Managing Change Underwater Heritage

From 9 January to 5 March 2024, Historic Environment Scotland (HES) asked for your views on draft guidance on underwater heritage.

The draft Underwater Heritage guidance outlines how to conserve underwater heritage around the coasts of Scotland and in freshwater environments such as lochs and rivers. It explains:

• the cultural significance of underwater heritage
• current management practices
• impacts on conservation
• safe exploration and investigation

We asked for your feedback on the proposed content of this guidance. This included your views on the key messages, scope and approach of the guidance and considerations to guide decision-making. We also asked for case study suggestions.

We recieved 11 survey responses on Citizen Space from a range of stakeholders, including local authorities, academics, and heritage consultants.

Stakeholders generally agreed with key messages, but we received feedback to refine specific key messages to improve clarity.

This includes:

• Reframing the original key message 6 to include an imperative to increase knowledge about underwater heritage and to clarify our messaging on the inaccessibility of underwater heritage sites.
• Adding that the impacts of climate and nature crises are affecting underwater heritage and that underwater heritage itself can be dynamic and changing, not just the environment it’s in for key message 7.
• Adding messaging on the international significance of underwater heritage.
• Highlighting that underwater heritage is a finite resource.

There was a range of suggestions from stakeholders on how to improve the scope and approach. Some of the key points from comments were:

• The scope should expand to include more references to freshwater heritage and heritage partly / sometimes underwater.
• There should be more clarity when using the terms ‘underwater cultural heritage’ and ‘underwater heritage’.
• The guidance should have more information about relevant policies, local marine plans, marine planning partnerships, regional differences and the role of local authorities should be included.
• We should strengthen references to the climate and nature crises in the guidance, including further detail on climate impacts and how underwater heritage can support marine biodiversity.
• The guidance should provide more information on how to reduce and mitigate the impacts of change on underwater heritage. This includes highlighting the importance of monitoring change, explaining the mitigation hierarchy and clarifying how impacts can be managed through strategies like Archaeological Exclusion Zones.
• The guidance should recognise the added value underwater heritage can bring to activities.
• Stakeholders noted sector skills shortages were important to the context of this guidance.
• Stakeholders suggested case studies focused on the unlawful removal or artefacts, monitoring natural and human impacts, impacts of the climate and nature crises, and local stewardship.

You can review the final version of Managing Change in the Historic Environment: Conserving Underwater Heritage on our website.

We updated the guidance based on your feedback. We provided more clarity to the document by splitting it into 4 parts instead of 3.

We refined the key messages to provide more clarity including:

• Reframing how we referred to accessibility, emphasising in what is now key message 7 that managing change in underwater heritage provides opportunities to increase our knowledge of it, and access to it.
• Highlighting that underwater heritage is part of a dynamic environment that is changing due to the climate and nature crises in what is now key message 8.
• Creating a new key message about the international significance of underwater heritage (key message 4).
• Integrating the idea that underwater heritage is a finite resource into an existing key message, now key message 6.

Other key changes include:

• Provided more clarity on the scope of the guidance by including more references to freshwater heritage and heritage partly / sometimes underwater. This included information on canals and the need to apply for scheduled monument consent for a range of activities.
• Added information in Part 1 of the document to explain how we are using the terms ‘underwater cultural heritage’ and ‘underwater heritage’. We also outlined how the term ‘underwater cultural heritage' is linked with the 2001 UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage. 
• Added further relevant policies and frameworks that outline the key considerations for decision making including more information on regional marine planning in Part 2 of the guidance.
• Included references to the climate and nature crises throughout the guidance, including on climate impacts and biodiversity restoration.
• Increased information on mitigation, including sections on how to avoid, reduce and offset impacts of change on underwater heritage and reordered Part 3 for clarity.
• Referenced the added value of protecting underwater heritage throughout the guidance, including the positive contributions it can make to the economy, biodiversity and activities.
• Decided that heritage skills, although important to the context, did not fit the scope of this guidance note. We have noted it for other HES work and resources, such as the Skills Investment Plan.
• Integrated some case study information into the guidance in the form of photo captions. HES will release more case study information through blogs and other communications material.