for the West Part of the Gulf of Gdańskim.umg.edu.pl › images › ksiazki ›...

M A R I T I M E I N S T I T U T E I N G D A Ń S KG D A Ń S K 2 0 1 0

Jacek Zaucha

Pilot Draft Plan for the West Part

of the Gulf of Gdańsk

FIRST MARITIME SPATIAl PlAN

IN PolAND

of Spatial Plan

4 p i l o t d r a f t p l a n f o r t h e w e s t p a r t o f t h e g u l f o f g d a ń s k

Editor: Jacek Zaucha

Reviewer: andrzej Cieślak

Co-authors: andrzej CieślakJuliusz gajewskilidia kruk-dowgiałłourszula kowalczykiwona kuklikandrzej osowieckiMariusz sapotakrzysztof e. skórakazimierz szeflerhenryka wojcieszykkrzysztof wojcieszyk

Contributors:Magdalena Błeńskapaulina Brzeskaagnieszka BrzezińskaŁukasz gajewskianna goralewska-BurdukiewiczBenedykt hacagnieszka krężelMaciej kałasMarek kulińskiMagdalena MatczakMonika Michałekradosław opiołakatarzyna rybkaantoni staśkiewiczizabela Zelewska

Translation: ośrodek tłumaczeń „Bank&Bank” s.c., gdańsk

Typography: Magdalena Janke

Photos: dominik Żyłowski, http://wizjer.blogspot.comróżni autorzy, www.sxc.hu

Printing:

ISBN: 978-83-62438-05-1

5C o n t e n t s

Contents

INTRoDUCTIoN 6

PART 1 DETERMINANTS oF ThE DRAFT MARITIME SPATIAl PlAN oF ThE WEST PART oF ThE GUlF oF GDAŃSK 8

1.1 physical conditions and existing uses of sea area 81.2 Characteristics of protected species and species requiring protection 121.3 Characteristics of the most valuable habitats 181.4 Main threats to species and habitats 201.5 legal environment of nature protection in the area covered by the plan 221.6 state of spatial development of neighbouring land 251.7 planned development of the land area 301.8 fishery 321.9 tourism 371.10 transport 39

PART 2 ThE PRoCESS oF SPATIAl PlANNING FoR ThE WEST PART oF ThE GUlF oF GDAŃSK AND ITS RESUlTS 42

2.1 Methodology of development of the pilot plan 422.2 pilot draft spatial plan of the west part of internal sea waters of the gulf of gdańsk 52

2.2.1 legal basis and character of the plan 522.2.2 Boundaries of the sea area covered by the draft plan 532.2.3 the integral parts of the plan 532.2.4 determinations of the plan 542.2.5 detailed determinations concerning specific sea areas – sea basin sheets 602.2.6 final determinations 61

anneXe 2.1 list of sea basins 62anneXe 2.2 examples of sea basin sheets 632.3 Barriers hindering planning 682.4 Conclusions and recommendations 72

BIBlIoGRAPhY 78

FIGURES, MAPS AND TABlES 80


Introduction

Maritime spatial planning is a concept that has come to the attention of spatial planners and spatial decision-makers relatively recently. although attempts to draw up maritime spatial plans have been made in some countries for many years, a breakthrough came with the eu integrated maritime policy, as outlined in the green (eC 2006) and Blue (eC 2007) Books and presented, in detail, in the action plan (eC 2007a). on the map of Community policies, the maritime policy is a brand new phenomenon. the debate on the policy has been instrumental for the popularization of the concept of, and need for, maritime spatial planning in europe.

under polish law, drawing up spatial plans for sea areas has been possible since 2003 (Zaucha 2009, p.p. 36–38). responsibility for planning is uniform over all sea areas (i.e., internal sea wa-ters, 12-nm zone and eeZ). regulations concerning spatial planning of sea areas are contained in Chapter 9 (articles 37a and 37b) of the act on sea areas of poland and Maritime administration of March 21st, 1991. the authority responsible for drawing up the plan is the director of Maritime office. the offices, located in gdynia, słupsk and szczecin make up poland’s maritime administra-tion reporting to the minister competent for issues of maritime economy (currently the Minister of infrastructure).

7i n t r o d u C t i o n

however, existing regulations do not establish a requirement to plan, and – considering that the provisions concerning the role of the plans and their practical regulative importance are, in fact, too general – until 2008 no plan of that kind had been worked out in poland. one of the obvious reasons for that was also a lack of relevant executory regulations.

the spatial plan for the western part of the gulf of gdańsk is thus of a pilot nature. it has been drawn up at the order of the Maritime office in gdynia which acquired funds to that end un-der the „planCoast” eu project. the development of the draft pilot plan should be viewed as a practical attempt at testing the possibility for drawing up maritime plans under poland’s legal, information and staff-related conditions. the objective was also to improve the awareness of polish decision-makers and stakeholders that implementation of spatial planning in poland’s sea areas is needed. in addition, it was expected to provide experience and conclusions regarding the direction in which the maritime spatial planning system should be developed and implemented.

the plan has been worked out by an interdisciplinary team from the Maritime institute in gdańsk, representing the following disciplines: macrospatial planning, information technology (gis), ocea-nography, physical/biological ecology and economics. the team was supported by experts from the Voivodship spatial planning office (local spatial planning), ichthyologists and specialists on sea mammals from the Marine station of the university of gdańsk. prior to starting development of the plan, the team had analysed world-wide experience in spatial management of sea areas. the process of elaboration of the plan was extremely short, owing to financial and time restrictions of the planCoast project and lasted from september 2007 until March 2008. the initial version of the plan was present-ed to the experts of the Maritime office in gdynia in april 2008 and, after considering their remarks, was presented to the stakeholders in June 2009. paralelly, members of the planning team were involved in the process of the development of the national spatial development strategy, referred to as the „national spatial development Concept 2030”, thus securing synergy between both processes. at present, the draft plan is still of indicative nature. there is a hope, though, that after currently prepared changes of law the plan will effectively shape the spatial management of the western gulf of gdańsk area.

this book is composed of two parts. the first describes the planning conditions, in fact it is an analysis of the area covered by the plan and of the surrounding territories influencing the plan area. part two presents the process of plan development, the plan itself and conclusions for the future.


Part 1 Determinants of the draft maritime spatial plan of the west part of the Gulf of Gdańsk

1.1 PhYSICAl CoNDITIoNS AND ExISTING USES oF SEA AREA

the area covered by the pilot spatial plan covers the western part of internal sea waters of the gulf of gdańsk (Zatoka gdańska). its delimitation from the east, i.e., from the side of the sea (the re-maining part of the gulf of gdańsk) is the line joining the tip of the hel peninsula (półwysep hel-ski) with the boundary between gdynia and sopot municipalities (with the exclusion of gdynia, puck, Jastarnia and hel harbour areas, closed by breakwaters1). the area includes only sea waters to avoid collision with terrestrial spatial planning. the surface of the area totals to 40,550 ha. its border on the land side is the coastline, as set by the director of the Maritime office.

the sea area covered by the pilot plan is situated close to the tri-City (gdańsk, gdynia and sopot)agglomeration recognised as a metropolitan area (weak Mega) in european studies, the area being a multi-functional economic centre including an important multimodal transport hub. from the north it is closed by a region of intense tourist functions of national importance. the municipali-ties surrounding the area of the study were inhabited, as of 2006, by 316,512 inhabitants, the city of gdynia accounting for ca. 80% of that number.

1 they are subject to other planning regulations.

1

9d e t e r M i n a n t s o f t h e d r a f t M a r i t i M e s p a t i a l p l a n

Fig. 1. Puck BaySource: Maritime Institute in Gdańsk


the sea area covered by the plan is a part of the gulf of gdańsk. the area has a slightly diversified coastline and varied depths. the puck Bay (Zatoka pucka) accounts for about 90% of the sea area (fig. 1). the Bay is divided into two parts, different in terms of morphology, hydrology, hydrochem-istry and biocenosis – the eastern, outer part and the western, inner one, referred to also as the puck lagoon (Zalew pucki). the border between the two bodies of water is a spit-like form – ryf Mew(seagull sandbar) 8.6 km long, cut near rewa by the artificially deepened głębinka passage on the fairway to puck and a 1.3 km long narrows near kuźnica.

the two sea areas differ greatly from each other in terms of depth and morphology. the eastern part, much deeper, directly adjoins the gulf of gdańsk. the western part is a 2nd order estuary, meet-ing all the criteria of a lagoon (Majewski 1972). it is a shallow body of water (of average depth of 3.1 m, maximum depth is 9.1 m). its bottom relief is diversified with shallows (piaski Zachodnie (western sands), piaski dziewicze (Virgin sands)), troughs, deeps (rzucewska, kuźnicka, Chałupska deeps) and basins (pucki and kuźnicki) significanlty influencing its hydrological conditions. water circula-tion in the inner bay (of currents direction and speed) is quite instable and depends mainly on bottom relief and the changing wind directions. the larger puck Basin communicates with the eastern part of the Bay via głębinka, the kuźnicki Basin via the earlier mentioned narrows near kuźnica. slightly re-duced salinity, as compared to the external part, is observed – the mean multiannual salinity is 7.31. owing to small depths and considerable water mixing the halocline and thermocline phenomena are not observed (after kruk-dowgiałło 2000).

the bottom relief of the eastern (outer) water region is poorly varied, of diversified inclination (with the maximum depth of 54 m near the tip of the hel peninsula). two shoals extend along the hel peninsula – długa Mierzeja (long shoal) and Bórzyńska Mierzeja (Bórzyńska shoal). the hy-drology of the external part is primarly influenced by the inflow of sea waters – salinity is subject to greater fluctuations, depending on the inflow of waters from the gulf of gdańsk or of transformed waters of the Vistula river. generally, salinity is higher than in the inner puck Bay.

according to the water framework directive definition, the puck Bay is transitional water – the term meaning bodies of surface water in the vicinity of river mouths which are partly saline as a result of their proximity to coastal waters, but substantially influenced by freshwater discharges (after kruk-dowgiałło 2000).

Various forms of economical activity are carried out in the analysed area. Besides maritime trans-port, harbour activities, maritime and land-sea investment and fishery, tourism is an important line of business, which has dynamically developed in the last years. other forms of activity include: municipal activities (sewer pipes at Mechelinki and Jastarnia), coastal protection, military activities (from torpedo and navigation training areas, through underwater linear installations to immediate protection zones of the president of poland’s holiday centre), as well as submarine cables (gdynia – hel and gdynia – gdańsk telecommunications cables) and dumping grounds. navigation routes and approaches to the ports of gdynia, Jastarnia and kuźnica need periodical dredging in order to maintain adequate depths. there are only a few maritime structures in the area of the plan (such as torpedo houses with acces jetties), fishing boat landing places (they have practically no struc-tures except elements of infrastructure facilitating beaching of fishing boats) and seasonal tourist jetties.


Fig. 2. Current usesSource: Maritime Institute in Gdańsk


the current state of spatial management is presented in fig. 2. the following spatial structures with corresponding sea areas are present: fairways, roadsteads and anchorages (5,316.97 ha), dumping areas (591.80 ha), sand extraction areas, as well as sea areas excluded from common use (4,061.75 ha). as regards the remaining part of the area covered by the plan (i.e., 3,1171.28 ha), it would be difficult, without relevant studies, to speak about its lead functions or existence of functional sea areas. in terms of transport, the area serves the ports of gdynia, puck, Jastarnia and hel. Very important are ecological functions, reflected in the protection regime of natura 2000 areas. these include a natura 2000 bird protection area (plB220005 – 40,576 ha), a natura 2000 habitat protection area (plh220032 – 21,479 ha) and areas protected by the estabil-ishment of the Coastal landscape park (10,534 ha).

no location decisions for new investments and no licences have been issued for the area covered by the plan.

the following objects of underwater cultural heritage are known to be present in the area of the plan: puck – a mediaeval harbour entered in the register of historical monuments under 379/arche,• the wreck of a wooden sailing vessel, entered in the register of the Central Maritime Museum under f33.2,• the wreck of a wooden sailing vessel, entered in the register of the Central Maritime Museum under w-36,• technical monuments – „wicher” a polish navy vessel and „helena” – a rewa sailing vessel.•

in addition, it is planned to establish in the area the „wrecks of the puck Bay”, „wrecks of hel peninsula”, „kępa redłowska” and „solen” underwater cultural parks.

1.2 ChARACTERISTICS oF PRoTECTED SPECIES AND SPECIES REqUIRING PRoTECTIoN

Macrophytes

within the analysed sea region, particularly attractive, in terms of natural values, is the area of the inner puck Bay. this has been confirmed by studies of the bottom flora which, in 2006, had the biggest biomass compared both to the preceding years and to other regions of the gulf of gdańsk. underwater meadows, unique in poland’s coastal zone, are dominated, as regards bio-mass, by pondweed (Potamogeton spp.). Compared to the condition in the 1970s and 1980s a re-duction in the biomass of filamentuous brown algae (Pilayella littoralis and Ectocarpus siliculosus) and growth of biomass of strictly protected Zostera marina has been noted. these changes may be an indication that the state of environment of the inner bay has been improving.

a varied taxonomic composition has been observed in the inner puck Bay – 21 species, of which 8 are legally protected. unique species in the whole puck Bay include: Ruppia maritima – a very rare species ap-pearing in poland’s red Book and buttercup (Ranunculus baudotii) – occurring mostly in fresh waters.

in the outer puck Bay the most valuable areas of macrophyte occurrence are the Bórzyńska and długa shallows, up to the 2 m depth contour, where the richest in the whole gulf of gdańsk taxonomic composition (22 species) in present. the permanent species here are pondweed, and especially Potamogeton pectinatus and Zostera marina.


a characteristic feature of the puck Bay are the large areas of sandy bottom covered by vascular plants forming underwater meadows. in the 1940s and 1950s the vascular plants, together with macroalgae, made up Zostero-Furcellarietum or Fuceto-Furcellarietum plant associations, referred to also as sand bot-tom plant communities, e.g. Zosteretea-marinae. high natural values of the puck Bay have been reduced by the persistent lack, since late 1970s, of non attached algae: red alga (Furcellaria lumbricalis) and black-wrack (Fucus vesiculosus), making up the main component of plant associations, which algae, dominat-ing in the 1950s and 1960s, are now under strict protection. thalli of black-wrack are often stranded or float in the water column, yet they are not autochthonous individuals but are brought by currents from other regions of the Baltic sea. Currently, the one-, two- or three-species meadows are composed, interchangeably, mostly of vascular plants (8 taxa).

the most frequent components of meadows are representatives of Potamogeton genus, Zostera marina and Zannichellia palustris. species sporadically making up meadows include: Ruppia maritima, Ranun-culus baudotii, Myriophyllum spicatum. the most valuable, and the most endangered, component of the meadows is Zostera marina. the surface of the puck Bay bottom covered by it, despite its considerable reduction over the last 30 years, counts among the largest in poland’s coastal zone of the Baltic sea. the meadows constitute a perfect habitat for phytophyllic fauna and ichtyofauna and favourably influence their development and diversity. Changes in the quality and quantity structure, as well as reduction of the range of occurence of meadows have an adverse impact on the phytophyllic fauna. particularly detri-mental to the development of ichtyofauna is massive occurrence of filamentuous brown algae of Pilayella and Ectocarpus genera, forming mats smothering the bottom. the red algae, abounding in the puck Bay, reduce the water region’s natural values.

in the outer part of the puck Bay, in the area neighbouring the foot of the orłowo cliff, 14 species of macroalgae occur on the stony bottom. two definitely permanent species are the Polysiphonia fucoides and Hildenbrandia rubra red algae, with their share exceeding 80%. Fur-cellaria lumbricalis red alga, unique in poland’s coastal waters and under strict protection, was found in about 17% of samples. the site of stone-attached Furcellaria lumbricalis red alga is one of the three identified locations in the polish zone of the Baltic sea. on the sand bottom, in the area near the foot of orłowo cliff, meadows are formed by Zostera marina.

Fucus vesiculosus, Furcellaria lumbricalis and Zostera marina are also on the list of the Baltic’s en-dangered species and habitats.

Macrozoobentos

the list of species of bottom invertebrates in the habitats directive annex ii and poland’s red Book of animals does not include maritime species found in the western part of the gulf of gdańsk. Yet spe-cies of key importance occur there and play a significant habitat-forming role, such as mussel (Mytilus trossulus). in big concentrations it forms shoals of bivalves – a protected habitat. Besides habitat-forming species, a valuable element of bottom biocenoses are pollution-sensitive species (Bathyporeia pilosa, Jaera sp., Mysidacea, Pontoporeia femorata and Monoporeia affinis families) and species creating accompanying fauna associations, inhabiting compact meadows of bottom macrophytes, Zostera marina sea-grass first of all.


Ichtyofauna

table 1 presents a list of fish species found in the puck Bay.

Tab. 1 Fish species found in the Puck Bay

Species latin name Prefe-rences Abudance occurrence Repro-

duction

shad Alosa alosa i? r o (?) -Black goby Gobius niger ei h pr yes

two-spotted goby Gobiusculus flavescens ei r pr yessand goby Pomatoschistus minutus ei h pr yes

round goby Neogobius melanostomus. ei h pr yesCommon goby Pomatoschistus microps eii h pr yes

garfish Belone bellone eii h p yesasp Aspius aspius ei l o -

Barbel Barbus barbus e r o -Vimba bream Vimba vimba eei l p -

nine-spined stickleback Pungitius pungitius eii h pr yesthree-spined stickleback Gasterosteus aculeatus eii h pr yes

Ziege Pelecus cultratus e r (?) -striped seasnail Liparis liparis e r pr (?) (?)greater sandeel Hyperoplus lanceolatus eei h pr yes?

atlantic cod Gadus morrhua e h pr -european plaice Platessa platessa e l pr -

Broadnosed pipefish Syngnathus typhle eii l pr yesruffe Acerina cernua eei l p (?)ide Leuciscus idus eei l pr (?) -

sturgeon Acipenser sturio e r (?) -Crucian carp Carassius carassius. i l pr -

Common carp Cyprinus carpio carpio eii r (?) -white bream Blicca bjoerkna eii l pr yes (?)

shorthorn sculpin Myoxocephalus scorpius e h pr yes longspined bullhead Taurulus bubalis e? r pr (?) (?)

fourhorn sculpin Triglopsis quadricornis e r (?) -Bream Abramis brama eii l pr yestench Tinca tinca i r o -

grayling Thymallus thymallus i r ohooknose Agonus cataphractus e l pr yes

atlantic salmon Salmo salar ei l pr -Mackerel Scomber scombrus e r p (?) -Burbot Lota lota e l o (?) -ling Molva molva e r o -perch Perca fluviatilis ei h pr yes

rock gunnel Pholis gunnellus eei r pr yestwaite shad Alosa fallax e r (?) -

haddock Melanogrammus aeglefinus e r o -roach Rutilus rutilus ei l pr yes

sea stickleback Spinachia spinachia eei r pr (?) yes?rainbow trout Salmo gairdneri ei h p/introduced -

pike-perch Stizostedion lucioperca eei l pr (?) -whitefish (powan) Coregonus lavaretus eii l p yes

turbot Psetta maxima eei h pr yes (?)dover sole Solea solea e r o -


Species latin name Prefe-rences Abudance occurrence Repro-

duction flounder Platichthys flesus eei h pr ?

smelt Osmerus eperlanus eei l pr (?)pike Esox lucius eii r pr yes

european sprat Sprattus sprattus eei h pr ?herring Clupea harengus eei h pr yes

lumpfish Cyclopterus lumpus ei l pr yessand eel Ammodytes tobianus eei h pr yes (?)

