MS/Art8/2018/D1-M/Denmark/NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea

Member State report / Art8 / 2018 / D1-M / Denmark / NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea

Report type	Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article	Art. 8 Initial assessment (and Art. 17 updates)
Report due	2018-10-15
GES Descriptor	D1 Mammals
Member State	Denmark
Region/subregion	NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea
Reported by	Danish Environmental Protection Agency
Report date	2019-08-30
Report access	DK_ART8_GES_Merge_20190829.xml

Danish part of Atlantic North Sea from coastline to EEZ (ANS-DK-TOTAL)

Simplified table

GES component	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M
Feature	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Seals	Seals	Seals	Seals	Seals	Seals	Seals	Seals
Element	Phocoena phocoena	Phocoena phocoena	Phocoena phocoena	Phocoena phocoena	Halichoerus grypus	Halichoerus grypus	Halichoerus grypus	Halichoerus grypus	Phoca vitulina	Phoca vitulina	Phoca vitulina	Phoca vitulina
Element code	137117	137117	137117	137117	137080	137080	137080	137080	137084	137084	137084	137084
Element code source	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR
Criterion	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5
Parameter	Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)	Abundance	Distribution (range)	Habitat condition	Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)	Abundance	Distribution (range)	Habitat condition	Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)	Abundance	Distribution (range)	Habitat condition
Parameter other
Threshold value upper	1.7					10000.0				10000.0
Threshold value lower	1.7					10000.0				10000.0
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source	Other (specify)	Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC)				Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC)				Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC)
Threshold value source other	Ascobans
Value achieved upper	0.62	287999.0	60000.0			300.0	55000.0			16300.0	60000.0
Value achieved lower	0.39	231000.0	60000.0			76.0	55000.0			1370.0	60000.0
Value unit	Other	(number of) individuals	Other		Other	(number of) individuals	Other		Other	(number of) individuals	Other
Value unit other	Percentage of population		square km		Percentage of population		square km		Percentage of population		square km
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit
Trend	Stable	Stable	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Improving	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Improving	Stable	Stable
Parameter achieved	Yes	Yes	Yes	Unknown	Unknown	No	Yes	Yes	Unknown	Yes	Yes	Yes
Description parameter	The value of 0,62 is the highest estimated value for the two populations of Harbour porpoise in the Marine Atlantic Region. Bycatch levels are estimated as 0,39-0,62% for the Belt Sea population (also found in Kattegat). And 0,36-0,58% for the North Sea population.	The two population has been deemed between 13600-22127. Favourable reference population is unknown. Since the article 17 assessment further monitoring and projects regarding the harbour porpoise populations have taken place. In 2016 the abundance of whales were estimated through the SCANS III project in the european Atlantic Ocean, Kattegat and the Belt Sea. The study found that North Sea population has been stable over a periode of 22 years. The entire North Sea population was estimated to be 345.000 individuals. The project estimated the Belt Sea population (western Baltic) to be 42000 individuals (this population spans two MRUs as it is found in the Belt Sea and Kattegat). Data however shows a shift in the distribution for the North Sea population from north to south. The highest densities for the North Sea population was in the southwestern North Sea outside of Danish waters.	Favourable reference range is found to be the same as the observed range. Since the article 17 assessment further monitoring and projects regarding the harbour porpoise populations have taken place. In 2016 the abundance of whales were estimated through the SCANS III project in the european Atlantic Ocean, Kattegat and the Belt Sea. The study found that the distribution of the North Sea population has shifted towards the south, and the highest densities are found towards the southwestern North sea outside Danish waters.			The population has been deemed between 76 and 300 individuals in Danish waters. Which does not match favourable referance population. However, the population is increasing. Since the article 17 assessment monitoring of abundance and pup production show that grey seal abundance in Danish waters have been increasing over the past 10 years. In 2017 46 seals greay seals were counted in Kattegat, and 332 in the danish part of the Wadden Sea. Additionally, a total of 15 grey seal pubs were counted in Danish waters.				The population has been deemed between 13700 and 16300 individuals in Danish waters. Favourable reference population is 10000. Since the article 17 assessment monitoring annual monitoring of harbour seal abundance and pup production show further development in the harbour seal population. Growth rates for harbour seal suggests that the species is close to the environmental carrying capacity, and is now negative in the Wadden Sea. In 2017 the number of harbour seals in Danish waters were approximately 17000 individuals.	Favourable reference range is unknown.
Related indicator	ANS-HELCOM-BYCATCH2017	BEVARINGSSTATUS FOR NATURTYPER OG ARTER Habitatdirektivets Artikel 17 rapportering Estimates of cetacean abundance in European waters in summer 2016 from the SCANS-III aerial and shipboard surveys	BEVARINGSSTATUS FOR NATURTYPER OG ARTER Habitatdirektivets Artikel 17 rapportering Estimates of cetacean abundance in European waters in summer 2016 from the SCANS-III aerial and shipboard surveys	BEVARINGSSTATUS FOR NATURTYPER OG ARTER Habitatdirektivets Artikel 17 rapportering		BEVARINGSSTATUS FOR NATURTYPER OG ARTER Habitatdirektivets Artikel 17 rapportering Marine områder 2017 - NOVANA	BEVARINGSSTATUS FOR NATURTYPER OG ARTER Habitatdirektivets Artikel 17 rapportering	BEVARINGSSTATUS FOR NATURTYPER OG ARTER Habitatdirektivets Artikel 17 rapportering		BEVARINGSSTATUS FOR NATURTYPER OG ARTER Habitatdirektivets Artikel 17 rapportering Marine områder 2017 - NOVANA	BEVARINGSSTATUS FOR NATURTYPER OG ARTER Habitatdirektivets Artikel 17 rapportering	BEVARINGSSTATUS FOR NATURTYPER OG ARTER Habitatdirektivets Artikel 17 rapportering
Criteria status	Good	Good	Good	Unknown	Unknown	Not good	Good	Good	Unknown	Good	Good	Good
Description criteria		Data comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. Parts of two populations are included in the assessments. Both populations are found stable.	Data comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. The range is considered to match favourable reference range.	Data comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013 for habitat quality.	There are insufficient data to assess gray seal by-catch.	Data comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013.	Data comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. The favourable reference range is unknown.	Data comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013 for habitat quality.	There is insufficient data to assess by-catch of the spotted seal.	Data comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013.	Data comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. The species is range was found to match favourable reference range.	Data comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013 for habitat quality.
Element status	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Good	Good	Good	Good
