscape feature	Access (e.g. disturbance)	Recreational access on water	7
Landscape	High value landscape feature	Access (e.g. disturbance)	Recreational access on the banks & intertidal	7
Conservation	Protected area adjacent to system	Conservation	Protected subtidal area	8
Conservation	Protected area adjacent to system	Conservation	Protected intertidal area	8
Conservation	Protected subtidal area	Landscape	High value landscape feature	9
Conservation	Protected subtidal area	Conservation	Protected intertidal area	11
Conservation	Protected subtidal area	Archaeology	Archaeology/history protected site	7
Conservation	Protected intertidal area	Landscape	High value landscape feature	9
Conservation	Protected intertidal area	Conservation	Protected subtidal area	11
Conservation	Protected intertidal area	Archaeology	Archaeology/history protected site	7
Archaeology	Archaeology/history protected site	Conservation	Protected subtidal area	7
Archaeology	Archaeology/history protected site	Conservation	Protected intertidal area	7
Access (e.g. disturbance)	Recreational access on water	Residential	Housing adjacent to system	7
Access (e.g. disturbance)	Recreational access on banks & intertidal	Residential	Housing adjacent to system	7
Flood/coast protection	Flood bank (dyke/gabion/wall)	Ports & Harbours	Port related activity adjacent to system	7
Navigation	Channel stabilisation	Navigation	Vessel movement	8
Navigation	Capital dredging	Navigation	Maintenance dredging	7
Navigation	Vessel movement	Navigation	Channel stabilisation	8
Residential	Housing adjacent to system	Access (e.g. disturbance)	Recreational access on water	7

ZONE ANALYSIS

Zone 1 (Figure 18a) of the Weser covers the reach within much of the City of Bremen and with associated port activity, with parts of the reach also included in the Natura 2000 designation for the estuary. A series of high scoring interactions were observed across a range of uses in this zone identified as impacting on the nature conservation requirements, as well as recreational fishing. Downstream from the City of Bremen (Zone 2) (Figure 18a), a considerable reduction in the number and severity of interactions was observed, this area featuring primarily agricultural land use along the banks, although being included in the Natura 2000 designation. A cluster of issues associated with navigation requirements impacts on nature conservation protection are noted.

Zone 3 (Figure 18b) which lies primarily within an area of agricultural land with marsh areas and inclusion in the Natura 2000 designation features an increased impact severity of uses on the conservation interests, with high scores arising from not just navigational requirements but also flood protection, port land claim industrial and residential discharges and agricultural run-off. Further conflict interactions arise from nature conservation needs on navigation and port expansion (land claim), with navigation needs (dredging) also affecting flood protection.

Zone 4 (Figure 18b) on the Weser relates to the anabranches and in general features a low level of impact interactions, but with a number of high scoring conflicts from uses acting on the conservation protection needs of the area.

5b. DISCUSSION

The conflict matrix analysis for the Weser indicates a considerably greater number of high scoring conflict interactions for most zones than for the Elbe. However similarly, a greater number of high scoring synergistic interactions are also recorded, which suggests that RWG scoring of conflict levels was perhaps higher than for the Elbe. This conclusion is somewhat borne out by the greater score attached to the high level main topic assessment undertaken by the RWG (scoring this at 6.7 compared to 5.8 for the Elbe and with a TIDE estuaries mean of 6.0). However, it is also noted that usage scores for the Weser as a whole, were considerably greater than for the Elbe (but below those for the Scheldt), and it therefore may the case that the elevated conflict and synergisms scores between uses are to some extent a reflection of a greater level of use in the estuary compared to the Elbe.

The outcomes from the matrix analysis process are interesting in that they indicate that the greatest severity of conflict interactions arise towards the outer estuary zones (zones 3, 5 and 6), primarily, but not exclusively relating to navigation related activity on the nature conservation aspects of the estuary. These issues largely arise from the need for management actions along the outer estuary to maintain the navigable fairway for traffic to and from the port of Bremen. It is also apparent that the corresponding requirements for conservation protection (the Natura 2000 site) produce conflicts with the need for the maintenance of navigational access.

Zone 1, which covers much of the urban area of the City of Bremen, features a reduction in the impact levels relating to navigation:conservation interactions, this not unexpected given that around half of the zone is outwith the Natura 20000 site boundary. However, there are high scoring impacts observed on recreational activity such as fishing and residential housing provision arising from port and port-related activity as well as industrial uses and the discharge of residential effluent.

Section 8 (Appendices) provides the Conflict Level Assessment spreadsheets for Zones 1 to 6 of the Weser in greater detail (larger scale).