Brown trout/sea trout Salmo trutta trutta ei h pr -european eel Anguilla anguilla ei h pr -

eelpout Zoarces viviparus eei h pr yes straightnose pipefish Nerophis ophidion ei h pr yes

whiting Merlangius merlangus e r o -swordfish Xiphias gladius e r o -

rudd Sardinius erythrophthalmus i r pr (?) yesdab Limanda limanda eei r (?) -

legend: [(?)] – uncertain assessment or data n/a. preference of geographic occupancy or direction of origin: [e] – in or from the external part of the Bay, [i] – in or from the inner part of the Bay, [ei] – occurrence possible in both parts of the Bay, [eii, eei] – occurrence possible in both parts of the Bay, but with the indication of its part: [eii] – inner or [eei] – external part. abundance: [h] – high, [l] – low, [r] – rare. occurrence [pr] – permanent, [p] – periodical, [o] – occasional. [Yes] – spawning in the puck Bay.

Source: own elaboration by K. E. Skóra and M. Sapota

as data published in the last years show, the natural structure of ichtyofauna of the puck Bay is characterized by great numbers of small-sized fish. the structure of ichtyofauna of the puck Bay, expressed in terms of frequency of the species in research catches using a non-selective trawl net, is presented in fig. 3 (skóra, sapota 2008).

Fig. 3. Structure of ichtyofauna of the Puck Bay, expressed in terms of frequency of the species in research catches using non-selective trawl netSource: own elaboration by K. E. Skóra and M. Sapota

the situation is different at the coasts of the Bay, in the shallowest water. three-spine and nine-spine stick-leback dominates there, the numbers and mass of the fish accounting for about 95% of total fish resources at the depth up to 1 m. the species of protected fish, for which fish quality of habitats of the puck Bay is of considerable value, include: sea stickleback, straightnose pipefish, broadnosed pipefish, common goby, black goby and two-spotted goby, as well as sand goby (albeit to a slightly smaller extent). the eastern, deepest part of the sea area is the habitat of twaite shad, a species protected also by Community law. straightnose pipefish, broadnosed pipefish and sea stickleback are the fish very strongly attached to underwater concentrations of


macroflora and coastal above-the-surface plants. adult gobius fish occupy the more open areas of the sand and stone bottom in search of clusters of bivalves. the fish live just as well among reed rootstocks, occupied, to an even greater extent by black goby, often found also at a greater depth, within mussel aggregations. two-spotted goby, as a more pelagic/demersal fish prefers the environment of deep water over big underwater stones grown over with green algae (skóra, sapota 2008). for the introduced (reproduced) sturgeon, the puck Bay is a potential feeding ground. the places of importance include such parts of the bottom where fauna on which it feeds is concentrated: sandeels, gobius, bivalves, polychaetes and macrocrustaceans (shrimps, brown shrimps, big isopod species) (skóra, sapota 2008).

sea lamprye is the rarest protected species for which the puck Bay offers a habitat of importance to its life cycle. this is the muddy mouth of river płutnica (skóra, sapota 2008).

Avifauna

results of the monthly count of birds of the western part of the gulf of gdańsk in 2006, covering the area from the mouth of the Vistula river mouth to hel, showed that for 6 species of waterbirds the puck Bay is europe’s important area of bird concentration in the non-breeding period, gathering more than 1% of their population (tab. 2). the particularly valuable species include: common mer-ganser (Mergus merganser) and smew (Mergus albellus). the populations of these birds wintering in the Bay account for 4.9% and 3.9% of north-european populations of the birds, respectively.

the considerable diversity of habitat conditions, as well as favourable climate conditions within the puck Bay make it an area of high concentration and rich species composition of avifauna. the species composition is slightly different at various places and undergoes changes depending on season and severity of winter.

Tab. 2. Numbers of most important waterbird species in the Puck Bay observed during investigations in January 2007 and maximum numbers in the preceding years

species

quantity Percent of population wintering in North-Western

Europe in relation to maximum quantity

Maximum 2005–2006* 2007

tufted duck Aythya fuligula 13 200 5 950 1.1

eurasian coot Fulica atra 22 600 4 520 1.3

Common merganser Mergus merganser 13 000 4 388 4.9

Mute swan Cygnus olor 5 200 834 2.1

smew Mergus albellus 1 550 152 3.9

greater scaup Aythya marila 6 200 75 2.0

Source: own elaboration of Maritime Institute in Gdańsk


Fig. 4. Positions of reported observations of grey seal in the Puck Bay, 1990–2004Source: own elaboration by I. Kuklik

Fig. 5. Positions of reported observations of common porpoise in the Puck Bay, 1990–2004Source: own elaboration by I. Kuklik


Marine mammals

as mammal species specific of the water region of the puck Bay grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) and common porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) should be recognized (kuklik 2008).

Currently, it is the grey seal that is most often observed in the sea area covered by the pilot plan. in the years 1990–99 there were 106, and in the years 2000–2006 – 133 instances of grey seal observed, caught in a net or found dead on poland’s coast. during the two mentioned periods about 75% of the observations were in the gulf of gdańsk, the puck Bay accounting for more than 30% of that share. the observations of live and dead individuals ranged from very young animals (aging from a couple of weeks to a few months) and adult individuals of both genders (fig. 4) (kuklik 2008).

the polish database for the period 1986–2005 includes descriptions of 104 common porpoises, out of which 71 are reports of bycatch in fishing nets, 23 – beached dead bodies of the animals, and 10 – swimming mammals observed from the coast and fishing vessels. over 40% of all the reports come from the area of the puck Bay (fig. 5) (kuklik 2008).

1.3 ChARACTERISTICS oF ThE MoST vAlUABlE hABITATS

Macrophytes and macrozoobentos

in the area covered by the draft plan there are five protected habitats, three of them protected under national law and two under international law, within natura 2000 sites. the characteristics of the areas are presented in table 3.

Tab. 3. Types of protected habitats present in the western part of the Gulf of GdańskNo. habitat Definition Dominating taxa Distribution

according to the ordinance of the Minister of environment of 14th august, 2001 (Journal of laws no. 92, item 1029)

1.Meadows in the sublitoral zone (Zosterion) seabed areas grown with rooted

plants (at least in 50%) along with co-occurring macroalgae on a surface not smaller than 20 m2 (przyrodnicza waloryzacja... 2000a)

Main species: Zostera marina,accompanying species: Zannichellia palustris,Potamogeton spp., Myriophyllum spicatum

Coastal waters: from hel-Bór to Jastarnia, from kuźnica to Chałupy, rzucewo, rewa Bay and at the foot of the orłowo cliff

2.

Charophycean meadows in the sublitoral zone (Ruppion maritimae)

Main species:Chara baltica, Tolypella nidifica,accompanying species: Zannichellia palustris,Potamogeton spp., Myriophyllum spicatum

Coastal waters: from Chałupy to kuźnica and from hel-Bór to Jurata, rzucewo

3. Marine bivalve shoals

seabed area occupied by aggregation of mussel (Mytilus trossulus) of great numbers and biomass

Mytilus trossulusCoastal waters in kuźnica area

according to the habitat directive


4.large shallow bays (1160)

water areas cutting into land and separated by land from the open sea, sheltered from the impact of waving, of limited inflow of fresh water (poradniki ochrony... 2000)

Zostera marina, Potamogeton spp., Zannichellia palustris,bentos algae, crustaceans, bivalves, snails, polychaetes

puck Bay

5. reefs (1170)

Bedrock in the sublitoral zone submerged in water and raised above the surrounding sea bottom (poradniki ochrony... 2000)

Furcellaria lumbricalis, Coccotylus truncatus, Polysiphonia fucoides, Mytilus edulis, Electra crustulenta, Balanus improvisus

rock and stone sea bottom in the area of the orłowo cliff


Marine mammals

as far as seals are concerned, the most often used habitat of the puck Bay is sand beaches and sandbars. dur-ing the breeding season it is most important to limit human access to the sites. the priority habitat is the seagull sandbar, where the ice floats remain longest and the place itself is a perfect refuge for resting animals. the most vulnerable phases of the grey seal’s life cycle – pairing and procreation – fall in the period from february to april. the moulting period, spent by seals only ashore, is May and June. an important role of seal resting places is also played by the tips of hel peninsula and the rewa Cape, which are at the top of underwa-ter slopes, allowing the animals quick escape by taking a deep dive (after kuklik 2008).

Common porpoise often feeds in very small depths close to the shore, usually at peaceful locations, free of any disturbance. due to the migratory nature of the species, it is difficult to determine clear-ly the boundaries of habitats important for the animal’s life and prospects of its survival. within the area covered by the draft plan, protected areas, where common porpoise has been observed, are the inner puck Bay and the eastern part of the Bay (after kuklik 2008).

Ichtyofauna

for the ichtyofauna of the puck Bay, the most valuable habitats that need protection include, first of all:

Submerged plant zones (vascular plants and macroalgae), which have been the habitat of such commercial species, as roach, perch, pike, eel, as well as non-utilisable protected species of: deep-snouted pipefish, straightnose pipefish, sea stickleback. for a majority of them the zone is a spawn-ing area. it is also a most important spawning place for two species living mostly outside the Bay waters – herring and garfish (skóra, sapota 2008).

Reed fields are specific communities of fresh water plants protruding above the water surface owing to small depth (from 0 to about 0.5 m). it is the living place for – predominantly – very small-sized species (gobius, stickleback, straightnose pipefish and broadnosed pipefish), for a few other species it plays the role of the area where spawn is deposited and incubated (pike, roach) and where fry takes shelter (skóra, sapota 2008).

aggregations of plants of that kind exist at the mouths of reda and płutnica rivers, along the coast between władysławowo and Chałupy, and in the area of Jastarnia and Jurata. they should be pro-tected and, at places where they have been destroyed (the forefield of the camping areas) should be largely reproduced (skóra, sapota 2008).


Sandy seabed plays an important role in the life of ichtyofauna of the puck Bay at least in three places. one is the sandy slope of the tip of the hel peninsula. its shallowest areas are occupied by sand goby and common goby, as well as sandeels. Juvenile flatfish (european flounder and turbot) live at slightly greater depths, while juvenile stages of codfish stay at the foot of the slope. the water column is periodically dominated by herring, sprat also rare and protected twaite shad is sometimes observed. the place, due to its morphology, the lifting of cold, well oxigenated water masses from deeper parts and their intense move-ment, plays a vital role in the life of marine species of ichtyofauna of the puck Bay (skóra, sapota 2008).

the next two sandy habitats are of a different character. they are vast surfaces with no stones or vegetation. one of them is situated between the fishing and naval harbours at hel (a similar habitat is probably located, west of the hel naval harbour, towards Jurata, but since the area is closed to civilian activities, no detailed data are available). the other area extends along the eastern verge of the southern part of seagull sandbar. these areas contain concentrations of lesser and greater sand eel, used by fishermen as bait (among others for eel). Considering the importance of the areas for coastal boat fishery they should be protected against degradation (skóra, sapota 2008).

Mouths of rivers and streams discharging into the Puck Bay are important habitats of ichtyo-fauna. they are, on one hand, migration routes for freshwater species, and on the other absolutely indispensable corridors for bi-environmental species (skóra, sapota 2008).

Artificial reefs are made up mainly by concrete and stone rubble mound breakwaters and coastal protection structures. Most important are the breakwaters of the ports of hel and Jastarnia. these places are inhabited by fish found also in other areas of the puck Bay, but certain species are much more numerous there, e.g. the viviparous blenny and father lasher (skóra, sapota 2008).

Avifauna

in the outer part of the puck Bay, areas of winter concentration of waterbirds (from november until March) are located in the Jastarnia area (swans, mallards, seagulls), on seagull sandbar (cormorant, seagulls) and in the harbour of hel (long-tailed duck).

in the inner puck Bay the most valuable areas of occurrence of birds wintering from november until March include the mouths of reda and płutnica and the area along the hel peninsula from kuźnica to władysławowo, to the depth of about 4 m. the most frequently represented birds in the areas are: tufted duck, cormorant, eurasian coot, greater scaup, mute swan, and – during frosty winters – smew, common merganser, common goldeneye.

1.4 MAIN ThREATS To SPECIES AND hABITATS

Most of the threats to species and habitats in the western part of the gulf of gdańsk result from anthropogenic pressure. the threats have their source in the immediate vicinity of the gulf and result from intense economical activities carried out in the area of the tri-City agglomeration.

also the relatively closely situated mouth of the Vistula is of considerable importance. the Vistula dis-charges into the gulf a heavy load of pollutants and biogenes from the entire area of its catchment.


Tab. 4. Major threats and their impact on natural environment of the western part of the Gulf of Gdańsk

Threat Impact

1.

incoherence of law• no uniform management of protected marine areas • no possibility to effectively manage the types of pro-• tection and enforce legally estabilished limitationsCivilization changes• insufficient environmental education and awareness•

nature protection functions in poland’s marine areas are • not realised despite establishment of protected areas

2.

excessive load of biogenes and suspended matter dis-• charged as non-point and point pollution (rivers and main drains from dębogórze, hel and Jurata treatment plants) pollution excessive load of biogenic substances and suspended • matter discharged into the gulf by the Vistula river

local eutrophication and its symptoms (decrease of • water transparency, degradation of bottom sediments, change in the structure of bottom flora and fauna) eutrophication in the entire gulf of gdańsk and its • manifestations (as above)

3. excessive, uncontrolled tourism and human settle-• ment in the narrow coastal zone

destruction of valuable coastal habitats • disturbance of peaceful life of sea mammals and birds • (acoustic discomfort)

4. use of inappropriate fishing equipment• unsustainable fishery• poaching•

Mechanical destruction of underwater meadows and • mussel aggregations – spawning areas and habitats of many fish species Bycatch of protected fish species and juvenile individu-• als, bycatch of sea mammals (seals and common por-poises getting entangled and dying in fishing nets) Mortality of diving birds• overfishing of commercial species •

5.intense navigation•

potential threat of polluting the environment with oil• sanitary contamination and litter in the sea area• introduction of alien species, threatening native fauna • and flora disturbance of peaceful life of sea mammals and birds • (acoustic discomfort)

6. disturbance of seabed by dredging of fairways and ap-• proach routes and to protect the shores destruction of protected meadows and bottom fauna •


the strongest anthropogenic impact on the most valuable natural areas results from the following currently carried out types of activity and investments:

tourism within the area of piaski dziewicze, the mouth of reda river and rewa Cape, • excessive speed of motor-driven vessels, in the inner part of the puck Bay in particular, and • growing noise intensity in the area (e.g. a noise of intensity and frequency audible to common porpoise results in lack of sufficient quietness for interspecific communication, e.g. between mother and her young, male-female, difficulties in proper location of the fish they feed on, or identification of obstacles, e.g. nets, since the modern fine structure of the fabric does not reflect a sufficiently strong echo),poaching, dredging and use of nets in all the above mentioned most valuable areas and influence • of the fishing harbour of kuźnica on piaski dziewicze and the Jastarnia harbour on the długa and Bórzyńska shallows,coastal defence in the area of piaski dziewicze,•


outlets of main drains in the area of długa and Bórzyńska shallows,• military activities within the długa and Bórzyńska shallows. •

the threats and their negative impact on the ecosystem of the discussed water area are presented in table 4.

1.5 lEGAl ENvIRoNMENT oF NATURE PRoTECTIoN IN ThE AREA CovERED BY ThE PlAN

Currently, in the area covered by the pilot plan exist three forms of nature protection: the Coastal landscape park, an area of special protection of birds – the puck Bay plB220005 and a special habitat protection area – the puck Bay and hel peninsula plh220032 (tab. 5, fig. 6). this results in specific consequences as regards the use of the area onto which the protection is extended (tab. 6)2.

Tab. 5. Forms of nature protection in the western part of the Gulf of Gdańsk principles of operation

Coastal landscape park (npk)

the puck Bay plB220005

the puck Bay and hel peninsula plh220032

legal basis for the establishment

resolution no. iX/49/78 of the Voivodship people’s Council of gdańsk (official gazette of the Voivodship people’s Council of gdańsk of 1978, no. 1, item 3) amended by ordinance of the governor of pomerania no. 55/06 of 15th May, 2006 (official gazette 58/2006)

Birds directive – Council directive 79/409/eeC of 2nd april, 1979 on the conservation of wild birds, oJ l 103, 25.4.1979 p. 1–19, amended by directives: 85/411/eeC, 86/122/eeC, 91/244/eeC, 94/24/eC;

ordinance of the Minister of environment of 21st July, 2004 on areas of special protection of birds (Journal of laws of 2004, no. 229 item 2313)

habitats directive – Council directive 92/43/eeC of 21st May, 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and on wild fauna and flora, oJ l 206, 22.7.1992, p.7, amended by directive 97/62/eC.

the area is proposed for protection (at the stage of a Biogeographical seminar)

protection plan

Currently no protection plan.

a protection plan is established, by means of an ordinance, by the governor within 6 months of receipt of the draft, and drawn up by the director of the park within 5 years of establishment of the plan (art. 19, nature Conservation act of 16th april, 2004)


the protection plan is established by the minister competent for the environment for a period of 20 years and is drawn up by the agency exercising supervision of the protected area withinr 5 years from the establishment of the area (art. 29, nature Conservation act of 16th april, 2004)


the protection plan is established by the minister competent for the environment for a period of 20 years and is drawn up by the agency exercising supervision of the protected area within 5 years from the establishment of the area (art. 29, nature Conservation act of 16th april, 2004)


2 activities of the regional water Management Board of gdańsk also were taken into account during the development of the draft spatial plan. the Board implements provisions of the water framework directive regarding water and sewage management. responsibilities of the Board include, among others, providing and passing the explanations needed for the development of spatial management plans and local spatial plans, and for the consultation processes of these documents.


Fig. 6. Existing forms of nature protectionSource: Maritime Institute in Gdańsk


Tab. 6. Prohibitions and limitations effective in the protected areas of the western part of the Gulf of Gdańsk

protected areas prohibitions and limitations

Coastal landscape park

under the draft park protection plan (legally binding protection plan does not exist) the following prohibited:

undertaking projects which can have considerable impact on environment as defined in art. 51 of the act • of 27th april, 2001 – environmental protection law (Journal of laws no. 62, item 627 with later amend-ments),intentional killing of wild animals, destroying breeding grounds, other shelters and procreation places, as • well as spawning areas and deposited spawn, with the exception of amateur angling and activities under-taken within the framework of rational fishing management, extracting minerals and amber for commercial purposes,• executing earth works durably distorting land surface, with the exception of works related to storm pro-• tection, flood protection or landslide protection, or construction, reconstruction, maintenance or repair of water facilities, changing water conditions unless the changes serve the purpose of nature conservation or rational fishing • management,using motor boats or other engine-driven craft in open water reservoirs, outside established water routes to • port in puck and kuźnica harbour.

puck Bay plB220005

according to the act of 16th april, 2004 on nature Conservation (protection plan does not exist) it is forbidden in the areas:

to undertake actions that can considerably deteriorate the state of natural habitats, as well as habitats of • vegetation and animals. it is also required to limit tourism, commercial activities, hunting and investments (art. 33 and 34).

puck Bay and hel peninsula plh220032

according to the act of 16th april, 2004 on nature Conservation (protection plan being does not exist) it is forbidden in the areas:

to undertake actions that can considerably deteriorate the state of natural habitats, as well as habitats of • vegetation and animals. it is also required to limit tourism, commercial activities, hunting and investments (art. 33 and 34).


the legal status of specific protected areas differs. the areas are characterized by various legal regimes and are managed by different state agencies. such a situation makes it impossible to prop-erly perform nature conservation functions in the waters of inner puck Bay, which – despite being included in the boundaries of the Coastal landscape park – is legally subjected to the maritime administration and to legal rules concerning sea areas. the director of the landscape park has no legal instruments by which he could exercise the function of nature conservation at sea. work on development of the protection plans is being carried out.