Description element	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. The evaluation is based on individuals in Danish waters. It consist mainly of the North Sea population found in several countries in the North Sea and parts of the Belt Sea (western baltic) population (found in Kattegat and the Belt Sea). The overall status, is deemed favourable conservation status, based on a one out all out integration rule for three criteria D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5.	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. The evaluation is based on individuals in Danish waters. It consist mainly of the North Sea population found in several countries in the North Sea and parts of the Belt Sea (western baltic) population (found in Kattegat and the Belt Sea). The overall status, is deemed favourable conservation status, based on a one out all out integration rule for three criteria D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5.	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. The evaluation is based on individuals in Danish waters. It consist mainly of the North Sea population found in several countries in the North Sea and parts of the Belt Sea (western baltic) population (found in Kattegat and the Belt Sea). The overall status, is deemed favourable conservation status, based on a one out all out integration rule for three criteria D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5.	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. The evaluation is based on individuals in Danish waters. It consist mainly of the North Sea population found in several countries in the North Sea and parts of the Belt Sea (western baltic) population (found in Kattegat and the Belt Sea). The overall status, is deemed favourable conservation status, based on a one out all out integration rule for three criteria D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5.	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. When concluding on the overall conservation status the species was found to be in unfavourable conservation status. A one out all out principle was used. Population size was found to be unfavourable. However population size is increasing.	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. When concluding on the overall conservation status the species was found to be in unfavourable conservation status. A one out all out principle was used. Population size was found to be unfavourable. However population size is increasing.	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. When concluding on the overall conservation status the species was found to be in unfavourable conservation status. A one out all out principle was used. Population size was found to be unfavourable. However population size is increasing.	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. When concluding on the overall conservation status the species was found to be in unfavourable conservation status. A one out all out principle was used. Population size was found to be unfavourable. However population size is increasing.	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. When concluding on the overall conservation status the species was found to be in favourable conservation status. A one out all out principle was used. However all three parameters evaluated - range, population and habitat quality was found to be favourable	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. When concluding on the overall conservation status the species was found to be in favourable conservation status. A one out all out principle was used. However all three parameters evaluated - range, population and habitat quality was found to be favourable	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. When concluding on the overall conservation status the species was found to be in favourable conservation status. A one out all out principle was used. However all three parameters evaluated - range, population and habitat quality was found to be favourable	Status of the species is not assessed at descriptor level. The overall evaluation is based on three of the five criteria, and comes from article 17 reporting under the habitats directive in 2013. In this D1 and D3 is not specifically evaluated. When concluding on the overall conservation status the species was found to be in favourable conservation status. A one out all out principle was used. However all three parameters evaluated - range, population and habitat quality was found to be favourable
Integration rule type parameter	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant	Not relevant
Integration rule description parameter	Only one species has been studied within this GES component. It has not been possible to make integration across other species.	Only one species has been studied within this GES component. It has not been possible to make integration across other species.	Only one species has been studied within this GES component. It has not been possible to make integration across other species.	Only one species has been studied within this GES component. It has not been possible to make integration across other species.	It has not been possible to do cross-species integration.	It has not been possible to do cross-species integration.	It has not been possible to do cross-species integration.	It has not been possible to do cross-species integration.	It has not been possible to do cross-species integration.	It has not been possible to do cross-species integration.	It has not been possible to do cross-species integration.	It has not been possible to do cross-species integration.
Integration rule type criteria	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO	OOAO
Integration rule description criteria	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.	It has only been possible to integrate across D2, D4 and D5 for one species. It has not been possible to make an integration for D1 and D3.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Description overall status	Assessment period vary depending on the underlying criteria. Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.	Assessment period vary depending on the underlying criteria. Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.	Assessment period vary depending on the underlying criteria. Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.	Assessment period vary depending on the underlying criteria. Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.	Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.	Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.	Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.	Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.	Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.	Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.	Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.	Additional pressures may apply. Assessments shown below for D1C2, D1C4 and D1C5 are from the habitats directive article 17 assessment from 2013. The results are shown to be in compliance with the 2017 GES decision, which states that regionally set threshold values should be in compliance with values from the habitats directive.
Assessments period	2006-2016	2006-2016	2006-2016	2006-2016	2006-2017	2006-2017	2006-2017	2006-2017	2006-2017	2006-2017	2006-2017	2006-2017
Related pressures	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
Related targets	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.6 DK-T1.8 DK-T1.9	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.6 DK-T1.8 DK-T1.9	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.6 DK-T1.8 DK-T1.9	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.6 DK-T1.8 DK-T1.9	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.7 DK-T1.8	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.7 DK-T1.8	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.7 DK-T1.8	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.7 DK-T1.8	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.7 DK-T1.8	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.7 DK-T1.8	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.7 DK-T1.8	DK-T1.10 DK-T1.3 DK-T1.7 DK-T1.8