Reference conditions can be found in the Surface Water Regulation (GewV) > 1 nautical mile, see HELCOM (project EUTRO PRO, further developed under CORE EUTRO HEAT 1 and 2)

up to baseline  1 nautical mile: WFD uses nutrients only as monitoring parameters

Reference conditions can be found in the Surface Water Regulation (GewV) > 1 nautical mile, see HELCOM (project EUTRO PRO, further developed under CORE EUTRO HEAT 1 and 2)

up to baseline  1 nautical mile: WFD uses nutrients only as monitoring parameters

Not reported

Not more than 1 mile from baseline: WFD takes sight depth only as monitoring parameters > 1 nautical mile from baseline see HELCOM (http://www.helcom.fi/BSAP_assessment/eutro/Secchi/en_GB/status/)

so far, there has been no assessment under the WFD or HELCOMBiser has only one indicator fact sheet on cyanobacteria in HELCOM (see http://helcom.navigo.fi/environment/indicators2004/cyanobacterialblooms/en_GB/cyanobacteria/).

Update 2012/13 seawards of which: HELCOM Heat (http://www.helcom.fi/BSAP_assessment/eutro/chlorophyll_a/en_GB/status/)

Baseline  1 nautical mile: According to the WFD, the sight depth is only as far as the monitoring parameters are concerned: HELCOM Heat (http://www.helcom.fi/BSAP_assessment/eutro/Secchi/en_GB/status/)

Up to 1 nm from the base line: Under the WFD, oxygen is used only as an accompanying parameter > 1 nautical mile from the base line: See OSPAR COMP

Update 2012/13 is expected > 1 nautical mile from baseline see HELCOM (http://www.helcom.fi/BSAP_assessment/eutro/chlorophyll_a/en_GB/status/)

Meyer 2008). 7 individual metrics will be evaluated, of which 2 reflect the proportion of opportunities.

Up to 1 nautical mile from baseline, see WFD: ELBO procedures and BALCOSIS (driver

Up to 1 nautical mile: Under the WFD, oxygen is used only as an accompanying parameter > 1 nautical mile: Under HELCOM HEAT, oxygen is currently not being assessed

Up to 1 nautical mile from baseline: WFD Marbit ? Marine Biotic Index Tool see 1. Intercalibration decision (2008) > 1 nm: HELCOM: http://www.helcom.fi/BSAP_assessment/eutro/zoobenthos/en_GB/status/

Baseline  1 nautical mile: See WFD BALCOSIS (Fürbehaupter et al. 2009) 7 individual metrics are referenced from those in 2 when the portion of opportunistic macroalgae captures seaward of this: Indicator possibly not relevant

Meyer 2008) seaward of this: Relevance to be considered

Baseline  1 nautical mile: Under the Water Framework Directive, oxygen is only used as an accompanying parameter to the extent that: Under HELCOM HEAT, oxygen is currently not being assessed

Baseline  1 nautical mile: WFD Marbit ? Marine Biotic Index Tool see 1. Intercalibration decision (2008) seawards of which: HELCOM: http://www.helcom.fi/BSAP_assessment/eutro/zoobenthos/en_GB/status/

µmol/l, mg/l

µmol/l, mg/l

µmol/l, mg/l

µmol/l, mg/l

Not reported

m

—

µg/l, µmol/l, mm³/l

m

Saturation% or mg/l

µg/l

m,%

m,%

Saturation% or mg/l

Up to 1 nautical mile from baseline (WFD): Dimensionless index > 1 nautical mile (HELCOM): Number of species

Depth propagation m, Species inventory, Cover grade%

Depth propagation m, Species inventory, Cover grade%

Saturation% or mg/l

Baseline  1 nautical mile (WFD): Dimensionless index, seawards of which: HELCOM Number of species

The current assessment of the Baltic Sea areas off the German coast according to HELCOM HEAT is moderate to poor. The lack of good ecological status of coastal waters under the Water Framework Directive is largely based on eutrophication effects. monitoring data 2007 show that the German territorial sea of the Baltic Sea in relation to the total N exceeds the relevant orientation values up to a significant extent. Nitrate winter concentrations are observed with the exception of the western Baltic Sea and the Arconasee (Nausch et al 2011 http://www.blmp-online.de/Seiten/Berichte.html)