Major conclusions contained in the draft protection plan of the Coastal landscape park, which must be taken into account in the pilot spatial plan, include:

restoration of natural values which have been lost or disturbed in result of human activity, if it • is practically feasible, retaining of particular values of flora and phytocenosis of the Coastal landscape park area,• maintenance of breeding, habitation and resting grounds of specific groups of animals,• improvement of the state of water environment of the puck Bay and its protection within the • boundaries of the park and its buffer zone, to allow restoration of the water region’s natural and


recreational values,protection of the park’s environment against the risk of extraordinary environmental threats and • providing conditions allowing minimizing the negative effects of such incidents,extension of reserve-type protection to the areas of „sea-grass Meadows” and „long shoal”,• it is recommended to develop and implement programmes for algae reintroduction and sea-grass • replanting.

Major conclusions from the pilot programme to develop management plans for natura 2000 areas (plh 220032 and plB 220005) include:

determining the required state of nature conservation of specific habitats and species in the • natura 2000 areas,development and implementation of a programme of monitoring of habitats, species and threats • in the areas.

Besides the three forms of protection, in the whole area covered by the pilot plan also national and international legislation concerning species protection is in force. in poland, all sea mammals are protected by law (national legislation), and the grey and ringed seal, as well as common porpoise, are species for which active protection is required.

fish protection is aimed, on one hand, at ensuring survival of rare species in risk of extinction, and on the other hand at protection of resources of commercial species. as far as the first aim is concerned, it is mostly the Minister of the environment who is the responsible agency. protection of the commercial species is exercised by the fishery inspection subject to the Minister of agriculture and rural development, via the department of fishery (previously the responsible governmental agency was the Minister of Maritime economy). fishing for sea organisms with the use of drag tools and fishing vessels longer than 15 m is generally forbidden within 3 nm from the coastline, and in the area east of the gdynia – hel fairway at depths smaller than 20 m.

1.6 STATE oF SPATIAl DEvEloPMENT oF NEIGhBoURING lAND

Coastal belt

the definition of the coastal belt is contained in the act on sea areas of poland and Maritime administration and further developed in the ordinance of the Council of Ministers of 29th april, 2003 on determining the minimum and maximum width of the technical and protective belts and methods of determining their boundaries.

the coastal belt is defined as the land area along the shore, which includes (fig. 7):the technical belt, which is the zone of direct interaction of sea and land; its main function is • to maintain the coast in a state complying with the requirements of safety and protection of environment;the protective belt, which covers the zone in which human activity directly impacts the state of • the technical belt.


Fig. 7. Diagram of definitions of areas included in the coastal zoneSource: „ZZOP w Polsce – stan obecny i perspektywy. Problemy erozji brzegu” K. Furmańczyk 2005

the boundaries of both belts are determined by the territorially competent director of maritime office, after obtaining an opinion of the municipal councils (in case of the technical belt) and in agreement with municipal councils (in case of the protective belt).

within the technical belt the director of the maritime office has the strongest decision-making powers. without the director’s permission no activities are allowed in the area. however, this does not exclude other authorities from the process of managing the area, i.e., the municipalities draw up spatial plans for the technical belt, the building permits are issued by the governor, and areas within the belt are, in most cases, owned by the treasury.

in the protective belt, the municipalities have the strongest decision-making powers, however cer-tain decisions made in the area by municipalities must be agreed with the territorially competent director of maritime office.

the area of the coastal belt adjoining the water region covered by the draft plan includes territories of 5 urban municipalities: gdynia, puck, władysławowo, Jastarnia and hel and 2 rural communes:

the coastal belt is establshed by the act on sea areas of poland and Maritime administration of 21st March with

later amendments (Journal of laws no. 3, item 153), and the detailed rules of determining its internal and external

boundaries are given in the ordinance of the Council of Ministers of 29th april 2003 on the determination of

maximum and minimum width of the technical and protective belts and the way of setting the boundaries (Journal

of laws no. 89, item 820).


kosakowo and puck. in the case of the hel and Jastarnia municipalities, their whole territory is within the coastal belt. in the territory of the puck municipality and puck rural commune, bounda-ries of the protective belt are not yet determined, but the technical belt is legally established.

the area of the entire coastal belt, the management of which impacts the territory covered by the draft plan, is about 55 km2, including 14.90 km2 of the technical belt. the total length of coastline is about 85.3 km. within the coastal belt the areas are used in the following ways:

forms of reserve-type nature conservation 731.34 ha, including:reserves 557 ha,• reserve buffer zones 112.7 ha,• ecological areas 48.52 ha,• documentation sites 13.12 ha,•

forests 2 897 ha,developed and urbanised areas 377.2 ha.

the coastal belt is an important element of the recreational potential of the region and contains high natural values. on the puck Bay side of the hel peninsula between władysławowo and Jastar-nia there are low, flat, partly water-logged plains of organogenic-mineral accumulation with local outcrops of peat. at the coast are reed fields, and some narrow natural beaches, about 10 m wide, which are not very attractive for recreation. the eastern part of the peninsula, from Jurata to the tip of the hel peninsula, has a dune coast. it is subjected to intense marine erosion, resulting in some places in complete disappearance of the narrow beaches. the beaches are, however, poland’s only beaches with southern and western exposition. hence efforts taken by the municipalities to widen them artificially. along the western coast of the puck Bay, high postglacial moraines with cliff coasts (reaching south to gdynia) are separated by wide and low ice margin valleys. in these valleys nearly non-accessible lagoon type coasts have developed.

along the coast are the seaports of gdynia, puck, Jastarnia and hel and fishing and yacht ha-vens of gdynia (4), Mechelinki, rewa (2), puck (2), rzucewo, swarzewo, osłonino, Chałupy and kuźnica.

within the coastal belt and port areas 27 local spatial plans are effective. their share in the coverage of the coastal belt varies. the biggest is in the town of puck, where the whole coastal area is comprehen-sively covered by 2 local plans. in the municipality of władysławowo nearly the whole coastal belt is covered by the plans. only the area of the „salty Meadows” reserve and its buffer is not covered by a lo-cal spatial plan. in the municipality of kosakowo the 5 local spatial plans in force cover, in total, 26% of the surface of the coastal area, and after excluding the „Mechelińskie Meadows” reserve with its buffer zone and over 70 ha of the closed areas, this accounts for half of the coastal belt. in the city of gdynia the effective local spatial plans cover about half of the coastal belt and almost 30% of the port area. in the rural commune of puck two local spatial plans cover in total (after deduction of Beka reserve) over half of the coastal belt. in the municipalities of Jastarnia and hel only very small portions of the coastal belt are covered by local plans.


Most important determinations resulting from the state of spatial management of Puck Bay’s coastal municipalities

spatial management of the coastal municipalities around the area covered by the plan has a direct impact on the functioning of that water region. in result of analysis of the studies of pre-conditions and directions in spatial management3 legally in force in these municipalitties4, four main areas of land-sea interactions, related to activities of the municipalities and their inhabitants, were identi-fied: sewage management – important for the ecological state of waters, development of tourism – determining the demand for sea space to perform maritime tourism, and issues related to nature conservation and coastal protection, often requiring complementary action taken in the sea. in case of Jastarnia, also the impact of fishery is important.

the analysed studies indicate that tourism and recreation are of high importance for the local economy (in some municipalities also fishery and/or national defence related functions are important). even in the multi-functional gdynia the coastal zone is an important recreational area for more than 250 thou-sand of the city’s inhabitants. only the municipality of puck signals an insufficient level of investment in tourism and recreation, as compared to the existing needs. in the municipality of hel the number of ac-commodation places in recreation centres, boarding houses, hotels and guest rooms exceeds 4 thousand. to this should be added over 4 thousand one-day visitors during the weekends and quite a number of participants of children summer camps and people staying in tents on camping grounds. in total, the number of tourists is at least twice the number of permanent inhabitants. the municipality of Jastarnia has about 30 accommodation facilities, with about 3,900 beds (2,100 in year-round facilities). the numbers show that the seasonal pressure of tourism is high, and this is confirmed also by other statements from the studies, such as heavy traffic and periods of traffic congestion, uncontrolled parking or insufficient availability of permanent and seasonal parking places. the hel peninsula has still unexploited resources of mineral waters and starting their extraction would raise the peninsula’s tourist attractiveness even more.

Considerable problems of the analysed municipalities with sewage management add up to the tourism pressure. for instance, in Jastarnia the treatment plant does not operate on a stable basis and does not reach, particularly during the summer season peak, the required level of treatment. the sewage is discharged into the puck Bay through a 1,600 m long pipeline. the volume of the discharged sewage, by the 2002 data, was 1,284 m3/day.

the hel treatment plant also discharges sewage into the puck Bay instead of the open sea. Meanwhile the municipality of puck reports significant insufficiency of its sanitary sewage system. in the munici-pality of kosakowo, the main source of pollution of surface waters was the „dębogórze” sewage treat-ment plant, which discharges treated sewage into the puck Bay near Mechelinki, and fuel station no. 21 at dębogórze, discharging sewage into the kanał leniwy (leniwy Channel). the sewage treatment plant serves gdynia, rumia, reda, wejherowo and kosakowo, i.e., more than 300,000 people. the discharged sewage complies with polish standards now, and shortly shall meet the eu requirements.

3 the „study...” is the only municipal planning document covering the municipality’s whole territory. it determines comprehensive spatial and economic policies of the municipality in long-term perspective.

4 the team developing the pilot plan analysed the studies of pre-conditions and directions of spatial management in force in the municipalities of Gdynia (2008), kosakowo (2006), rural municipality of puck (2000), Jastarnia (2005) and hel (2003). the studies of the municipality of puck and władysławowo were not analysed because they are rather outdated.


rain and melt waters are also a source of trouble. in Jastarnia the rain and melt water sewerage system requires improvement, and at Jurata the construction of the system should be finally finished. in hel part of the rain water is discharged into the Bay. it is not feasible to establish a complete rainwater sewerage system because the ground water deposits are shallow and the soil has to be supplied with water. in gdynia nearly all rainwater is discharged without pre-treatment. only one of the main drains discharging into the Bay has a separator. in case of rainwater sewerage discharging into the local streams, only 26 out of 104 municipal outlets have treatment facilities. poor state of repair and low throughput of main storm drains in the city add up to the situation.

the condition of the atmosphere is also not without importance for the state of the natural en-vironment of the area covered by the plan. the main source of pollution is shipping, but both in hel and in other municipalities of the hel peninsula the heating systems are based on solid fuel. in Jastarnia, a high share of solid fuel in the power-balance (coal and coke in the first place, their share in the fuel consumption structure being 36.7%5) has a negative impact on the aerosanitary climate of the town.

all the studies stressed the significant natural values of the coastal zone. in gdynia these included, e.g., nature reserves (kępa redłowska), ecological areas (the swelinia ravine), natura 2000 areas, as well as beaches and cliff coasts. all gdynia’s cliff coasts should be considered as endangered due to the progress of marine erosion, particularly in conditions of the observed and predicted sea level rise. in the kosakowo municipality, near rewa, occur halophyte communes, on the coastal dunes there are communes of sea lyme grass and european marram grass, and there is one of the biggest in the voivodship populations of the protected sea holly. additionally, the coastal part of the municipality abounds with nesting birds. a part of the municipality is in the territory of the Coastal landscape park. Cliff coasts are also in this municipality, i.e., the klif Mecheliński (Mechelinki Cliff) endangered by erosion. there is also the unique in poland rewa Cape with its variable length resulting from a complex set of marine sand accumulation processes and wave and storm surge action. the rural municipality of puck is characterized by a complex set of valuable natural areas (including cliff and flat coastline, sites of wild nature), covered, in result, by protec-tion within the Coastal landscape park system (including land and sea areas). the threat of landscape and cultural heritage degradation by excessive, uncontrolled development is stressed in the “study...” of this municipality. the whole area of Jastarnia is situated within the Coastal landscape park. there is only one, but important, ecological area – the torfowe kłyle (peat kłyle) in the municipality, however new ones are planned. the Jastarnia study pays much attention to moderately resilient habitats, including meadows and peat and brush communities, located on accumulation plains on the puck Bay side of the hel penin-sula. also the whole hel municipality is located in the Coastal landscape park. the harbour of hel is an important bird wintering area (especially auks and long-tailed ducks). the study indicates that excessive development of the tourist function may pose a danger to the natural values of the spit.

in the Jastarnia study, fishery, based on individually operated vessels sailing from the port of Jas-tarnia and the kuźnica haven, is considered a still important function for the development of the municipality. however, fish processing businesses (smoking chambers in Jastarnia and kuźnica) are gradually disappearing and are replaced with yachting-related facilities. a similar course of think-ing is also present in the documents concerning hel, gdynia and even kosakowo.

5 as of the date of elaboration of the study.


the studies for both hel and Jastarnia pay much attention to passenger navigation providing tour-istically attractive connections of the peninsula with the tri-City.

1.7 PlANNED DEvEloPMENT oF ThE lAND AREA

Directions of development of the municipalities adjoining the sea region covered by the plan

the analysis of studies of pre-conditions and directions of spatial management of the municipali-ties adjoining the area covered by the plan, and of the strategies of development, shows that the majority of the municipalities consider that the following is most important:

development of tourist infrastructure, • improvement of transport accessibility, • extension of the tourist season, • development of fishery. •

in addition, in case of gdynia, development of the port and creation of conditions allowing the city to perform the role of an important transport hub is planned. in effect, the frequently men-tioned activities include:

improvement of tourist infrastructure (with cycling and water routes), • establishment of passenger connections to all coastal locations, • promotion of historical locations and open-air museums, • development of transport hubs, jetties, marinas, information points, • greater diversification of tourist services based on cultural heritage, • cultural offer and natural/health values, • restructuring of the areas connected with fishery, • including support of boat fishing and aquaculture in compliance with requirements of the Com-• mon fishery policy, construction and modernization of port infrastructure (including modernization of fishing in-• frastructure, modernization of shipyards, modernization of ports and havens – fish exchange, warehouses, new terminals in gdynia and sanitary facilities in small harbours), modernization and maintenance of fairways with the accompanying facilities, installations, as • well as construction and modernization of flood control infrastructure.

the authorities of gdynia explicitly declare their wilingness to become involved in the manage-ment of the gulf of gdańsk and puck Bay to ensure that it will serve the development of the city’s recreational and tourist functions. gdynia and other cities, for instance hel, also intend to make a better use of their coastal location by e.g. more intense utilization of the port areas to serve other functions than handling cargo and by better management of the coastal zone, e.g. organization of an aquapark next to the kępa redłowska nature reserve in gdynia.

all the plans mean that increasing numbers of tourists will flow into the area covered by the plan, that maintenance of fishery (and space for fishermen) is required in order to retain this important indicator of the identity of the analysed municipalities, that development of the port in gdynia has to be taken into consideration (this will need sea space), that congestion on sailing routes to smaller harbours may occur where conflicts with wind- and kitesurfers and related businesses are imminent.


Directions of development set out in voivodship regional strategies and plansin the spatial plan of the pomorskie Voivodship (adopted in 2008), the whole coastal zone has been recognized as a problem area. three issues were given special attention: low stability of the economic base, conflict between conservation of natural and cultural resources and the recrea-tional/tourist utilization and investments in the area, and thirdly the emergence of conflict situa-tions between the utility attractiveness of the recreational space and its availability. the following detailed matters have been indicated in the plan:

economic threats to the existence of Baltic fishery,• economic instability of tourism-based economy,• generally poor financial standing of municipalities, limiting their prospects for economic devel-• opment,excessive seasonal tourist exploitation of the areas, going beyond their carrying capacities, • locally excessive investment in recreational/tourist facilities, resulting in degradation of natural, • cultural and landscape values,overloaded, badly operating transport system,• unsatisfactory ecological education of local communities and lack of pro-ecological information • addressed to visitors to the region, resulting in increasing threats to the environment,an on-going process of replacement of traditional buildings by structures often disharmonic with • their surroundings,introduction of recreational functions into village centres and their immediate vicinity in forms • incompatible with local and regional building traditions,pressure of investors to change the destination of yet undeveloped areas into areas of intense • development of permanent recreational facilities,an on-going process of disappearance of objects representative of the old building tradition of • the region and gradual loss of awareness of the tradition and its architectural forms,limitation of transport accessibility (particularly by cars) of the recreational/holiday areas and re-• gions of high natural and landscape value, lack of alternative means of transport and insufficient number of accompanying service facilities for vehicle traffic.

the area of land adjoining the water region covered by the draft plan is also the area: of the voivodship’s highest increase in population in the years 2000–2003,• requiring the most active regional policy in the field of cultural heritage protection,• needing comprehensive development for the needs of water sports (sea tourism).•

a large part of the municipalities bordering the water region covered by the draft plan:require extension and revitalization of technical infrastructure due to the heavy tourism load,• need revitalization of coastal settlements.•

in the voivodship plan much attention is given to the need to protect resources and values of natu-ral and cultural environment, especially to reduce the anthropopressure in the coastal zone (limit-ing the existing and emerging processes of destruction, resulting in creation of areas of excessive development and leading to the generation of spatial structures destroying environment suitable for recreation, limiting the negative impact of recreactional traffic and development on the natural, cultural and landscape resources of recreational areas, including władysławowo, restructuring, and


fitting to european standards, of the high-potential tourist locations, including władysławowo, hel and Jastarnia, protection of valuable nature areas which are vulnerable to the consequences of uncontrolled penetration during the summer season).

the voivodship plan also points to the need to diversify economic functions within the coastal zone (including introduction of health resort functions – e.g. the cases of Jastarnia, Jurata) in order to extend the length of the tourist season and improve the efficiency of utilization of tourist facilities. in addition, the plan assumes transformation of hel into a national centre of sightseeing tourism. the voivodship plan provides for extension of the base allowing development of mass marine tourism, comprehensive development for the needs of sea yachting and sea sports, development of tourist functions of small ports (the so called gulf of gdańsk ring) and growth of coastal pas-senger shipping, including:

construction and extension of marinas in gdynia, rewa, puck, Jastarnia and hel,• construction and extension of sea havens in orłowo, Babie doły, Mechelinki, rewa, rzucewo, • swarzewo, Jurata, Jastarnia and Chałupy.

in addition, the following is assumed in the voivodship plan:a possibility to establish „the land of puck” cultural park, due to the high historical and cultural • values of the puck area and of the hel peninsula,possible transformation of the Babie doły airfield into an international civilian airport, • maintenance of the fishing haven at Jastarnia and its revitalisation, • construction of a network of bycicle routes around the sea region covered by the plan (the gdy-• nia – kosakowo – puck – władysławowo – hel route to be built as priority investment),modernisation of, first of all, the no. 216 reda – puck – władysławowo – hel (main) road,• recognising the reda – puck – władysławowo – hel railway line as a line of primary importance • for the voivodship,a limited need to extend and modernise sewerage facilities in the municipalities around the puck • Bay (third and fourth priority in the voivodship).

1.8 FIShERY

for centuries the sea area covered by the plan was an excellent fishing ground for fishermen from nearby villages and towns. fish were caught all year round, using various fishing techniques (skóra, sapota 2008).

fishing is carried out over the whole area, with the exception of military areas occasionally or per-manently closed to fishing, and areas situated in the immediate vicinity of sewage main drains. a description of the fishing grounds has been partly provided by means of a monitoring programme of the local fishery, carried out in late 1990s to assess the potential dangers to sea mammals from using certain types of nets (fig. 8, 9) (skóra, sapota 2008).


Fig. 8. Fishing grounds (approximate data needing verification and updating)Source: own elaboration by K. E. Skóra

fishing vessels operating in the puck Bay are, as a rule, small boats. there are 123 of them (tab. 7). of these nine are rowing boats with length below 6 m, the rest is engine propelled. the larger ones, seeking higher efficiency, fish outside the Bay. Most of the boats station in Jastarnia and kuźnica (fig. 10) (skóra, sapota 2008).

one of the fishing techniques practised in the puck Bay is hook fishing. this needs bait. Bait the fishermen use most often are: lesser and greater sand eel, sprat and Baltic shrimps. sprat comes from trawling outside the area covered by the plan. sandeels are caught in the puck Bay in the area of hel and of the seagull sandbar. shrimps are obtained from covered by underwater vegetation shallows along the Bay coast of the hel peninsula between Chałupy and Jastarnia (skóra, sapota 2008).

legend:a. afloat (usually semi-drifting) gill nets b. set gill nets fishing groundsc. pots and traps (fyke nets and fykes)

d. garfish caught using floating longlines e. Bottom-set longlines eel fishing groundsf. semi-afloat longlines eel fishing grounds


Fig. 9. Distribution of various fishing instruments in the western part of the Gulf of Gdańsk in summer and autumnSource: own elaboration by M. Sapota


Tab. 7. Size structure of fishing boats per location around the sea area covered by the pilot plan (as of 2006, according to CRM register)

Boat length < 4 m 4–8 m 6–8 m 8–10 m 10–12 m

Quantity 2 28 67 22 4

Source: own elaboration by M. Sapota based on the register

Fig. 10. Importance of locations as fishing centres expressed by the number of stationed fishing boatsSource: Skóra, Sapota 2008

the sea areas covered by the pilot plan started losing their importance for fishery in the 1980–1990s. some of the settlements do not have any fishing harbours any more (osłonino, rzucewo, hel-Bór), in others fishery is slowly disappearing (puck, swarzewo, Chałupy). Quitting the fishing profession reflects, among others, the condition and structure of the local ichtyofauna. fish which


were abundant in the past, like pike, vimba and roach have totally disappeared from the catches, other species lost their original strong position (perch, Baltic whitefish). the fishing grounds are today used sporadically, mostly for fishing with trap tools – (fig. 9). Better fishing prospects are offered by some areas of the outer puck Bay, where sea fish (flatfish, cod and herring) and bi-environmental fish (first of all sea trout/salmon and eel) can be caught (after skóra, sapota 2008).

Angling

the sea area covered by the plan was a popular angling ground throughout almost the whole sec-ond half of the 20th century. in the 1950-1960s this was limited by restrictive border regulations, which did not allow anglers to use boats. therefore shore angling, mostly from harbour breakwaters and piers, became predominant (skóra, sapota 2008).

until late 1970s the species caught in large numbers from the shore were roach, perch, vimba, eel, flatfish, eelpout, shorthorn sculpin, sometimes also spring herring. from boats mostly pike (the puck Bay was famous for it) and garfish were caught (skóra, sapota 2008).

at present almost all the harbours around the puck Bay are angling grounds for shore anglers. Most often used are the harbours of hel, Jastarnia, puck and gdynia. also the area near the mouth of płutnica river is considered to be a good angling ground for fresh water fish (skóra, sapota 2008).

Cod is caught from boats mostly in the hel area and over the shipwrecks resting on the Bay bot-tom. garfish is sought mostly in the lagoon part, at places of concentrations of underwater vegeta-tion in piaski dziewicze in the area of rzucewski szpyrk (rzucewo head). sometimes the slopes of seagull sandbar (ryf Mew), the shallow in front of Jastarnia and the shallow between Jurata and hel prove to be better angling grounds. also the shallow waters off kępa redłowska are recognized as a good place. Most important angling locations are shown in fig. 11 (skóra, sapota 2008).

Fig. 11. Map of most important angling locations Source: own elaboration by M. Sapota

legend:

red (dotted line) – codfish and perch boat angling

green (circles) – shore angling mostly from harbour structures

Yellow (ellipses) – locations used for pike angling until the end of the 1970s

Marine blue (dotted line) – location of garfish angling


the attractiveness of angling can be enhanced even more by the restitution of valuable species (such as Baltic whitefish, pike, roach and perch).

1.9 ToURISM

according to estimates given in the materials to the protection plan for the Coastal landscape park, up to 100 thousand people may be staying at one time in the area of the park during summer season weekends (gerstmann 2000).

the development of traditional “3xs” (sea-sand-sun) coastal tourism is most notable. along the coast from hel to gdynia about 20 bathing areas are organised and attract not only tourists, but also inhabitants of the pomeranian Voivodship, especially of the tri-City agglomeration. some-times the demand exceeds the coastal zone’s capacity, resulting in numerous conflicts and threats to nature and to the cultural landscape. the negative effects are strengthened by the concentration of tourists during the short tourist season and by the insufficient diversification of the offer (rap-ort... 2006).

Jastarnia and władysławow have the highest ratio of the number of beds for overnight visitors to the number of permanent inhabitants of the municipality. a steady growth of the number of tour-ist facilities and accommodation places is especially characteristic for władysławowo since 2003. the result is a growth of the number of accommodation places in boarding houses and camping sites in the narrowest and flood-prone part of the hel peninsula near Chałupy. in 2007 there were as many as nine camping sites in Chałupy, two in Jastarnia, one in Jurata and one in hel plus one situated outside the peninsula – in puck. some of the camping sites, located along a low, subject to flooding 5 km section of the peninsula, offer also year-round facilities for overnight stays. in the camping areas a trend to extend beaches at the expense of the coastal reed fields and elevate the ground level, as well as transform it in order to increase the number of accommodation places is observed. this is contrary to regulations on nature conservation.

Marine tourism using the values of sea space, in that of wind- and kitesurfing, sea angling, scuba diving and birdwatching is quickly developing, thus contributing to an even more intense use of the area.

the shallow and safe waters of the puck Bay and favourable climatic conditions attract an ever growing number of windsurfers. the increasing popularity of this sport resulted in starting, in 2007, of 24 windsurfing schools, realising their training programs in sea areas directly next to the camping sites, mostly in the area of Chałupy (18 plus 4 kitesurfing schools), kuźnica (1), Jastarnia (2), Jurata (1), also in puck (1) and rewa (1). the training usually lasts for a week, and this service is offered at some camping sites even over a period of six months (from May to october). puck, kosakowo and gdynia plan to extend their offer. since 2006 also snowkiters have been appearing on the frozen Bay.

development of yachting is supported by the development of harbour infrastructure. the modern-ized Marina of gdynia recorded 2.2 thousand calls in 2005 and 3 thousand in 2006. the following centres provide facilities for sea yachting in that section of the polish coast:


modernized gdynia Marina – 250 berths for yachts (extension by further 150–200 berths is • planned),modernized Jastarnia Marina – 60 berths (however, the land part of the marina and neighbour-• hood require development, in that for recreation east of the port, and commercial activities in the western part),modernized marina in the fishing harbour of hel – 13 berths,• modernized marina in puck – the target is 500 berths, the dock master’s building has been trans-• formed into a tourist station,mooring stage at kuźnica – 10 berths,• recreational/mooring stages at: Chałupy, swarzewo, rzucewo, osłonino, rewa, Jastarnia and • kuźnica.

among poland’s sea ports gdynia has the best conditions for development of passenger navigation. it can receive big cruise ships. the number of these ships calling in gdynia and the number of pas-sengers have been quickly growing during the last decade – the number of calls of large cruise ships grew by 270% and the number of their passengers visiting gdynia increased over 6-fold (szefler, furmańczyk et al. 2008). passenger traffic has reached 500 thousand per year. it is planned to build a new passenger terminal at the polish Quay, attractively located close to the centre of the city.

Coastal passenger shipping is regaining popularity. recently a new competitor, the so-called water-trams, has appeared. they operate in summer, are subsidized by local governments and due to rela-tively low fares are very popular. from June until august they carry passengers between the tri-City and hel and Jastarnia. further development of passenger water transport requires modernizing and reconstructing existing port infrastructure, mainly the infrastructure which was previously used by fishing vessels, and improving access by cars and coaches to allow better connection with the hinterland.

the therapeutic properties of the climate and prospects of utilization of salt springs open up op-portunities for the development of health resort functions in coastal locations. Basing on these assets, the Council of Jastarnia is applying for spa status. already a number of hotels located in Jastarnia on the open sea side offer biological regeneration services supported by values of the local microclimate. also gdynia contemplates opening a rehabilitation and medical prophylaxis centre involving thalassotherapy.

in hel, the hel Marine station of the institute of oceanography of the university of gdańsk is realizing a project aimed at reintroduction and protection of grey seal colonies in the southern Baltic, and the seal aquarium, run by the station, where seals are kept, bred and exhibited, is a very popular tourist attraction. it is planned to extend the pro-ecological activities of the station by the implementation of a „Blue Village” concept (including, among others, an artificial island for watching sea mammals, and a recreated dune park in the coastal zone).

the relics of an early mediaeval port and large settlement located in puck Bay waters near the mouth of płutnica, also other objects of underwater cultural heritage made available to the public can be a significant attraction for scuba divers.


the puck and kosakowo municipalities, which do not have that attractive access to beaches and marine bathing areas, plan to develop summer resort and guest-house functions in their area. gdynia intends to develop significantly its conference and hotel/sports facilities, giving special at-tention to the service of foreign tourists, interested in weekend-type entertainment.

1.10 TRANSPoRT

within the area covered by the pilot plan are the ports of gdynia, puck, Jastarnia and hel, and several fishing and yachting havens (mentioned in chapter 1.7). the most important of them is the port of gdynia with its role of a commercial port (7 basins), naval port (4 basins) and yachting port (1 basin). in 2006 the port handled about 14.2 mln tonnes of cargo, showing a significant growth trend (tab. 8, fig. 12). the other ports in the area covered by the plan are fishing and/or yachting harbours and, in practical terms, play no role in the international sea transport.

Fig. 12. Total cargo handling in the Port of Gdynia (2002–2006) in thous. tonnes Source: www.port.gdynia.pl/stat0.php

the achilles’ heel of the port of gdynia is the lack of logistic centres inside the country, insufficient access infrastructure from land, i.e., lack of motorways and high speed roads, disadvantageous rail-way tariffs, lack of rail trucks, small number of regular intermodal connections, poor adaptation to handling cargo in rail trucks. after construction of the motorway that picture may change. But even in the case of most optimistic scenarios of traffic through the port, there is no need to build new, or extend existing, fairways or anchorages. there may appear a need to extend seaward the port itself, e.g. in order to increase its cargo handling capacity and/or to allow entrance of larger vessels. this requires reserving adequate sea space.

Coastal navigation between ports of the area covered by the plan is practically limited to regular passenger services during summer, mentioned in the chapter on tourism. it has to be taken into account that with the growth of the number of tourist attractions in the coastal locations (such


as e.g. the „Blue Village” in hel), demand for that type of transport will grow. this may result in a pressure to set out new fairways on the puck Bay. on the other hand, due to the need to protect the values of the natural environment, it should be assumed that the existing jetties and smaller havens in the inner puck Bay, except the port in puck, should be maintained but with no new development.

Tab. 8. Cargo handling and passenger traffic in the main Polish sea ports in 2006

Port mln tonnes No of passenegers

gdańsk 24.2 156 511

gdynia 14.2 460 231

szczecin 10.0 139

Świnoujście 9.2 929 899

police 2.4 –

Total 60.0 1 546 780

Source: Strategia rozwoju portów morskich do 2015 roku, p. 6


Part 2 The process of spatial planning for the west part of the Gulf of Gdańsk and its results

2.1 METhoDoloGY oF DEvEloPMENT oF ThE PIloT PlAN

Because of the pioneering nature of the project, the planning team first of all had to agree on the planning methodology. for a starting point, the objectives and priorities of the national spatial de-velopment Concept (under development) were adopted. they were, however, extended by the Mar-itime office in gdynia (which is responsible for the management of the planned sea area) to cover the six aims presented in the next chapter „legal Basis and CharaCter of the plan”. the objective „economical use of space, leaving possibly much of it for future (also unknown at present) ways of sea use” was treated not so much as an independent goal, but as a methodologi-cal requirement for the development of the plan, and a similar approach was taken also with the postulate of introducing, whenever possible, provisions concerning not only space, but also time.

2

43t h e p r o C e s s o f s p a t i a l p l a n n i n g a n d i t s r e s u l t s

Considering that the whole space covered by the plan is a natura 2000 area of special protection of birds, and that a great part of it is also an area of habitat protection, that it also includes coastal waters of special protection regime under the water framework directive, and that it is located very close to a metropolis of about million inhabitants and areas of intense touristic development on land, the key issue to be resolved by authors of the plan was to work out accepted by all stakehold-ers solutions, which would ensure both protection of nature and environment and conditions for achieving and maintaining proper living standards by the coastal communities.

the starting point for drawing up the plan was a stock-take of current and potential ways of sea space use. for obtaining a picture of the current status, information about the natural environment was of key importance. luckily, data on species diversity in the plan area were available in litera-ture (obtaining such information by field measurements is very costly and time consuming, and without such information the plan could not have been drawn up). Valorisation of nature, carried out basing on the data, covered avifauna, sea mammals, phytophyllic fauna, and also macrophytes and macrozoobenthos.

a separate study was made for the ichtyofauna, which is important not only for ecological reasons, but also because it is a basic resource for the preservation of cultural landscapes in the territories around the area covered by the plan. a characteristic of post-larval stages of fish is their mobility. this feature makes translation of the requirements concerning the survival of rare or near-extinct fish species, and the maintenance of commercial species, into the language of spatial planning quite difficult. fish occupy various parts of a sea basin (or basins) depending on their stage of development (different in juvenile stages, different when mature). with fish, the strategy of selec-tion of a spatial location depends on the determined by evolution connection of the species with a specific habitat (or set of habitats). other important determinants are the current hydrological and biocenotic conditions related to the time of day and also season during the year. deficiency or disappearance of an element of habitat typical for a species results in increased probability of mortality and/or problems with reproduction. for that reason authors of the plan focused on pro-viding proper spatial conditions for maintaining fish habitats in proper state (by determining the principles of their use by man).

similar analyses were carried out for sea mammals, and an attempt was made to indicate in the plan area the most important procreation, feeding and sheltering places and to ensure their con-nectivity.

the analyses allowed to determine areas of valuable nature 1. Components of the biocenosis were evaluated using the following criteria:

presence of species protected by national and eu law,• presence of habitats protected by national and eu law,• special function performed by a species in the biocenosis – the group includes species of key • importance in biocenosis, e.g. habitat-forming species,uniqueness of a species or habitat in the scale of poland’s sea areas.•

1 in fact these are areas of most valuable nature, since the whole plan area is an area of valuable nature.


Fig. 13. Areas of particular natural valueSource: Maritime Institute in Gdańsk


areas of particularly valuable nature are shown in fig. 13.

the next step was to examine plans and intentions concerning future forms of economic utiliza-tion of the area. stakeholders were asked to submit propositions and postulates regarding the use of sea areas covered by the plan. a stakeholder meeting was organised, during which the 54 par-ticipants were invited to further discuss the propositions and/or add new ones. the discussion was dominated by ecological issues. 46 propositions were submitted in writing by nine stakeholders: the hydrographic office of the polish navy, the Mayor of puck, the logistic operator of liquid fuels, the Mayor of gdynia, the hel Marine station of the university of gdańsk, the Municipal-ity of władysławowo, the prefect of kosakowo Municipality, prefect of puck rural Municipality, the port of gdynia authority. they concerned the following matters: sea transport and harbour activities (7), maritime investment for needs of research (1), infrastructure of fishery (2), invest-ments and other activities (e.g. making shipwrecks available to scuba divers) tourism oriented (22), sewage discharges (4), coastal protection (6), military activities (1), protection of species (1), other issues (2).

in result of all the stock-taking activities the following types of current and future use of the planned sea space were identified:

water transport, including: sea routes, roadsteads, mooring grounds, • sports and recreation, mostly bathing areas, but also wind- and kitesurfing and underwater ar-• chaeology,fishery,• erection of above-water-surface structures and artificial islands and underwater facilities, • linear facilities of technical infrastructure networks,• nature conservation, including e.g. reed fields, sea areas of importance for well-being of ichtyo-• fauna, sea mammal refuges,cultural heritage,• defence and safety,• other forms of utilisation, such as depositing of waste. •

during that stage the team also studied strategic documents which could impact the spatial man-agement of the planned sea area. these included: the strategy of development the pomeranian Voivodship and the Voivodship spatial development plan in force, municipal studies of conditions and directions of spatial development and local spatial plans, as well as sectoral strategies and poli-cies, mostly concerning fishery and development of ports.

the stock-take, and the identification of future demand of stakeholders for sea space and its uses, allowed to outline basic spatial conflicts. Because of the importance of natural conditions, valua-tion of specific types of economic activity against their impact on nature and environment of the planned area was done in the first place (results of the valuation are presented in the box below).


eCologiCal threats related to speCifiC tYpes of eConoMiC aCtiVitY

Sea transport, port activities, maritime projects. threats related to sea transport include break-down and collision resulting in chemical and oil spills, and, to a lesser extent, result-ing from exploitation.

Fishery. the threats may be related to the use of improper fishing techniques and non-observance of fishing periods and fishing quota.

Tourism. negative impacts include physical destruction of bottom habitats, both near the shore by bathers, and by tourists doing water sports. a negative impact is also exerted by local, point pollution at places with no sanitary infrastructure, and oil spills caused by cars parking near the shore, and by fuelling of motorboats.

Municipal activities. negative impacts result from direct discharge into coastal waters of treated sewage from the sewage treatment plants. this leads to eutrophication of the sea area, especially near the points of discharge. a particular threat comes from outlets of sew-age discharge pipelines located on the coast (dębogórze treatment plant) and of pipelines extending only a short distance into the sea (hel and Jurata treatment plants).

Coastal protection. technical activities related to coastal protection, i.e., hydrotechnic structures (seawalls, underwater breakwaters) and beach nourishment affect natural proc-esses taking place in the coastal zone. these activities (carried out in accordance with the long term Coastal protection programme) result from the need to maintain locations of strategic importance for the functioning of many branches of economy placed in the coast-al zone.

Military activities are concentrated mainly in designated, periodically closed sea basins. their impact on the marine environment results mostly from the use of water- and aircraft during exercises in offshore and coastal military training areas.

Linear investments. the main threat to marine environment from cables laid on the seabed (or under it) occurs at the construction stage. local disturbances of the bottom and short lasting turbidity in the water column are generated. power transmission by underwater ca-bles changes the direction and value of magnetic induction of the earth’s natural magnetic field. however, the influence of such changes on specific sea species is not yet sufficiently understood.