The current assessment of the Baltic Sea areas off the German coast according to HELCOM HEAT is moderate to poor. The lack of good ecological status of coastal waters under the Water Framework Directive is largely based on eutrophication effects. monitoring data 2007 show that the German territorial sea of the Baltic Sea in relation to the total N exceeds the relevant orientation values up to a significant extent. Nitrate winter concentrations are observed with the exception of the western Baltic Sea and the Arconasee (Nausch et al 2011 http://www.blmp-online.de/Seiten/Berichte.html)

The current assessment of the Baltic Sea areas off the German coast according to HELCOM HEAT is moderate to poor. The lack of good ecological status of coastal waters under the Water Framework Directive is largely based on eutrophication effects. monitoring data 2007 show that the German territorial sea of the Baltic Sea in relation to the total N exceeds the relevant orientation values up to a significant extent. Nitrate winter concentrations are observed with the exception of the western Baltic Sea and the Arconasee (Nausch et al 2011 http://www.blmp-online.de/Seiten/Berichte.html)

The current assessment of the Baltic Sea areas off the German coast according to HELCOM HEAT is moderate to poor. The lack of good ecological status of coastal waters under the Water Framework Directive is largely based on eutrophication effects. monitoring data 2007 show that the German territorial sea of the Baltic Sea in relation to the total N exceeds the relevant orientation values up to a significant extent. Nitrate winter concentrations are observed with the exception of the western Baltic Sea and the Arconasee (Nausch et al 2011 http://www.blmp-online.de/Seiten/Berichte.html)

Organic matter is currently not yet subject to regular German maritime monitoring.

The status has not been assessed for the whole water column but at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the whole water column but at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the whole water column but at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the whole water column but at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the entire seabed but has been determined at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the entire seabed but has been determined at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the entire seabed but has been determined at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the entire seabed but has been determined at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the entire seabed but has been determined at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the entire seabed but has been determined at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the entire seabed but has been determined at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the entire seabed but has been determined at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the entire seabed but has been determined at indicator level.

The status has not been assessed for the entire seabed but has been determined at indicator level.

In principle, no statement was made about future trends in the initial assessment.

In principle, no statement was made about future trends in the initial assessment.

In principle, no statement was made about future trends in the initial assessment.

In principle, no statement was made about future trends in the initial assessment.

In principle, no statement was made about future trends in the initial assessment.

In principle, no statement was made about future trends in the initial assessment.

Organic matter is currently not kept regularly in German maritime monitoring. in principle, no statement was made about future trends in the initial assessment.

Organic matter is not currently covered by German maritime monitoring on a regular basis. In principle, no statement was made about future trends in the initial assessment.

Since 1985, the entry has been reduced by 50 % for nitrogen compared to 2005. The reductions are mainly due to the reduction of point sources (improved treatment facilities, phosphates-free laundry detergents) and for further information see background document Chapter 3.7.1.

Since 1985, the entry has been reduced by 50 % for nitrogen compared to 2005. The reductions are mainly due to the reduction of point sources (improved treatment facilities, phosphates-free laundry detergents) and for further information see background document Chapter 3.7.1.

The nitrate concentrations in the coastal waters are in some cases 50-70 times higher than the values of the open sea. A general trend is not apparent in both marine areas for further information see background document Chapter 2.1.3.

Since 1985, the entry has been reduced by 76 % for phosphorus as compared to 2005. The reductions are mainly due to the reduction of point sources (improved treatment facilities, phosphates-free laundry detergents) and for further information see background document Chapter 3.7.1.

Since 1985, the entry has been reduced by 76 % for phosphorus as compared to 2005. The reductions are mainly due to the reduction of point sources (improved treatment facilities, phosphates-free laundry detergents) and for further information see background document Chapter 3.7.1.

The winter phosphate concentrations do not differ between the coastal waters and the open sea. The reduction observed in phosphate concentrations in the early 1990s followed a lower level of stability from the mid-1990s onwards, see background document Chapter 2.1.3.

Organic matter is currently not regularly acquired in German maritime monitoring. for further information see Background Document Chapter 3.7.2.