Dumping sites. deposition of waste always entails environmental threats. they are largest during the deposition (dumping) operation itself and for some time afterwards. during the process of settling, the waste causes increased turbidity and disturbance of bottom sedi-ments.


similar analyses were carried out for conflicts between the various types of economical activity. in these analyses also morphodynamic processes (coastal dynamics) were taken into account.

when solving the conflicts, priorities of sea space use defined for the national spatial development Concept were used. it was considered that one of the most important of them is the priority of collision-free functioning and development of technical (including navigation) infrastructure, ad-equately to the transport needs, i.e., to ensure undisturbed access to ports and havens from the sea. at the same time, basing on planning documents of regional level (the voivodship plan) it was as-sumed that the existing port system in the area is final (will not change), and that the new yachting havens will not need dredged fairways. second priority, but in fact similar importance, was given to issues of national defence, regarded as given and predetermined. equally important priority was given to the protection of habitats and species, which seems natural considering the presence of the natura 2000 and the Coastal landscape park areas. owing, however, to the rather unconcerned approach of the national authorities when setting out the boundaries of natura 2000 areas, it was considered that the existing reliable results of investigations of macrophytes, macrozoobenthos and avifauna allow for a gradation of restrictions imposed on the use of marine space included into these areas (in compliance, by the way, with the spirit of the relevant eu directives, which do not prohibit economical activities in natura 2000 areas).

third priority was given to the protection of cultural heritage, both located under water and on the coast, including the cultural landscapes of the coastal fishing villages. fourth place was given to the development sea tourism (but different from the sea-sun-sand type of coastal tourism). the fifth priority was the development of linear infrastructure. on the other hand, it was decided to restrict erecting above- and underwater structures, limiting them in terms of space and scope, in order to minimize the inconvenience resulting from degradation of landscape.

the third stage of work on the plan consisted in delimitation of functional areas. in maritime plan-ning this is a very important stage, crucial to the overall success of the planning effort. it does not appear in terrestrial spatial planning, which is based on the grid of already existing and determined by ownership rights plots. the sea space, which from the legal point of view is common property, is in fact divided by a set of functional processes, constituting the internal cohesiveness of some of its parts. it is therefore necessary to understand the dynamics of these functional relationships.

for the area of the plan, it was decided that transport- and nature-related relationships are of key importance. the starting point for the delimitation of these sea basins was the earlier described val-uation of nature in the region. it was assumed that the spatial grid within the planned area will be composed of areas of valuable habitats (so-called areas of valuable nature) and transport corridors with high traffic density or requiring dredging. fairways which require dredging were recognized as independent functional sea basins, except areas of valuable nature. provided that international conventions on sea transport are observed, it is possible to minimize environmental threats from shipping to the marine (water) environment, although this transport unfortunately still remains a considerable source of air pollution. But sea transport is very important for the development of the big cities located at the boundaries of the area of the plan. it also provides an opportunity for development of smaller settlements, especially in the context of recreational navigation. Because of that, the principle of maintaining the existing fairways was assumed, while respecting the rules


of environmental protection and the requirement of economical use of sea space.

the plan also had to provide space needed for connecting cities and settlements situated around the sea area, artificial islands and other above- and underwater structures with linear infrastructure, and to indicate the desirable corridors for the development of such infrastructure. these corridors were recognized as functional sea basins.

when laying out the corridors, the following was taken into account:ecological aspects calling for minimizing such connections and the need to make them available • to all concerned,the principle of economical management of space (inter alia the requirement that cables and • pipelines should be laid parallel to each other),land-related determinants (dynamics and ecology of the coastal zone) requiring careful selection • of locations where cables and pipelines cross the shoreline, and that they are buried sufficiently deeply below the seabed in the coastal zone (the less than 8 m water depth zone); location and depth of burying depend on the morphodynamic conditions.

on the grid of transport and nature connections was superimposed the network of military ar-eas, existing waste dumping and sand extraction sites. the most important military areas (except the measurement mile) were recognized as separate functional sea basins. the existing state was adopted, on the assumption that there is synergy between national defence functions and the na-ture conservation and environmental objectives. also areas of specific economic functions, such as waste dumping or sand extraction sites were recognized as functional sea basins.

distinguishing the sea basins of valuable nature and designated for transport and defence func-tions, and for linear infrastructure, waste dumping and sand extraction, allowed to indicate areas that could be utilized by other users. the zones of natural expansion of economic (mostly port-related) functions and the corridors for linear infrastructure needed to serve them were set there. the rest was designated for recreation (of varying intensity depending on the proximity of areas of valuable nature) and for fishery.

in effect 30 sea basins were obtained, distinguished by their dominating function. in the next stage, using expert knowledge and experience of other countries, limitations on, and allowed ways of, using each of the sea basins were formulated (which took into account the 3d character of sea space and the time dimension). in the process of their formulation, the earlier mentioned list of priorities was used. the guiding rule was to attempt minimizing conflicts, particularly in sea basins with valuable nature designated for protection2. propositions of the ways of avoiding conflicts with requirements of nature conservation, taking into account the specifics of various economical activi-ties and their impacts are presented in table 9.

2 areas of valuable nature will especially be an arena of conflict between protection of species and tourism functions, since the life and income of the coastal communities is based mainly on tourism.


Tab. 9. Propositions of methods of minimizing damage to nature resulting from economical activity in areas of valuable nature

Function Impact Minimization of damage to nature(prevention of conflicts)

touristic

trampling of underwater meadows (near camping • sites)excessive noise (motorboats and scooters)• large quantities of sewage and waste• permanent tourist-oriented development in the • coastal zone (ports, havens, jetties)

limitation of tourist traffic in most valuable areas of • the Bay down to a safe levelmodernization of sewage management in the re-• gion,implementation of environmental impact assess-• ment (eia) procedures

Military use of vessels and aircrafts during exercises•

observance of international conventions on sea • transportdetermination of losses resulting from the activities • and of required compensation

investmentdisturbance of seabed at the cable or pipeline lay-• ing stagepermanent occupation of bottom•

implementation of eia procedures• use of the Best available technology (Bat)•

transportsource of oil pollution • permanent occupation of bottom for port invest-• ments

observance of international conventions on sea • transportimplementation of eia procedures• use of Bat•

fisherycatching of protected species• fishing during protection periods or of fish not • meeting allowed dimensions

observance of protection periods• use of allowed fishing gear•

Source: own elaboration

first of all, using these propositions, for each sea basin a system of prohibitions and requirements serving the needs of nature conservation and environment protection was formulated, which, among others, included:

temporary ban on use of nets in areas of highest concentration of water birds, • ban on works changing the structure and relief of the seabed, except works specified in the act • on the long term programme of coastal protection, ban on use of motorboats and other motor craft outside the set out water routes,• ban on sewage discharge,• prohibiting development of bathing areas in reed field areas,• prohibiting noise-generating activities.•

as regards ichtyofauna, it was assumed that the most valuable habitats are those which allow fish (especially the protected species) to feed, shelter and procreate. in the analysed area these are, in particular, areas of sea bottom covered with macrophytes, coastal rush fields and river mouths, especially of the reda, płutnica, kacza and gizdepka. equally important are artificial reefs, i.e., breakwaters of the hel and Jastarnia ports, sandy habitats between the fishing and navy ports of hel and along the eastern edge of the southern part of the seagull sandbar and the sandy slope at the tip of hel peninsula. also for these areas a system of requirements and prohibitions was developed, often including a ban on fishing or, in justified cases, forbidding access of unauthorized persons to some areas, e.g. the seagull sandbar.


the places of historical occurrence of grey seal should be fully available to the animals, and con-ditions at these places should be favourable to recolonization. it was decided that in such places (i.e., sites of documented procreation and residence of young seals) rules of use of the sea basins, adequate to needs of seal population protection, should be established concerning fishery, naviga-tion and new infrastructural investment in the coastal zone. these rules include periodical closing of the areas to noise-generating and moving at too high speed vessels, stopping human penetration and the requirement to use only safe types of fishing gear in the area of such sites. Because of the possible occurrence of common porpoise in the puck Bay, it was decided to establish a maximum speed limit also within the fairways. for the same reasons eias for the use, erection and disman-tling of maritime structures and military facilities and installations should take into account the noise threat.

assuming that boat fishery should be protected as a part of the cultural heritage, and that sea an-gling can be an important development stimulus, fishing and angling has been allowed over the whole area covered by the plan, except fairways, reed field areas and certain habitats of particular importance for maintenance of the ichtyofauna. however, due to the need to protect avifauna, in certain areas the use of some types of fishing gear is banned (mainly in winter). Because of the seals, time limitations are imposed on fishing in the seagull sandbar area.

given the conflict-generating features of the tourist function and its expansion over both the ma-rine and terrestrial areas, much attention was paid to the development of tourism on land. inves-tigations served to indicate the sea basins where coastal tourism collides with nature conservation and where it should be spatially limited, and its uncontrolled spreading prevented. Consequently, uncontrolled extension of bathing areas was limited, but at the same time reconstruction of beach-es with sand washed out by the sea was allowed at selected bathing areas indicated in the plan, and described additionally using the coastline kilometre grid of the Maritime offices.

in order to support the development of sea tourism, free navigation of tourist vessels was in prin-ciple allowed over the whole area except fairways and some areas of exceptionally valuable nature (e.g. reed fields or seagull sandbar). however, due to environmental requirements, the plan does not provide for building new fairways in the inner puck Bay nor new marinas and only a small number of jetties for tourist vessels is allowed. tourism was allowed wherever it will not collide with shipping, fishery and protection of environment.

keeping in mind the development of sea tourism, locations of underwater cultural heritage were also indicated in the draft plan, and safety zones were set around them. in accordance with the act on sea areas of poland and Maritime administration, objects of cultural heritage rendered accessible or closed to sea (underwater) tourism were destingnished. the selection of open and closed objects was based on investigations of the Central Maritime Museum in gdańsk and the requirements of safety of navigation, safety of the tourists and lack of particular protection of a shipwreck, its remnants or of other underwater structure (as justified by ethical reasons, sensitivity of the object to tourist exploration and the object’s historical value).

Because of the specifics of the area, the authors also made every effort to avoid limiting works and investments related to storm, flood and landslide protection at all the locations listed in the long


term coastal protection programme. nor has the possibility for beach nourishment been excluded a priori, wherever coastal protection is allowed. all these activities are, however, subjected to eia procedures (as required by law) or, whenever they are not required, a stock-take of habitats must be carried out within the area where the works are to be conducted.

since ecological issues have been given high priority, locating infrastructure for nature conservation and environmental purposes and for scientific investigations has been allowed without limitation. also temporary mooring jetties are allowed without limitation in the existing arranged bathing areas. other structures have been put under strict control. the authors are of the opinion that investments realized within the gulf of gdańsk ring project provide a sufficient stimulus for sea tourism in the area covered by the plan.

this is why the possibility to erect structures and artificial islands has been limited, in terms of space, to a few sea basins, and to structures which are especially important for the development of sea tourism and/or cargo handling functions and for national defence (puck, gdynia). erection of one island for the needs of research (and additionally tourism) has been allowed close to hel. the decision on reserving sea area for development of the port in hel is postponed until the future of hel’s naval port shall be cleared up. in the central part of the area covered by the plan, an area has been selected, where erection of above- and underwater structures and artificial islands connected with cargo handling, storage and processing of goods imported or exported by sea, discharge of treated sewage and brine and generation of power from waves and sea currents is allowed. the in-tention of the authors was to limit development of port functions and other onerous industrial and municipal functions (the development of which seems to be inevitable) to a small basin possibly distant from the most ecologically valuable areas. wind farms are not allowed in the whole area of the plan because of too small distances from the shore (landscape pollution), conflict with the fishing and tourist functions and because expert opinions for the national spatial development Concept clearly showed that within the polish sea areas there are significantly better locations for offshore wind farms, ensuring higher efficiency of power production and less conflict with other uses.

also some recommendations concerning spatial management of land areas directly adjacent to the planned sea area were made, aimed at improving the functional spatial cohesiveness between land and sea. Mainly they concerned nature-related issues, since e.g. economical interactions could not be sufficiently precisely quantified to allow formulating specific postulates:

limitation of such forms of economical activity which even now, due to their large scale and lack • of rules regulating their operation, very often negatively impact the natural environment,transfer of activities detrimental to nature conservation outside areas of valuable nature,• application of compensation in case of activities of national strategic importance having negative • impact on the environment.

the final stage consisted in indicating areas for which even more detailed spatial plans should be drawn up because of the expected intensity of spatial conflicts within them. these included:

coastal waters north-west of hel and around hel,• gdynia – hel technical infrastructure corridor.•


the criterion of the selection was the expected intensity of spatial conflicts related to utilisation of the sea areas.

2.2 PIloT DRAFT SPATIAl PlAN oF ThE WEST PART oF INTERNAl SEA WATERS oF ThE GUlF oF GDAŃSK

2.2.1 LEGAL BASIS AND ChARACTER oF ThE PLAN

Legal basis

the draft spatial plan for part of internal sea waters of the gulf of gdańsk has been drawn up pur-suant to art. 37a par. 1, 2 and art. 37b par. 1 of the act of 21st March, 1991 on sea areas of poland and Maritime administration (Journal of laws of 2003 no. 153 item 1502 with further amend-ments), which came into force – in the shape including the two articles – on 11th July, 2003.

the draft spatial plan also pays regard to the draft ordinance of the Minister of infrastructure on the required scope of spatial plans of internal sea waters, territorial waters and the exclusive eco-nomic zone.

in addition, the draft spatial plan refers to the national spatial development Concept (under prep-aration) and the spatial plan of the pomeranian Voivodship, as well as to selected local plans and studies of conditions and directions of spatial management of the municipalities surrounding the sea area covered by the draft plan. when drawing up the plan, development plans of ports and other important stakeholders using the area covered by the plan, as well as proposals to the plan filed with the Maritime office in gdynia were taken into account.

Character of the plan

the draft spatial plan of part of the internal sea waters of the gulf of gdańsk has been developed paying regard to the objectives indicated by the Maritime office in gdynia, which include:

ensuring sustainable and durable development of coastal communities,• ensuring good condition of marine and land-sea ecosystems, • ensuring safe, sustainable and durable use of sea,• economical use of space, leaving possibly much of it for future (also yet unknown) ways of sea • use,ensuring maintenance and conservation of historical values,• wherever possible, application of provisions concerning not only 3d space, but also time.•

the draft plan decides on:destination of specific parts of the internal sea waters covered by the plan,• prohibitions and limitations of use of the areas, taking into account the requirements of nature • conservation.


in particular, the plan decides on:distribution of public use investment within the area covered by the plan,• directions of development of transport and technical infrastructure in the area,• areas and conditions of nature conservation and cultural heritage protection in the area covered • by the plan.

the draft plan should be, on one hand, a tool for the maritime administration supporting (on the principle of best available knowledge) rational shaping of the use of sea space, and on the other hand, considering its pilot nature, it should serve the verification of existing and currently under prepara-tion legal solutions on maritime spatial planning.

the character of the plan differs from that of spatial plans developed for land areas. Because of the different than on land ownership relations at sea, the smaller number of stakeholders (and a higher degree of their institutionalization), as well as the highly insufficient knowledge about the current state of the sea space, this plan has both of a quasi-strategic character and also fulfils certain (legally binding) functions reserved on land for local spatial plans. it is an instrument for balancing of vari-ous interests attached to the use of sea space, it links national level planning (the national spatial development Concept) with the local/detailed (on the sea) planning, and links terrestrial and mari-time spatial planning. on one hand it is a structural plan, because it provides a diagnosis of spatial conditions of development, specifies components of the spatial system and their mutual relationships and indicates their desired configuration over a relatively large sea area (equal to the territory of 2–3 municipalities). on the other it decides on certain specific limitations of sea space use.

the key issue is reaching agreement on the problems and developing solutions, accepted by all stake-holders, which will ensure both protection of environment and proper conditions for the improve-ment of living standards of coastal communities.

2.2.2 BouNDARIES oF ThE SEA AREA CovERED By ThE DRAFT PLAN

the draft plan covers a part of the internal sea waters of the gulf of gdańsk. it is an area of about 40,550 ha, situated west of the line connecting the tip of the hel peninsula (geographical coordi-nates 18°48’29.12’’e, 54°35’33.71’’n) with the border between the gdynia and sopot municipalities (18°33’43.15’’e, 54°27’51.46’’n). areas of the ports of gdynia, puck, Jastarnia and hel, enclosed be-tween breakwaters and land, are not included in the plan. the draft plan covers most of the internal part of the gulf of gdańsk – the puck Bay (including its inner part, located west of the seagull sandbar, called the inner puck Bay, and its part open to the gulf, referred to as the outer puck Bay).

the adjoining land area covers, situated within the coastal belt, territories of the rural municipalities of kosakowo and puck, and the municipalities of the towns of puck, hel, Jastarnia, władysławowo and gdynia.

2.2.3 ThE INTEGRAL PARTS oF ThE PLAN

the draft spatial management plan includes a graphic and a textual part. the draft text of the plan contains, in particular, determinations concerning principles of development and use for the


distinguished in the plan sea basins. the drawing of the plan has been made in scale 1:25,000, in the ”92” state coordinate system, and its numerical version allows easy transformation to the projection used in nautical charts.

attached to the draft text of the plan is an extensive justification, which includes a description of the existing state, characteristics of conditions of spatial development of the area covered by the plan and an explanation of the solutions contained in the plan’s determinations.

also attached to the text of the plan are: recommendations concerning the management of the land adjoining the area covered by the • plan, suggestions concerning the required amendments of law (included in the text due to the pilot • nature of the plan), a glossary of used professional terminology. •

2.2.4 DETERMINATIoNS oF ThE PLAN

General determinations

in the whole area covered by the plan regulations of the act of 21st March, 1991 (with further amendments) on sea areas of poland and Maritime administration and the act of 7th July, 1994 – Construction law (with further amendments) are in force.

all changes in the way the sea basins in the region are used (erection of above- and underwater structures, artificial islands, structures and facilities for scientific needs, laying of cables and pipe-lines) must obtain required by law permits of organs of maritime administration territorially com-petent in the area. the zones closed to navigation, fishery and tourism for military reasons are as-signed by the Minister of defence in agreement with the minister competent for matters of internal affairs and the minister competent for matters of maritime economy. prospecting, identification and extraction of mineral resources are regulated by the geological and mining law and by relevant regulations concerning protection of marine environment, safety of navigation and life at sea.

Division into sea basins

the area covered by the plan is divided into 30 sea basins marked by a number and a letter code. the letter codes are defined below:k – sea basins designated for water transport, fairways, roadsteads and anchorages,s – sea basins for sports and recreation, r – sea basins for fishing,B – sea basins for above-water structures and artificial islands,p – sea basins for underwater structures,l – sea basins for linear objects, technical infrastructure networks,o – sea basins designated primarily for nature conservation,d – sea basins designated primarily for cultural heritage protection,a – other sea basins,


i – sea basins of particular importance to good state of ichtyofauna,t – reed fields, Z – dredging pits,n – natura 2000 (soo) areas not coinciding with the boundaries of the sea basins.

the boundaries of the sea basins are defined by coordinates of their corners.the following numbers of specific types of sea basins were distinguished for their dominating func-tion: 12o, 6rs, 4k, 4a, 2Bp, 2l. the designations concern the dominating functions, but (at least for some basins) other functions are also allowed. a summary of the sea basins and their leading functions is presented in table 10.

Tab. 10. Summary of sea basins and their leading functions

Main function of the sea basin Sea basin Total area

nature conservation 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09, 10, 11, 12 17,370.54

fisherysports and recreation 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 15,087.08

transport 19, 20, 21, 22 1,847.52

linear infrastructure 23, 24 2,542.39

sand extraction 25 139.39

waste deposition 26 591.80

areas closed for military reasons 27, 28 1,616.99

Construction of surface and underwater installations and artificial islands 29, 30 1,354.26

Source: Pilot draft plan of the west part of the Gulf of Gdańsk

detailed requirements concerning the use of each sea basin are given in the basins’ sheets. general requirements apply to the whole area covered by the plan.

General requirements concerning the whole area covered by the draft plan

Environmental protection and nature conservation

Natura 2000 areasthe whole area covered by the draft plan is included into the natura 2000 system – special bird protection area “puck Bay” plB 220005.in natura 2000 areas (except national parks and nature reserves) activities connected with the maintenance of structures and facilities serving purposes of flood protection and economical, ag-ricultural, forestry, hunting, fishing and angling activities are not limited, provided that they do not pose a threat to the maintenance of natural habitats and habitats of vegetation or animals, and have no significant negative impact on species of plants and animals for the protection of which the natura 2000 area was established.


in natura 2000 areas it is prohibited to undertake actions which can significantly deteriorate the state of natural habitats and habitats of vegetation and animals, and it is required that tourism, economical activities, hunting and investment projects are limited to a safe level.

draft plans and draft changes to the adopted plans, as well as planned projects which are not directly related to the protection of a natura 2000 area, or do not result from that protection, and which can have a significant impact on the areas, must be subjected to the eia procedures in ac-cordance with the regulations of the act of 27th april, 2001 – environment protection law. a part of the area covered by the draft plan is also included into:

natura 2000 system – the “puck Bay and hel peninsula” area of special habitat protection • plh220032,the Coastal landscape park.•

detailed conditions of use and the range of allowed uses resulting from the above general condi-tions are contained in the sheets of relevant sea basins.

Water Framework Directivein accordance with the, carried out in 2004, typology of waters (resulting from the water frame-work directive of the european parliament and Council of 23rd october, 2000), carried out in 2004, the western part of the gulf of gdańsk was classified into the category of transitory waters, within which the following parts were distinguished: the inner gulf of gdańsk, inner puck Bay and outer puck Bay. But in accordance with the act of 18th July, 2001 – water law, the gulf of gdańsk was included into the category of coastal waters. this means that, by force of directive 2000/60/eu, no activity carried out in the area may deteriorate the ecological state of its waters. this state will have to meet the more rigorous standards set up for coastal waters. the directive re-quires that compliance with all the standards and objectives concerning the protected area should be achieved by 2015. according to directive 2000/60/eu, maintenance or improvement of the quality of water (achievement of best possible ecological state) is a precondition for protection of species and habitats directly dependent on water.

Protection of fish and sea mammal habitats the spatial aspect of protection of species of sea mammals, Cyclostomata and fish protected by national and international law consists in protecting their habitats (places of procreation, feeding and sheltering).

other requirements related to environmental protection and nature conservationwithin the area covered by the draft plan no sea basins specifically designated for breeding and mariculture are distinguished. Biotechnical activities aimed at reintroduction of species and opera-tions of nature restoration are allowed.

discharge of sewage and waste dumping is not allowed within the area covered by the draft plan. exception is made for discharges of sewage of enhanced treatment level, meeting the requirements


of the ordinances of the Minister of environment3 and eu directives4. discharge of sewage of that kind is possible only in the indicated sea areas5. waste dumping is regulated by separate legal docu-ments (i.e., the ordinance of the Minister of transport and Building6 and the ordinance of the Minister of environment7). deposition of waste from dredging which meets standards specified in the above mentioned ordinances is allowed within a specified sea basin.

rain- and meltwater in watertight, open or closed sewerage systems can be discharged into sea areas covered by the plan after pre-treatment, using facilities with highest efficiency level defined in regula-tions on discharge of sewage into waters or soil (i.e., in ordinances of the Minister of environment8).

within the boundaries of the plan, special protection is extended onto the seagull sandbar (sea basin 6) and reed fields (areas described in sea basin sheets 1, 2 and 10, marked in the drawing of the plan with t and a four-digit number, and determined in the annexe to the sea basin sheets by coordinates of their corners). the protection will be implemented by prohibiting access to the ar-eas without a permit from the Maritime office. information about the prohibition shall be placed by the Maritime office in gdynia on special information boards at the boundaries or close to the boundaries of the protected areas.

sand extraction9 is allowed only at designated places.

in the area covered by the draft plan, dredging is forbidden except on fairways and approach channels.

the principle of minimizing negative effects of hydro-morphological processes on the coastline is adopted, and activities which could result in appearance of new coastal erosion are forbidden.

links of nature in the area of the plan with nature in neighbouring areas should be shaped by maintaining the continuity of the existing areas reserved for habitat and species protection guaran-teed by law, unique in the scale of polish sea areas or fulfilling a special function in the biocenosis, taking into account the need to protect land ecosystems in the context of their dependence on the sea.

detailed requirements and limitations resulting from the nature conservation and environmental protection needs are contained in the sea basin sheets.

3 Currently in force is the ordinance of the Minister of environment of 24th July, 2006 on conditions to be met when discharging sewage to waters or soil and on substances particularly hazardous to the water environment (Journal of laws of 31st July, 2006).

4 Currently in force is directive 98/15/eu of 27th february, 1998.5 delimitation of the sea basins was carried out taking into account the requirements of the act of 18th July, 2001 – water

law (Journal of laws no. 115, item 1229), which provides that sewage shall not be discharged „within bathing areas, public beaches and at a distance smaller than 1 km from their boundaries”.

6 Currently in force is the ordinance of the Minister of transport and Building of 26th January, 2006 on the procedure for issuance of permits for removing into the sea spoil from dredging and for dumping of waste or other substances in the sea (Journal of laws of 10th february, 2006).

7 Currently in force is the ordinance of the Minister of environment of 16th april, 2002 on types and concentrations of substances resulting in pollution of dredged spoil (Journal of laws of 2002 no. 55 item 498).

8 Currently in force is the ordinance of the Minister of environment of 24th July, 2006 on conditions to be met when discharging sewage to waters or soil and on substances particularly hazardous to the water environment (Journal of laws of 31st July, 2006).

9 polish coastal protection strategy forbids extracting sand from sea bottom closer than 5 km from the shore and from depths smaller than 20 m.


Requirements concerning protection of cultural heritage

underwater cultural heritage is protected by indicating objects and sea basins with historical herit-age open for tourism, and by defining the rules under which access is possible, and also by limit-ing/banning access to the rest of the heritage.

investigations and exploration of the cultural heritage is allowed only when authorized by the organ of maritime administration of relevant level.

detailed requirements and limitations resulting from the need to protect cultural heritage have been included in the sea basin sheets.

Determinations concerning investments of public aim

sites for investments of public aim should be selected on the basis of this plan.

decisions on locating public aim investments in the area covered by the draft plan are issued by the director of the Maritime office in gdynia.

when issuing the decision, the procedure described in articles 52-56 of the act of 27th March, 2003 on spatial planning and Management should be followed.

the director of the Maritime office in gdynia keeps records of the issued decisions concerning localization of public aim investments within the area covered by the draft plan. General determinations concerning development of technical infrastructure and vessel traffic

the plan ensures access from sea to all ports and havens, using fairways crossing the sea area cov-ered by the draft plan.

within the plan area, cargo and passenger vessels should sail along designated fairways allowing access to the ports and havens. this does not concern passenger vessels realising regular tourist cruises on certain sea basins. any change or extension of technical infrastructure shall require a review and, possibly, modification, of the sailing routes. this concerns particularly the sea basins 13 rs, 18rs, 23l and 30Bp.

fishing vessels, rowing and sailing boats, windsurfing boards may move everywhere. the only limitations are natural/technical (draught) and requirements from nature conservation and envi-ronmental needs (given in the specific sea basin sheets). in many areas engine propelled vessels are not allowed. this limitation does not concern rescue vessels, water police, the Border guard, sea fishing inspectors, maritime administration and vessels carrying out scientific investigations, and no speed limit is imposed on them. all the limitations are lifted when human life is in dan-ger. fishermen are given much freedom of movement, also on motorboats.


underwater linear technical infrastructure should be laid within the infrastructure development corridors indicated in the plan. deviations from this rule, dictated by requirements of national defence, are allowed in selected sea basins (see the basins’ sheets).

the existing technical infrastructure is retained to serve further operation.

within the whole area of the plan it is allowed to develop technical infrastructure and temporary facilities (mainly cables, sensors, cameras and measurement instruments) for the needs of environ-mental protection, nature conservation and research. realisation of these projects must meet the detailed requirements concerning environmental protection and nature conservation given in sea basin sheets.

in the areas of water routes it is also possible to place technical infrastructure to enhance safety of navigation.

laying of underwater technical infrastructure (i.e., requiring taking up an area of seabed), regard-less of its purpose, requires: (a) an inventory of habitats in the area where the work is to be car-ried out; (b) use of the Best available technology; (c) observing the principle of economical use of space. in addition, where pipelines (with the exception of temporary pipelines) are laid, it is required to develop, for an area indicated by the maritime administration, local/detailed plans in scale 1:1000, preceded by eco-hydrographic studies made at the expense of the investor.

infrastructure related to storm, flood and landslide protection can be realised in accordance with the principles and recommendations of the polish coastal protection strategy, in particular at loca-tions indicated in the strategy. realisation of this type of infrastructure (and structures) requires: (a) an inventory of habitats in the area of the works; (b) use of the Best available technology; (c) observing the principle of economical use of space.

Crossing of cables and pipelines laid under sea bottom (or on it) onto land should take into ac-count land conditions (coastal morphodynamics, ecology of the coastal zone) in order to make a careful selection of the cable/pipeline landing point and to bury them sufficiently deeply under the bottom in the coastal zone (less than 8 m water depth zone); the location and depth of burying should depend on morphodynamic conditions.

within the whole plan area use of pulsating lights other than serving navigation needs and posi-tioning of structures and installations dangerous to navigation is prohibited.

General determinations concerning economic utilization of the area

limiting of economic utilization and access of tourists to a sea basin or its part can take place only after its importance for the preservation of valuable resources and features of environment, nature or cultural heritage has been documented, and after establishing legal protection unequivocally determining the scope of the limitation.


no sea basins for the erection of wind farms and offshore drilling platforms are designated within the area covered by the draft plan.

Building of above- and underwater structures and artificial islands is allowed only if they are related with the lead function of a given sea basin, or if they are placed for the needs of research and/or na-ture conservation and environmental protection. in bathing areas, the location of which has been agreed with the director of the Maritime office, it is allowed to erect temporary jetties dismantled after the summer season.

erection of temporary structures (e.g. serving sea and coastal tourism, scientific research, environ-mental protection and nature conservation) requires: (a) an inventory of habitats in the area of the works; (b) use of the Best available technology; (c) observing the principle of economical use of space.

erecting permanent (operated year-round) structures and artificial islands requires developing, for an area indicated by the maritime administration, local/detailed plans in scale 1:1000, preceded by ecohydrographic studies made at the expense of the investor. erection, repair and reconstruction of permanent structures and artificial islands requires also using the Best available technology, observance of the principle of economical use of space and adjustment of overall dimensions of the structures to the structures and spatial development on land.

when erecting above-water structures and artificial islands, technical solutions preventing inun-dation by sea waters (storm surges, waves, sea level rise due to global warming) should be imple-mented, unless the inundation is consistent with the economic purpose they serve. the required ordinates are given in detailed provisions in the sea basin sheets.

installing sign-boards and advertisements, and the way they are installed in the area of the plan, requires consent of the Maritime office of gdynia.

detailed conditions of utilization for economic purposes and the range of allowed uses in the spe-cific sea basins are given in the basins’ sheets.

2.2.5 DETAILED DETERMINATIoNS CoNCERNING SPECIFIC SEA AREAS – SEA BASIN ShEETS

detailed determinations concerning specific sea areas (basins) are given in 30 sea basin sheets. the sheets contain: symbol of the sea basin using a number and letter code, the basin’s surface, loca-tion and description of boundaries, name, lead (dominant) function, complementary functions, allowed functions, principles of development and management and limitations. additionally, each sheet contains a small map of the whole plan area with the specific sea basin shaded or indicated with an arrow.


2.2.6 FINAL DETERMINATIoNS

detailed plans for sea basins 23, 14 and, if possible, for 2710 in the part adjoining the hel peninsula (see annexe to chapter 2.2) should be developed.

10 these are, respectively: gdynia-hel technical infrastructure corridor, outer puck Bay, coastal waters around hel and coastal waters to north-west of hel.


ANNExE 2.1 lIST oF SEA BASINS

Tab. 11 Sea basins Sea area number Name Category

01 Coastal waters kuźnica –władysławowo o

02 inner puck Bay, central part o

03 inner puck Bay, western part o

04 płutnica river mouth foreground o

05 reda river mouth foreground o

06 seagull sandbar o

07 outer puck Bay – western part o

08 outer puck Bay – coastal waters Mechelinki-rewa o

09 outer puck Bay – north-western part o

10 Coastal waters kuźnica – hel peninsula o

11 Coastal waters near orłowo Cliff o

12 rewa Cape o

13 outer puck Bay – southern part rs

14 outer puck Bay – coastal waters around hel rs

15 outer puck Bay coastal waters Mechelinki – oksywie rs

16 Coastal waters gdynia rs

17 Jastarnia – hel coastal waters rs

18 outer puck Bay – middle part rs

19 fairway to kuźnica k

20 fairway to Jastarnia k

21 fairway from gdynia to the open sea k

22 fairway to puck k

23 technical infrastructure corridor gdynia – hel l

24 technical infrastructure corridor from Mechelinki l

25 sand extraction a

26 dumping area a

27 Coastal waters north-east of hel a

28 Coastal waters east of oksywie a

29 waters around port of gdynia Bp

30 outer puck Bay – middle part Bp


ANNExE 2.2 ExAMPlES oF SEA BASIN ShEETS

Sea basin 01sea basin destination

location of sea basin and description of its boundaries digit

code sur-face name letter

code performed function

01

3623

4.6

ha

Coa

stal

wat

ers

kuźn

ica

–wła

dysł

awow

o

o

lead function:nature conservation•

Complementary functions:fishing • sports and recreation •

allowed functions: storm surge and coastal • protection infrastructure traffic on the fairway •

detailed determinations

determi-nations concerning nature con-servation and environmental protection

execution of works permanently deforming the seabed relief is not allowed; exceptions include recultiva-• tion of dredging pits (sub-basins Z0101-Z0104 shown in the drawing and defined in the annexe by co-ordinates of their corners), storm surge, flood or slide protection works, or reconstruction, maintenance and repair of water installations.set type nets are banned from november 1 until March 31.• reed fields are to be protected (sub-basins t0101-t0106 shown in the drawing and defined in the an-• nexe by coordinates of their corners).Bathing areas must be located at least at a distance of 2 m from reed field sub-basins (the t0101-t0106 a • sub-basins shown in the drawing).noise level shall not exceed 50 dB.• prohibitions resulting from the protection plans of the Coastal landscape park and the plh220032 • natura 2000 area and from regulations on angling and sea fishery must be observed.only arranged bathing areas are allowed along the coast. they can be located exclusively within stretches • of coast defined by km h65.28-h67.30; h67.92-h68.31; h68.41-h69.13 and h69.66-h70.0 of the kilometre grid of coastline of the Maritime offices.

determina-tions concern-ing protection of cultural heritage

the cultural heritage area (sub-basin d0101 – shown in the drawing and defined in the annexe by • coordinates of its corners) is protected. the Maritime office in gdynia must be notified about every intended investigation in the sub-basin, or a permit to investigate/penetrate the sub-basin must be obtained from the director of Maritime office in gdynia (if such a permit is required by law).placing technical infrastructure and erection of structures within the d0101 sub-basin requires prior • investigation of the area of the works in order to make a detailed inventory of underwater cultural heritage.

derminations concerning vessel traffic

use of motor boats and other craft is allowed only along the fairway to kuźnica haven (sub-basin • k0101 – shown in the drawing and defined in the annexe by coordinates of its corners).Movement of fishing boats (including motor-propelled), windsurfing boards, oar propelled craft • (pontoons, rowing boats, kayaks) is allowed without limitation except in the reed field sub-basins (sub-basins t0101-t0106 shown in the drawing), where entrance of vessels requires a permit of the Maritime office in gdynia, and the fairway k0101 (shown in the drawing) which can be crossed only along the shortest line leading to its opposite boundary; the limitations do not concern situa-tions of danger to human life or health. the speed of craft on the entire sea basin shall not exceed 8 knots.•

determina-tions concern-ing economic utilisation of the sea basin area

fishing and angling is allowed save with exception of the reed field sub-basins (sub-basins t0101 – • t0106 – shown in the drawing) and the fairway sub-basin (k0101 – shown in the drawing). along stretches of coastline defined by km h58.12-h62.11; h63.71-h66.16; h69.24-h69.58 of the • kilometre grid of coastline of the Maritime offices) erection of structures and other works for the needs of coastal protection is allowed.it is allowed to reconstruct the coastline using material washed away by sea and deposited on the • bottom at a distance of up to 50 m from the coastline along stretches of coastline defined by km h65.28-h67.30; h 67.92-h68.31; h68.41-h69.13; h 69.66-h70.0 of the kilometre grid of coastline of the Maritime offices, provided that a permit of the Maritime office in gdynia is obtained.






14

795.