Organic matter is not currently covered by German maritime monitoring on a regular basis.

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. since 1980 phytoplankton is a mass increase. Modified P: n is a change in species composition, including an increase in dinoflagellates. Blooms of algae (Chrysochroulina, Dictyocha, Peridiiella) and cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) regularly occur (Wasmund et al., 2008). The highest chlorophyll concentrations and the lowest visibility are found in the Oderfahan Oderfahne, east of Rügen and the Pommersch Bay. As a result of the reduction of nutrient inputs, chlorophyll concentrations are decreasing, in particular in the Bay of Mecklenburger Bucht, but remain well above the HELCOM orientation values of the HEAT evaluation process (2007). for more information see Background Document Chapter 3.7.3.

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. since 1980 phytoplankton is a mass increase. Modified P: n is a change in species composition, including an increase in dinoflagellates. Blooms of algae (Chrysochroulina, Dictyocha, Peridiiella) and cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) regularly occur (Wasmund et al., 2008). The highest chlorophyll concentrations and the lowest visibility are found in the Oderfahan Oderfahne, east of Rügen and the Pommersch Bay. As a result of the reduction of nutrient inputs, chlorophyll concentrations are decreasing, in particular in the Bay of Mecklenburger Bucht, but remain well above the HELCOM orientation values of the HEAT evaluation process (2007). for more information see Background Document Chapter 3.7.3.

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. since 1980 phytoplankton is a mass increase. Modified P: n is a change in species composition, including an increase in dinoflagellates. Blooms of algae (Chrysochroulina, Dictyocha, Peridiiella) and cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) regularly occur (Wasmund et al., 2008). The highest chlorophyll concentrations and the lowest visibility are found in the Oderfahan Oderfahne, east of Rügen and the Pommersch Bay. As a result of the reduction of nutrient inputs, chlorophyll concentrations are decreasing, in particular in the Bay of Mecklenburger Bucht, but remain well above the HELCOM orientation values of the HEAT evaluation process (2007). for more information see Background Document Chapter 3.7.3.

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. since 1980 phytoplankton is a mass increase. Modified P: n is a change in species composition, including an increase in dinoflagellates. Blooms of algae (Chrysochroulina, Dictyocha, Peridiiella) and cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) regularly occur (Wasmund et al., 2008). The highest chlorophyll concentrations and the lowest visibility are found in the Oderfahan Oderfahne, east of Rügen and the Pommersch Bay. As a result of the reduction of nutrient inputs, chlorophyll concentrations are decreasing, in particular in the Bay of Mecklenburger Bucht, but remain well above the HELCOM orientation values of the HEAT evaluation process (2007). for more information see Background Document Chapter 3.7.3.

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. the eutrophication has led to the shifting of multi-annual macrophyte species to opportunistic seasonal species. As a result of the lack of light, the spread of sea grass and bladder species has fallen sharply. Secondary eutrophication effects occur when the phytoplankton biomass is reduced to the seabed and reduced by the use of oxygen. It is the result of oxygen deficiency in the soil water. As a result of eutrophication, frequency, strength and spatial extent of oxygen and oxygen free zones (Totzones) in the Baltic have increased. Since the 1960s, there has been a deterioration in living conditions for benthic communities through oxygen deficiency in the western Baltic Sea, which, among other things, is reflected in a loss of species but also in an increase in the biomass of filter-feeding bivalve molluscs that benefit from the high concentrations of nutrients (grazing, 1987

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. the eutrophication has led to the shifting of multi-annual macrophyte species to opportunistic seasonal species. As a result of the lack of light, the spread of sea grass and bladder species has fallen sharply. Secondary eutrophication effects occur when the phytoplankton biomass is reduced to the seabed and reduced by the use of oxygen. It is the result of oxygen deficiency in the soil water. As a result of eutrophication, frequency, strength and spatial extent of oxygen and oxygen free zones (Totzones) in the Baltic have increased. Since the 1960s, there has been a deterioration in living conditions for benthic communities through oxygen deficiency in the western Baltic Sea, which, among other things, is reflected in a loss of species but also in an increase in the biomass of filter-feeding bivalve molluscs that benefit from the high concentrations of nutrients (grazing, 1987