34 h

a

out

er p

uck

Bay

coas

tal w

ater

s ar

ound

hel

rs

lead function:fishery• sports and recreation •

Complementary functions: nature conservation•

allowed functions:erection of above- and under-• water structures and artificial islands linear infrastructure• storm surge and coastal • protection infrastructuretransport•


determi-nations concern-ing nature conservation and envi-ronmental protection

Creation of new fairways requiring dredging is not allowed. • locating bathing areas at a distance smaller than 50 m from particularly important habitats of ichthyofauna, i.e., • artificial reefs, the tip of hel peninsula and the sandy bottom between the navy and fishing ports of hel (sub-basins i1401, i1402 shown in the plan drawing and defined in the annexe by coordinates of their corners), is prohibited.in sub-basins i1401 and i1402 works permanently deforming the bottom relief are prohibited, with the exception • of works related to storm, flood or landslide protection or reconstruction, maintenance, overhaul or repair of water installations. in sub-basins n1401, n1402 and n1403 (as shown in the plan drawing and defined in the annexe by coordinates of • their corners) prohibitions of the protection plan for the plh220032 area are in force.prohibitions of other regulations concerning fishing and practising of sea fishery, and sea navigation are in force.•

determi-nations concerning protection of cultural heritage

protection is extended over the whole sea basin because of presence of cultural heritage. investigations shall be • each time notified, or an application for a permit to investigate/penetrate the area submitted, to the director of Maritime office in gdynia (if such a permit is required under separate regulations).for placing technical infrastructure and erection of structures and artificial islands, as well as carrying out other • works causing a change of the bottom relief (e.g., dredging, sand-fill) prior examination of the work area has to be carried out in order to make a detailed inventory of underwater cultural heritage.

determi-nations concerning development of technical infrastruc-ture and ves-sel traffic

outside of fairway sub-basins k1401, k1402 and k1403 shown in the plan drawing and defined in the annexe by • coordinates of the corners, and sub-basins of important habitats of ichtyofauna i1401 and i1402, it is allowed to develop technical infrastructure for servicing structures and artificial islands erected in this and adjoining sea basins.laying of infrastructure in fairway sub-basins (k1401, k1402 and k1403 shown in the plan drawing), i.e., the • situation where the infrastructure crosses fairways, requires providing conditions for safe navigation and anchoring. in sub-basin a1401 (shown in the plan drawing and defined in the annexe by coordinates of its corners) laying of infrastructure must be agreed with the Commander of polish navy. navigation of cargo ships and other vessels is allowed in the whole sea basin except sub-basins i1401, i1402 (shown • in the plan drawing) and, in periods of its temporary closing to navigation, in sub-basin a1401 (shown in the plan drawing).free movement of tourist vessels in the sea basin is allowed, except in fairway sub-basins k1401 k1402 and k1403 • (shown in the plan drawing) where movement of muscle driven watercraft and windsurfing boards is forbidden (with the exclusion of crossing of the fairway) and in sub-basin a1401 (shown in the plan drawing) during its temporary closing to navigation.

determi-nations concerning economic utilisation of the sea basin area

fishing is not limited in the whole sea basin except fairways (sub-basins k1401, k1402 and k1403 shown in the • plan drawing), important habitats of ichtyofauna (sub-basins i1401 and i1402, shown in the plan drawing) and sub-basin a1401 (shown in the plan drawing) during its temporary closing for fishery.along sections of the coast defined by the kilometre grid of coastline of the Maritime offices (h36.0 – h36.83; • h37.38 – h37.97; h38.97 – h38.57) it is allowed to erect structures and conduct works for the needs of coastal protection, including artificial nourishment. with the exclusion of fairways (sub-basins k1401, k1402 and k1403, shown in the plan drawing), sub-basins of par-• ticularly valuable habitats of ichthyofauna (sub-basins i401, i402, shown in the plan drawing) and sub-basin a1401 (shown in the plan drawing) during its temporary closing, it is allowed to erect an artificial island (including connected above- and underwater structures) of a surface not exceeding 2 ha for scientific and environment protection needs.the height of above-water structures, built for scientific, environmental and nature conservation needs, should not exceed • 1 storey (5.5 m above msl). technical solutions should be applied to account for sea level rise due to climate change.


Sea basin 23

sea basin destinationlocation of sea basin and description of its

boundariesdigit code

sur-face name letter


23

1692

.86

ha

gdy

nia

– h

el t

echn

ical

in

fras

truc

ture

cor

rido

r

l

lead function:linear technical infrastructure•

Complementary functions:nature conservation• fishery• sports and recreation•

allowed function: storm and seashore protection • infrastructure



Creation of new fairways requiring dredging is not allowed.• in sea basin n2301 (shown in the plan drawing and defined in the annexe by coordinates of its • corners) prohibitions and limitations stipulated in the protection plan for the plh220032 area are obligatory.prohibitions resulting from regulations on fishery and practise of sea fishing are in force. • effective are prohibitions resulting from regulations on sea navigation. •


protection is extended onto the cultural heritage sub-basin d2301 (shown in the plan drawing and • defined in the annexe by coordinates of its corners). investigations shall be each time notified, or an application for a permit to investigate/penetrate the area submitted, to the director of Maritime office in gdynia (if such a permit is required under separate regulations).placing new technical infrastructure within sub-basin d2301 requires prior detailed examination and • inventory of underwater cultural heritage.

determi-nations concerning development of technical infrastructure and vessel traffic

it is allowed to establish a fairway for big vessels (sub-basin k2303 shown in the plan drawing and • defined in the annexe by coordinates of its corners). navigation of cargo/passenger vessels is allowed (preferably in sub-basins k2301, k2302 and k2303 • shown in the plan drawing and defined in the annexe by coordinates of its corners), provided it is realised by the shortest route across the sea basin.navigation of tourist vessels is allowed, except on fairways (sub-basins k2301, k2302 and k2303 • shown in the plan drawing), where traffic of muscle driven craft and windsurfing boards is forbidden (except crossing the fairway by shortest route). navigation is forbidden in sub-basin a2301 (shown in the plan drawing and defined in the annexe by • coordinates of its corners) in the period of its temporary closing for navigation. anchoring is forbidden.• technical infrastructure connecting the hel peninsula with gdynia should be located in that sea ba-• sin. within sub-basins a2301 and a2302 (shown in the plan drawing and defined in the annexe by co-• ordinates of their corners) locating infrastructure requires agreement of the Commander of the polish navy.


fishing is allowed with the exclusion of line gear, gear dragged on the bottom and anchored gear. it is • not allowed to fish in the fairway sub-basins (sub-basins k2301, k2302 and k2303 shown in the plan drawing) and in sub-basins a2301 and a2302 (shown in the plan drawing) when they are temporarily closed to navigation and fishery.along the sections of coast defined by km h89.98-h91.03of the kilometre grid of coastline of the • Maritime offices it is allowed to erect structures and carry out works for needs of coastal protection.






27

690.

95 h

a

Coa

stal

wat

ers

to t

he n

orth

-wes

t of

hel

a

lead function:Closed zone•

Complementary functions: nature conservation • fishery• sports and recreation •

allowed functions:transport• underwater tourism • linear infrastructure• erection of above- and under-• water structures



Creation of new fairways requiring dredging is not allowed.• works resulting in permanent change of bottom relief are prohibited in sub-basin i2701 (shown in • plan drawing and defined in the annexe by coordinates of corners) with exception of works for the needs of storm surge, flood and landslide protection and reconstruction, maintenance, overhaul and repair of water installations.locating bathing areas at a distance smaller than 50 m from particularly important habitats of ich-• thyofauna, i.e., artificial reefs, and the sandy bottom between the navy and fishing ports of hel (sub-basin i2701 shown in the plan drawing) is prohibited.in sub-basin n2701 (shown in the plan drawing and defined in the annexe by coordinates of its cor-• ners) prohibitions stemming from the protection plan for area plh220032 are in force.prohibitions resulting from separate regulations concerning fishing and practising of sea fishery, as • well as sea navigation are in force.


protection of cultural heritage is extended over the whole sea basin. investigations shall be each time • notified, or an application for a permit to investigate/penetrate the area submitted, to the director of Maritime office in gdynia (if such a permit is required under separate regulations).placing technical infrastructure and erection of structures requires prior examination of the work area • in order to make a detailed inventory of underwater cultural heritage.


for the purpose of national defence it is allowed to develop technical infrastructure beyond the fair-• way area (k2701, k2702 and k2703 areas as shown in the plan drawing and outlined in the annexe by stating the coordinates of boundary corners) and areas of important habitats of ichtyofauna (i2701 area as shown in the plan drawing). placing of infrastructure within fairways (sub-basins k2701, k2702 and k2703 shown in the drawing) • i.e., a situation where the infrastructure crosses a fairway requires that conditions of safe navigation and anchoring should be provided.navigation of cargo vessels is allowed in the whole sea basin except in periods when it is temporarily • closed to navigation.in the period when the sea basin is not closed to navigation, traffic of tourist vessels is allowed, ex-• cept on fairways (sub-basins k2701, k2702 and k2703 shown in the plan drawing), where traffic of muscle driven craft and windsurfing boards is forbidden (except when crossing the fairway by shortest route).


outside the fairway sub-basins (k2701, k2702 and k2703 shown in the plan drawing) and the area • of important habitats of ichtyofauna (sub-basin i2701 shown in the plan drawing) fishing is allowed except during the periods when the basin is temporarily closed for fishery.outside the fairway sub-basins (k2701, k2702 and k2703 shown in the plan drawing) and the area • of important habitats of ichtyofauna (sub-basin i2701 shown in the plan drawing) erecting above- and underwater structures of military purpose is allowed.the height of the above-water structures erected for defence purposes shall not exceed that of 1 storey • (5.5 m above msl).



location of sea basin and description of its boundariesdigit



30

1225

.00

ha

out

er p

uck

Bay

mid

dle

part

Bp

lead function:erection of above- and under-• water structures and artificial islands

Complementary functions:discharge of sewage • linear infrastructure • transport •

(temporarily) allowed functions:fishing• sports and tourism•



prohibitions resulting from separate regulations concerning fishing and practising of sea fishery, as • well as sea navigation are in force.


not applicable.•


outside fairways (sub-basin k3001 shown in the plan drawing and defined in the annexe by coor-• dinates of its corners) development of technical infrastructure designed for servicing artificial islands and above- and underwater structures is allowed. placing of infrastructure within fairways (sub-basin k3001 shown in the plan drawing), i.e., crossing • fairways requires that conditions of safe navigation and anchoring must be ensured.navigation of cargo vessels is allowed provided it does not pose a threat to structures and artificial • islands. navigation of touristic vessels is allowed without limitation except the fairway (sub-basin k3001 • shown in the plan drawing), where traffic of muscle driven craft and windsurfing boards is forbidden (except for crossing the fairway by shortest route). the sea basin can be closed temporarily or perma-nently to touristic vessels by a decision of the director of the Maritime office in gdynia.


fishing is allowed except on the fairways (sub-basin k3001 shown in the plan drawing and defined in • the annexe by coordinates of its corners). the sea basin can be closed temporarily or permanently to fishing by a decision of the director of Maritime office in gdynia.discharge of treated sewage is allowed. • discharge of brine is allowed (of parameters determined by means of environmental impact assess-• ment) at a location where their gravitational outflow from the puck Bay is possible. outside of the fairway (sub-basin k3001 shown in the plan drawing and defined in the annexe by • coordinates of its corners), it is allowed to erect above- and underwater structures and artificial islands connected with handling, unloading, storage and improvement of goods imported or exported by sea, discharge of treated sewage and brine and obtaining power from waves and sea currents. technical solutions should take into account sea level rise due to climate change.


2.3 BARRIERS hINDERING PlANNING

the pilot’s planning team had to deal with a number of significant problems and barriers of divers origin. first of all, it was the pioneering character of the project, and that the matter proved much more complex than in the case of routine terrestrial spatial plans. a good illustration is the work with stakeholders, for the first time ever, had to define their demands for sea space. the imperfect legal system who also did not make the work easier. due to the lack of legal solutions, it had to be assumed that certain issues, though not covered at present by existing law, will in the future fall into the competence of maritime spatial planning in poland. this meant that the team was allowed to, and did, step outside the canon of traditional spatial planning, which resulted in much contro-versy, coming especially from spatial planning professionals. secondly, there was the deficit of data, additionally complicated by the unclearly defined division of competence and responsibility for data collection and accessibility. in effect it was necessary to appeal to the goodwill of information owners. thirdly, methodological problems appeared. Because of the differentness of the planned area, new solutions, not applied in terrestrial planning, had to be used. fourthly, knowledge ac-cumulated earlier proved insufficient to provide answers on many issues vital for the determination of future directions of development of the planned area. this had a negative impact on the quality of the document itself. the knowledge gaps concerned many land-sea interactions (e.g. the issues of tourist capacity of the terrestrial hinterland and of foreshore capacity) and the dynamics of marine processes (relating e.g. to the alignment of marine ecological corridors). the area of uncertainty was much broader than in the case of traditional terrestrial spatial planning.

the dialogue with the stakeholders was intense, and, despite the lack of legal requirements, the stakeholders really tried to take an active part. But significant barriers appeared. even where fu-ture conditions should have been clearly specified, e.g. with respect to environmental and nature conservation concerns, it was found that protection plans (of the Coastal landscape park) or man-agement plans for natura 2000 areas are lacking. Coastal municipalities, interested in developing tourism, were unable to translate their interests into demands for sea space; their planners merely signalled a need to erect mooring jetties and yacht havens or to open new beaches, but had no ideas about the related demands on the sea space. nor did port authorities have a clear vision of long-term development in the context of demand for sea space. due to the short time of develop-ment of the plan, the team was unable to start a dialogue with the navy to find out whether oc-cupied by it sea areas are really needed for national defence purposes.

utilisation of sea areas is currently ruled by a number of sectoral regulations, but many important related aspects escape the attention of responsible public authorities. a number of matters ruled on land by other regulations (e.g. speed limits, noise levels, accessibility of transport routes, i.e., marking of roads, bans on entrance to protected areas etc.), proved possible to control on sea only by means of spatial planning – even though present regulations do not provide spatial plans with such power. the main reason was the lack and/or vagueness of law, in effect of which there are some gaps between the decision making competences of various authorities. Because the issues make up an important part of spatial order at sea, it was decided to regulate them in the plan, thereby stepping outside the exist-ing legal framework. as a result, during preparation of the sea basin sheets, the planning team was often faced by the problem of feasibility of proposed determinations of the plan. within the exist-ing legal framework it is impossible to determine what will be the consequences of non-compliance with the regulations of the plan, nor even what tools could be used to enforce its provisions. this is


particularly true about provisions going beyond the spatial planning canon of rules (erection of struc-tures and determination of the degree of co-existence of various functions of the area in question). spatial planning theory indicates that inability to enforce compliance of stakeholders’ activities with plan provisions is even worse than a lack of such provisions. the adopted approach is justified by the pilot nature of the plan and the objective of providing material for amendments to the existing law, and by the assumption that such amendments shall be made.

the water framework directive obliges poland to carry out ichtyological (including non-commercial fish species), macrophyte and macrozoobenthos monitoring. the protection objectives in the inner puck Bay, which is included into the Coastal landscape park, and the whole puck Bay’s habitat and bird natura 2000 areas also should be monitored. at present only monitoring of macrozoobenthos is carried out. in result of insufficient understanding of the biology of protected species of sea bottom macrophytes and lack of monitoring of macrophyte meadows, there are no studies on effective meth-ods of protection of species and habitats of these meadows.

the list of species protected under national law does not include species of sea bottom macro-fauna. this may be due to the lack of knowledge about their biology. the current knowledge of macrophytes and macrozoobenthos is based on results of individual research projects only.

the best recognized component of the live nature of the western part of the gulf of gdańsk is avifauna. also the species composition of fish living in, or temporarily occupying, the sea area of the puck Bay and adjoining waters is well identified. available is also information concerning wind potential and geomorphological issues.

knowledge gaps are, however, serious and concern many aspects: intensification of habitat mapping is needed; though extremely costly, it is of key importance for • proper development of maritime spatial plans,information about the demand of highly mobile ichtyofauna species and sea mammals for sea • space of specific quality is very unsatisfactory, there is no information about mineral deposits under the sea bottom – but the situation on land • is often not much better, information about planned by stakeholders (municipalities, ports, the navy) development or • future utilization of sea areas is not gathered systematically – in effect there is no strategic reflec-tion on these issues, information on existing development of coastal land is easily available, but information on • planned directions of change in the development (already issued licences and permits) is much more difficult to obtain.

in consequence of the insufficient knowledge, it was impossible to define marine ecological cor-ridors (so-called blue corridors). even an attempt to determine the area traditionally occupied by reed fields failed (only some pieces of information are available). availability of information varies also spatially. the best studied area of the west part of the gulf of gdańsk, as far as characteristics of habitats and biocenosis are concerned, is the belt of coastal waters. the deep water zone is less known, since for the measurements special ships and gear must be used, which greatly increases the cost of environmental investigations.


another problem is that obtainable information is often outdated and imprecise. this concerned, for instance, the marine cultural heritage, and not so much shipwrecks (which are relatively well identi-fied) as rather the presently submerged coastal and land structures. precise and up-to-date informa-tion about fishery also could not be obtained. the size of boats and fish catch are known, but the information cannot be related to the area covered by the plan because locations at which they were caught are not defined, and besides it is known that most of the fishermen operate in other sea areas. Quite a problem appeared with contradicting information concerning transport corridors obtained from the Maritime office in gdynia and the hydrographic office of the polish navy.

difficulties resulted also because many of the municipal studies of pre-conditions and directions of spatial development were rather outdated, and for a large part of the coast no local spatial plans existed. the documents did not contain sufficient information about directions and real priorities of spatial development of the municipalities, especially in the future. in effect it was impossible to, e.g., determine to what extent development of the tourist facilities, parking areas etc. will cause an increase of the number of people wanting to do sea tourism in the area covered by the plan.

Methodological difficulties were connected with the three-dimensional nature of sea space. interpen-etration of functional sea basins, e.g. military areas or fairways containing areas of valuable nature proved to be a problem. in addition, this interpenetration could take place at various levels (horizons) of the three-dimensional sea space (for instance fairways and infrastructural corridors). in such situa-tions one of the sea basins (usually the area of valuable nature) was recognized as the overriding one, and within it a sub-basin was established with additional limitations and/or admissions of use (e.g., resulting from the need to maintain navigation, such as the right to dredge a fairway in an area of protected habitats). in this way a clarity of determinations given in the sea basin sheets was achieved. a similar sub-basin method was applied to other forms of sea space use. areas of e.g., protection of underwater cultural heritage, reed fields, areas important for ichthyofauna, natura 2000 and Coastal landscape park areas, etc. were superimposed on the basic grid of sea basins. as in the previous case, this allowed to formulate additional limitations concerning the use of sea space in selected parts of basic water basins.

a considerable barrier, especially in the preparatory stage of the pilot plan, was the deficit of knowledge about many issues related to the economic use of sea areas. this concerned particularly matters of sea tourism, mariculture and fishery, but also ecological issues and, to a lesser extent, renewable power. in the case of sea tourism and recreation, this deficit included the following matters:

prospects and directions of development of water and underwater forms of sea tourism, such as • scuba diving, water scooters, wind- and kitesurfing etc. in the Baltic sea area,used in the world methods of minimising conflicts between various forms of sea tourism• 11,qualitative and spatial requirements concerning the space which is to serve sea tourism,• spatial conflicts related to sea tourism, their typology and intensity, • co-existence of sea tourism with other ways of sea space use, • capacity of sea space with respect to various forms of sea tourism – how could it be determined, • what experience exists in that respect.

11 already in the area covered by the pilot plan occur accidents involving wind- and kitesurfers.


the widest margin of uncertainty concerned mariculture. the planning team searched with little effect for answers to the following questions:

what is the future of mariculture in europe and elsewhere,• what are the economic and legal prospects for mariculture in the eu and in poland; what are • the risks and opportunities for development of mariculture in poland: possible threats (conflicts) generated by mariculture and its co-existence with other forms of sea space utilization (e.g., with nature protection).

a sine qua non condition of development of the planned area is to pursue the concept of envi-ronment-friendly fishery. however, answers to the following important questions have not been found:

how can such fishery be achieved? (and what in practical terms does such fishery mean?),• what consequences does it have for the ways of space organisation and for management of sea • space?what can be the socio-economic effects of introducing such fishery?• what are the possible conflicts, but also what kind of co-existence with other forms of sea space • use is possible?

the deficit of knowledge on wind power generation had no significance in the specific case of this plan. however, a certain lack of satisfaction has remained because of insufficient information about:

innovative methods of generating power in sea areas from other sources than wind, potential • directions of their development and existing trends, innovative methods of storage and utilization of power obtained from sea areas and predicted • directions of their development (e.g. desalination of sea water for drinking or economic pur-poses).

Much more important for the quality of the plan was the lack of answers to vital questions con-cerning the directions of future protection of marine environment. it is still unknown:

what is the most probable future of marine environment protection and to what extent it should • be restrictive or allowing other economic utilisation of the sea,what kinds/types of environment protection are able to ensure best fulfilment of ecological ob-• jectives in long term,which phenomena/systems/objects should be fully protected and which can spatially co-exist • with other forms of human activity,how climate change and socio-economic development (including technological changes) will af-• fect the protection of marine areas in long term, and how, in turn, the protection will influence the development of coastal communities.

in particular, it proved impossible to establish: to what degree the spatial scope of protection of Baltic’s marine environment (percentage of • protected sea areas) is sufficient and complies with the eco-system approach, and by how much this percentage may increase, considering especially the eu and helCoM policies, what new requirements concerning nature protection of the Baltic sea may appear in the long run, in • particular requirements preventing defragmentation of natural systems, e.g., underwater ecologi-


cal corridors (blue corridors),as a result of the former, what new forms of nature conservation may appear and why (e.g., protection • of underwater landscapes) and how this will influence the utilisation of sea areas for economic purposes,what should be, taking into account the ecological requirements, the most important quantified • objectives and indicators used for medium term management of sea space.

in effect the pilot did not take properly into consideration e.g., the issue of underwater land-scapes.

2.4 CoNClUSIoNS AND RECoMMENDATIoNS

the pilot plan proved to be a promising tool for determining the rules of co-existence of various users of sea space. on the basis of experience gained during its development, and experience gath-ered from terrestrial spatial planning, it can be inferred that a three-tier structure of the plans is needed for poland’s sea areas. the whole sea area should be covered by a national plan in the scale of about 1:400,000, determining:

the distribution of investments of public aim and strategic investments of international, national • and supra-regional importance resulting from recommendations included in the long-term na-tional development strategy and in other development strategies and legal acts, taking into ac-count possible variants of location of such investments, distribution of closed sea areas, indicated by relevant ministers and heads of central government • agencies, within which tasks of national importance will be realised, as well as distribution of areas needing protection.

sea basins of that type would have the nature of priority areas. as regards other forms of sea space utilization, the plan would indicate areas reserved and designated (similar to the methodology of the german maritime plans). the plan would constitute sufficient grounds for undertaking invest-ment activities and locating linear infrastructure in the eeZ.

a comprehensive plan, i.e., such as the one developed for a part of the internal sea waters of the gulf of gdańsk, would play the role of a plan opening internal sea waters and the territorial sea to a wide range of forms of sea space utilization. development of such a plan would be obligatory for areas characterised by a considerable intensity of conflicts. the initiative to develop the plan could come from the director of the maritime office, regional authorities or an association of interested municipalities. the plan should be harmonized with the neighbouring voivodship spatial plan (terrestrial). it is supposed that such second-tier plans would cover about 25-30% of poland’s sea areas. a plan like that would make it possible for investors to start applying for permits for erecting structures, laying cables or building pipelines in internal sea waters and territorial sea. on initiative of the maritime administration, a comprehensive plan could be also developed for areas of the eeZ particularly susceptible to spatial conflicts.

for selected areas (in internal sea waters, territorial sea and eeZ), the maritime administration could order or initiate development of local plans in 1:10,000 and more accurate scales. this would be justified in situations where specific forms of use could lead to significant changes in habitats,


underwater landscapes, pose some other type of threat to marine ecosystems (dumped/discharged chemicals), and/or result in other significant and intense use-use conflicts. areas requiring local plans should be indicated in the comprehensive plans, making it easier for investors to decide on the location of their investments, and making the permitting procedures more predictable. gener-ally, local plans should be drawn for infrastructural corridors, when certain types of structures are erected, and also where it is planned to widely open the sea area to underwater tourism (scuba diving). development of such a plan could be also a part of the investment process, and then the duty to develop the plan would rest on the investor in order to select the optimum variant of the investment (the uncertainty factor). the initiative could come also from the interested municipal-ity. the issue is that the costly detailed investigations of the sea bottom and water column, needed for the development of a local plan, should be carried out only were it is really needed. local plans could embrace both land and sea areas (in the event of problems arising at the land/sea interface). in such situations the plans would require acceptance both of the municipal council and the mari-time office territorially competent in the specific sea area. should a second-tier plan be missing, the local plan would be an obligatory element of the investment process at sea. Both the local and comprehensive plan would have the status of local law.

the pilot plan has allowed to test the scope of information needed to draw up a comprehensive mari-time spatial plan. it showed that: (i) in many cases the information is unavailable or not precise in terms of space (e.g., ichtyofauna), and its collection is very expensive, which increases the uncertainty factor when drawing up maritime plans; (ii) information on both the sea areas and the land areas sur-rounding them is needed; (iii) the quality (adequateness) of the available information leaves much to be desired.

in such a situation establishing an information standard concerning obtaining, collecting and making available spatial information about sea areas is suggested. the essential part of work on the standard should consist in finding the right proportion between the degree of reduction of the uncertainty fac-tor in planning and the cost of obtaining necessary knowledge about the factors shaping the space of sea areas. an instrument could be long term plans of research on marine environment, agreed on by all the Baltic sea countries and jointly implemented with the involvement of national (Ministry of science and higher education) and external (not only eu) funds. the contents (problem structure) of common analyses (the synergy effect) should be determined, and prioritisation of sea areas to be examined should be established. the eu project eModnet could prove quite helpful for this work. equally important is the compatibility (in terms of methodology and topics) of information gathered on land and at sea. at present, voivodships are developing own gis databases for the needs of regional planning in a way reflecting the regional preferences and planning concepts. harmonisation of the databases would enhance the efficiency of spatial planning processes and would also facilitate the monitoring of their implementation.

it is also necessary to determine the minimum scope of issues covered by the plan, since at present it is possible to draw up a plan omitting many significant aspects influencing the spatial develop-ment of sea areas. Besides the obvious matters, such as conditions and requirements resulting from higher order legal acts (natura 2000 areas, zones closed and dangerous to navigation and fishery, investments of public aim, issued permits and licenses), the following preconditions should be taken into account in the plans: (i) hydro- and geomorphological issues (coastal morphodynam-


ics, winds and currents); (ii) ecological and natural issues (the state of flora and fauna and re-quirements concerning their proper living conditions, spawning areas, factors generating threats to marine and terrestrial-marine ecosystems, including pollutant discharges and diffusion), (iii) land-related issues (municipal studies of conditions and directions of spatial development, spa-tial development plans of voivodships, municipal/county/voivodship/national development strate-gies, ecological land-sea corridors), (iv) international requirements (international conventions and agreements signed by poland). the process of taking into account the municipal/voivodship/na-tional/international documents should partly be of a horizontal nature (analysis of consequences), and partly be a vertical one (provisions of such documents adopted as obligatory for the plan). the problem requires regulating in law.

the pilot plan was also used for testing the method of delimitation of sea basins forming the spa-tial grid of maritime plans. this issue will appear repeatedly when drawing up maritime spatial plans. further testing of various approaches is necessary (possibly in an international dimension) and the developed good practices, i.e., approaches which proved effective and efficient, should be widely disseminated. there is no doubt that the approach proposed in the pilot plan, based on functional ties, is a step in the right direction. it allows good fitting of space to the limitations and admissions concerning its use. however, for the method to be successful, adequate information about hydrobiological, geomorphological, thermohydrodynamic and hydrochemical processes, as well as information from the fields of marine meteorology, lithology, hydrography, hydrooptics, biology, ecology etc. must be available. But, as it has been mentioned before, such information is often missing or largely insufficient. the assumption adopted in the pilot plan that the ecological relationships and the fragmentation function of sea transport are of primary importance may not be correct in all conditions. an alternative method could be that of using underwater landscapes as an approximation of habitats (information about landscapes is more easy to obtain). in sufficiently deep waters non-intense navigation has no significant influence on the diffusion of chemical and biological processes. More important (e.g., for the location of mariculture or the good state of fish) could be the boundaries of areas potentially threatened by oil spills in case of ship- or oil platform-related accident (even in case of properly conducted contingency actions).

the pilot plan allowed also examining various forms of dialogue with the stakeholders and the lev-el of their preparation for active participation in the spatial planning process. it seems that special attention should be paid to the preparation of stakeholders for such dialogue and for articulation of their strategic interests, since the predominant approach to sea space is – at least in poland – that the space belongs to everybody without any limitations. hence there is no real interest in analyses examining whether the development of a municipality or a port is conditioned by access to sea space of appropriate quality. the educational task in that respect should be realised, by law, both by the maritime administration and regional planning services. greater weight should be also put on dissemination of information among municipal/regional decision-makers and potential inves-tors about the benefits of sustainable exploitation of the economic potential of sea areas.

an important experience gained in the pilot was the testing of institutional conditions of plan development. a polish phenomenon is that the maritime administration has adapted to the new role of a maritime spatial planner, has gained a necessary minimum knowledge in the field and initiated the process of maritime spatial planning in a „bottom up” way. it seems that for effective


planning of maritime areas, these initiatives need a coordinated support. it is necessary to establish in poland an interdisciplinary centre where the traditional planning knowledge (the terrestrial planning skills) will be combined with knowledge about issues of hydrobiology, geomorphology, thermohydrodynamics, hydrochemistry, maritime meteorology, lithology, hydrography, hydrooptics. it is also necessary to begin integrated teaching of maritime spatial planning at university level in order to develop the needed staff. sea space should become the subject of a professional (and not only political) debate of spatial planners at the european level, either on the occasion of updating of the rather outdated esdp or within work on the definition of territorial cohesion.

the pilot plan also allowed formulating several conclusions of methodological character:instead of the single-variant presentation (as in terrestrial spatial planning) of sea basin designa-• tion, variant planning should be used, e.g. with respect to cables and pipelines: sea basins with preference for linear objects of technical infrastructure, sea basins where such infrastructure is possible and sea basins where placing it is inadmissible.Colour coding in maps, should be replaced with letter (digit and letter) coding, which would • make it possible to retain the three dimensions of sea space and combine various forms of its utilization. Cartographic materials of maritime spatial plans should fit cartographic materials used in terrestrial • planning in order to achieve continuity and cohesiveness of planning over the whole space of our country12.

in long run, there is a need (and poland should join such an effort) to amend the law of the sea (unClos). Maritime traffic, if intense, should become subject to similar restrictions as traffic on land (e.g. creation of traffic corridors, traffic separation zones) and the use of bottom (for cables or pipelines) should not be free of tax to avoid excessive and disorganised use of the sea space.

the enthusiasm of maritime administration proved sufficient for attracting external funds from the eu to draw up the pilot plan. But further continuation and introduction of maritime spatial plan-ning as a legal obligation is not possible without removing financial barriers. in the future system, budgets of maritime offices must have enough funds for the development of maritime spatial plans and for their updating. the programmes of european territorial Co-operation, especially of cross border cooperation across the sea, should support obtaining data and information needed to create maritime plans, particularly information difficult to obtain and costly (e.g., habitat mapping). the competent department of the Ministry of regional development should take due action.

also the motivation and information barriers should be at least significantly reduced. Currently, the stimuli to develop spatial plans of sea areas are limited. there is a need for incentives which would re-sult in truly active participation, jointly with the maritime administration, of coastal municipalities in maritime spatial planning processes, (e.g. a share in benefits from offshore wind farms situated in the immediate vicinity of municipalities).experience gained during the development of the pilot plan allowed also to formulate propositions

12 alternatively, navigation charts should include maps of the land part in the scale in which they are used for voivodship plans, municipal studies and local plans, depending on the kind of the maritime plan (cf. note 2), or the plan should be drawn up in appropriate scale, using the „92” national system set of coordinates, with possibility of easy transformation to the representation used for navigation charts.


concerning directions of changes of polish law on spatial planning of sea areas. it seems that the required amendments of the law should be based upon the following assumptions:

planning of development of the eeZ, due to its specific legal regime, should be carried out at the • national level, as a separate part of work on the national plan, spatial plans of the territorial sea and internal sea waters (comprehensive and local) should de-• cide, as the present act requires, about the assignation of sea basins and about the prohibitions and limitations of their use, but a more precise definition of the competence of the maritime ad-ministration to impose them (in face of the competencies of other agencies) is needed, also legal mechanisms forcing the stakeholders to observe the plan’s provisions should be added – plans of that type should have local law status,when determining the structure of the plan and the catalogue of spatial phenomena regulated by • the plan, it may be worthwhile to use the experience of the pilot presented in this publication,the procedures of maritime plan initiation, its development, plan appealing and evaluation • should base on the experience of terrestrial planning,the hierarchy of spatial plans of sea areas should be determined by indicating the catalogue of • issues and determinations of the national plan which should be included in the comprehensive and local plans, whereas in case of voivodship (regional) and local level planning authorities a procedure of consultation based on the principle of reciprocity would be sufficient13,harmonization of planning activities on land and sea could be achieved by a mechanism of re-• ciprocal consultation/agreement of spatial plans of internal sea waters and territorial sea by the adjoining voivodships and municipalities, and of terrestrial plans by maritime administration (e.g. by means of procedures for submitting remarks to and appealing against the plan), and by development of local plans embracing jointly sea and land areas, even if it is known in advance that various conflicts may arise on this point, all spatial plans of sea areas should be a significant determinant of regional and local plans, • the responsibility for collecting, processing and ensuring availability of information needed for • the development of maritime spatial plans should be determined by law.

it is also necessary to define the concept of spatial order on the sea. the following should be re-garded as determinants of spatial order in the development of sea space:

coherence of spatial development on land and sea, • economical management of space, leaving reserves of space for future, currently unknown, ways • of sea utilisation, minimising the effects of negative natural hydro-morphological processes concerning the coast-• line and preventing the emergence of new processes of that kind,ensuring conditions for maintaining biodiversity and for sustainable development of marine and • land ecosystems in the entire complexity of their interactions, maintaining the continuity of areas with dominating nature conservation function, • maintaining the public character of recreational areas,• minimising the conflicts between various forms of sea space use, • maintenance of transport accessibility from the sea to developed areas and ports,• balancing the availability of and need for sea areas suitable for investments, •

13 the existing legal mechanisms, specifically the requirement that terrestrial plans concerning the coastal belt must be agreed with the maritime administration should be supplemented by adding the requirement that maritime plans must be agreed by the regional and local councils.


protection of social values, including the balancing of collective and individual interests, estab-• lishment of social contacts and reduction of spatial conflicts.

the introduction of systematic planning of sea space in poland seems to be an inevitable process. it is a good thing that at present the process is of a comprehensive character, i.e., it takes place both at the national level (national spatial development Concept) and at the level of the maritime admin-istration. Both processes seem to interact in a proper way. nevertheless poland has a long way to go to achieve the objective of a comprehensive permanent system of maritime planning. Changes of law, much improved awareness and better know-how are required. also systematic collection of information about sea space is needed, which seems to be, in case of poland, quite a significant barrier (even though the investors are willing to cover a part of the costs).


BIBlIoGRAPhY

eC (2006) Green Paper Towards a future Maritime Policy for the Union: A European vision for the oceans and seas, Commission of the european Communities, Brussels, 7.6.2006 CoM(2006), 275 final, Volume ii,

eC (2007) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the Euro-pean Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Region. An Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union, Commission of the european Communities, Brussels, 10.10.2007, CoM(2007), 575 final,

eC (2007a) Accompanying document to the Communication from the Commission to the European Parlia-ment, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. An Integrated Maritime Policy for the European Union, Commission of the european Communities, Brus-sels, 10.10.2007, seC(2007) 1278,

furmańczyk k. (ed.) (2005) ZZOP w Polsce – stan obecny i perspektywy. Problemy erozji brzegu, oficyna, szczecin,

gerstmann e. (ed.) (2000) Materiały do Monografii przyrodniczej regionu gdańskiego (Materials for the Monography of nature in the gdańsk region), tom 3 nadmorski park krajobrazowy, wydawnictwo „Marpress” gdańsk, p. 112,

79B i B l i o g r a p h Y

kuklik i. (2008) Ssaki morskie Zatoki Puckiej, ekspertyza wykonana dla instytutu Morskiego w gdańsku,

kruk-dowgiałło l. (ed.) (2000) Przyrodnicza waloryzacja morskich obszarów chronionych HELCOM BSPA województwa pomorskiego, vol. 3., nadmorski park krajobrazowy, Crangon 7, CBM pan w gdyni,

Majewski a., (1972) Charakterystyka hydrologiczna estuariowych wód polskiego wybrzeża, prace pihM 105,

raport o stanie zagospodarowania przestrzennego województwa pomorskiego (2006) pomorskie studia regionalne, uMwp, gdańsk,

skóra k. e., sapota M. r. (2008) Ryby i rybołówstwo Zatoki Puckiej, ekspertyza wykonana dla in-stytutu Morskiego w gdańsku,

szefler k., furmańczyk k. i inni (2008) Zagospodarowanie i przestrzenne aspekty rozwoju strefy przybrzeżnej Bałtyku, zarówno strefy wód terytorialnych (12 milowej) jak i wyłącznej strefy eko-nomicznej [in:] saganowicz k., Zagrzejewska-fiedorowicz M., Żuber p., „ekspertyzy do kon-cepcji przestrzennego Zagospodarowania kraju 2008–2033”, tom iV, Ministerstwo rozwoju regionalnego, warszawa,

Zaucha J. (2009) Planowanie przestrzenne obszarów morskich. Polskie uwarunkowania i plan pilotażowy, instytut Morski w gdańsku, gdańsk.


FIGURES AND MAPS

fig. 1. puck Bay 9fig. 2. Current uses 11fig. 3. structure of ichtyofauna of the puck Bay, expressed in terms of frequency of the spe-

cies in research catches using non-selective trawl net 15fig. 4. positions of reported observations of grey seal in the puck Bay, 1990–2004 17fig. 5. positions of reported observations of common porpoise in the puck Bay, 1990–

2004 17fig. 6. existing forms of nature protection 23fig. 7. diagram of definitions of areas included in the coastal zone 26fig. 8. fishing grounds (approximate data needing verification and updating) 33fig. 9. distribution of various fishing instruments in the western part of the gulf of

gdańsk in summer and autumn 33fig. 10. importance of locations as fishing centres expressed by the number of stationed

fishing boats 35fig. 11. Map of most important angling locations 36fig. 12. total cargo handling in the port of gdynia (2002–2006) in thous. tonnes 39fig. 13. areas of particular natural value 44

Figures, maps and tables

81f i g u r e s , M a p s a n d t a B l e s

TABlES

tab. 1 fish species found in the puck Bay 14tab. 2. numbers of most important waterbird species in the puck Bay observed during

investigations in January 2007 and maximum numbers in the preceding years 16tab. 3. types of protected habitats present in the western part of the gulf of gdańsk 18tab. 4. Major threats and their impact on natural environment of the western part of the

gulf of gdańsk 21tab. 5. forms of nature protection in the western part of the gulf of gdańsk 22tab. 6. prohibitions and limitations effective in the protected areas of the western part of

the gulf of gdańsk 22tab. 7. size structure of fishing boats per location around the sea area covered by the pilot

plan (as of 2006, according to CrM register) 35tab. 8. Cargo handling and passenger traffic in the main polish sea ports in 2006 40tab. 9. propositions of methods of minimizing damage to nature resulting from economi-

cal activity in areas of valuable nature 49tab. 10. summary of sea basins and their leading functions 55tab. 11 sea basins 62sea basin 01 63sea basin 14 64sea basin 23 65sea basin 27 66sea basin 30 67

part-financed by the european union(european regional development fund)

Maritime institute in gdańskdługi targ 41/4280-830 gdańsk

tel. +48 58 301 16 41fax +48 58 301 35 13

[email protected]

ISBN: 978-83-62438-05-1

Gdańsk 2010

for the West Part of the Gulf of Gdańskim.umg.edu.pl › images › ksiazki ›...

Documents

Transcript of for the West Part of the Gulf of Gdańskim.umg.edu.pl › images › ksiazki ›...