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. the eutrophication has led to the shifting of multi-annual macrophyte species to opportunistic seasonal species. As a result of the lack of light, the spread of sea grass and bladder species has fallen sharply. Secondary eutrophication effects occur when the phytoplankton biomass is reduced to the seabed and reduced by the use of oxygen. It is the result of oxygen deficiency in the soil water. As a result of eutrophication, frequency, strength and spatial extent of oxygen and oxygen free zones (Totzones) in the Baltic have increased. Since the 1960s, there has been a deterioration in living conditions for benthic communities through oxygen deficiency in the western Baltic Sea, which, among other things, is reflected in a loss of species but also in an increase in the biomass of filter-feeding bivalve molluscs that benefit from the high concentrations of nutrients (grazing, 1987

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. the eutrophication has led to the shifting of multi-annual macrophyte species to opportunistic seasonal species. As a result of the lack of light, the spread of sea grass and bladder species has fallen sharply. Secondary eutrophication effects occur when the phytoplankton biomass is reduced to the seabed and reduced by the use of oxygen. It is the result of oxygen deficiency in the soil water. As a result of eutrophication, frequency, strength and spatial extent of oxygen and oxygen free zones (Totzones) in the Baltic have increased. Since the 1960s, there has been a deterioration in living conditions for benthic communities through oxygen deficiency in the western Baltic Sea, which, among other things, is reflected in a loss of species but also in an increase in the biomass of filter-feeding bivalve molluscs that benefit from the high concentrations of nutrients (grazing, 1987

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. the eutrophication has led to the shifting of multi-annual macrophyte species to opportunistic seasonal species. As a result of the lack of light, the spread of sea grass and bladder species has fallen sharply. Secondary eutrophication effects occur when the phytoplankton biomass is reduced to the seabed and reduced by the use of oxygen. It is the result of oxygen deficiency in the soil water. As a result of eutrophication, frequency, strength and spatial extent of oxygen and oxygen free zones (Totzones) in the Baltic have increased. Since the 1960s, there has been a deterioration in living conditions for benthic communities through oxygen deficiency in the western Baltic Sea, which, among other things, is reflected in a loss of species but also in an increase in the biomass of filter-feeding bivalve molluscs that benefit from the high concentrations of nutrients (grazing, 1987

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. the eutrophication has led to the shifting of multi-annual macrophyte species to opportunistic seasonal species. As a result of the lack of light, the spread of sea grass and bladder species has fallen sharply. Secondary eutrophication effects occur when the phytoplankton biomass is reduced to the seabed and reduced by the use of oxygen. It is the result of oxygen deficiency in the soil water. As a result of eutrophication, frequency, strength and spatial extent of oxygen and oxygen free zones (Totzones) in the Baltic have increased. Since the 1960s, there has been a deterioration in living conditions for benthic communities through oxygen deficiency in the western Baltic Sea, which, among other things, is reflected in a loss of species but also in an increase in the biomass of filter-feeding bivalve molluscs that benefit from the high concentrations of nutrients (grazing, 1987

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. the eutrophication has led to the shifting of multi-annual macrophyte species to opportunistic seasonal species. As a result of the lack of light, the spread of sea grass and bladder species has fallen sharply. Secondary eutrophication effects occur when the phytoplankton biomass is reduced to the seabed and reduced by the use of oxygen. It is the result of oxygen deficiency in the soil water. As a result of eutrophication, frequency, strength and spatial extent of oxygen and oxygen free zones (Totzones) in the Baltic have increased. Since the 1960s, there has been a deterioration in living conditions for benthic communities through oxygen deficiency in the western Baltic Sea, which, among other things, is reflected in a loss of species but also in an increase in the biomass of filter-feeding bivalve molluscs that benefit from the high concentrations of nutrients (grazing, 1987

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. the eutrophication has led to the shifting of multi-annual macrophyte species to opportunistic seasonal species. As a result of the lack of light, the spread of sea grass and bladder species has fallen sharply. Secondary eutrophication effects occur when the phytoplankton biomass is reduced to the seabed and reduced by the use of oxygen. It is the result of oxygen deficiency in the soil water. As a result of eutrophication, frequency, strength and spatial extent of oxygen and oxygen free zones (Totzones) in the Baltic have increased. Since the 1960s, there has been a deterioration in living conditions for benthic communities through oxygen deficiency in the western Baltic Sea, which, among other things, is reflected in a loss of species but also in an increase in the biomass of filter-feeding bivalve molluscs that benefit from the high concentrations of nutrients (grazing, 1987

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. the eutrophication has led to the shifting of multi-annual macrophyte species to opportunistic seasonal species. As a result of the lack of light, the spread of sea grass and bladder species has fallen sharply. Secondary eutrophication effects occur when the phytoplankton biomass is reduced to the seabed and reduced by the use of oxygen. It is the result of oxygen deficiency in the soil water. As a result of eutrophication, frequency, strength and spatial extent of oxygen and oxygen free zones (Totzones) in the Baltic have increased. Since the 1960s, there has been a deterioration in living conditions for benthic communities through oxygen deficiency in the western Baltic Sea, which, among other things, is reflected in a loss of species but also in an increase in the biomass of filter-feeding bivalve molluscs that benefit from the high concentrations of nutrients (grazing, 1987

The description of impacts applies to the total MSFD relevant marine waters and the initial assessment on the description of these impacts did not distinguish between coastal waters, territorial waters and the EEZ. the eutrophication has led to the shifting of multi-annual macrophyte species to opportunistic seasonal species. As a result of the lack of light, the spread of sea grass and bladder species has fallen sharply. Secondary eutrophication effects occur when the phytoplankton biomass is reduced to the seabed and reduced by the use of oxygen. It is the result of oxygen deficiency in the soil water. As a result of eutrophication, frequency, strength and spatial extent of oxygen and oxygen free zones (Totzones) in the Baltic have increased. Since the 1960s, there has been a deterioration in living conditions for benthic communities through oxygen deficiency in the western Baltic Sea, which, among other things, is reflected in a loss of species but also in an increase in the biomass of filter-feeding bivalve molluscs that benefit from the high concentrations of nutrients (grazing, 1987

Unknown_NoAssseide

31,414 tonnes/year (period 2000-2005)

31,414 tonnes/year (period 2000-2005)

75-100%

865 tonnes/year (period 2000-2005)

865 tonnes/year (period 2000-2005)

75-100%

Unknown_NoAssseide

Unknown_NoAssseide

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

75-100%

Tonnes per year

Tonnes per year

Tonnes per year

Tonnes per year

Unknown_NoAssseide

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

The main cause of eutrophication is the high nutrient loading in the rivers. In 2005, 31,414 tonnes of nitrogen and 865 tonnes of phosphorus were entered into the surface waters of the German Baltic Sea basin (data source: The Federal Environment Agency), the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients mainly come from diffuse sources. The main cause is agriculture (in 2005: 82 % of total nitrogen inputs and 63 % of total phosphorus inputs). In addition, in 2005 9 % of total nitrogen inputs and 21 % of total phosphorus inputs came from point sources (waste water treatment plants).In addition to the river entries, nitrogen is also entered via the atmosphere

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.

From the eutrophication parameters to be assessed in accordance with the MSFD, only organic material is currently not routinely recorded in German marine monitoring. It is currently under discussion whether this is a meaningful indicator of eutrophication under the MSFD. Trend estimates for nutrient loading and nutrient concentrations have not been addressed in the initial assessment and are not carried out routinely as they require costly modelling. In addition, such assessments require accurate projections of both the future climate change and the planned nutrient reduction measures and their impact on marine ecosystems. Such forecasts are subject to very large uncertainties and are therefore considered to be of limited value. Assessments of the effects of measures to reduce nutrients are exemplary for selected river basin districts (e.g. the Elbe River Basin Community) under the WFD. Under the MSFD, such assessments will only be relevant when drawing up action plans. assessment of direct and indirect eutrophication effects at indicator level is carried out, but cannot be reflected in the reporting sheets. Furthermore, a description of eutrophication effects at habitat level (Pelagal, Benthos) cannot be given because, for example, they are not sufficiently mapped and eutrophication effects are not differentiated by sediment types.