(SEE 9 GES reporting for the different arbitrators) objective 0 is considered unnecessary since it coincides with the main aim of the Directive: Achieve BEA in all descriptors

The minimum surface area of the seabed of the Demarcación Canaria que ha if you have suffered some sort of disturbance during the current period of evaluation is 98 million m². representing 0.02 % of the area demarcation. Because it could not be taken into account trawling, one very relevant activity for this analysis not possible determine whether or not the target is met It is proposed to maintain the objective, simplifying wording and focusing more on indicators towards the main pressures of the FD Canary Islands The indicator is too general in order to assess the objective, it proposes to amend and combine it with other relevant indicators evaluate the initiatives put in place at gear for achieving reduction of pressures. It is also proposed to include this target group C as it is clearly targeted at making activities compatible human beings with conservation marine environment

Progress was noted. Is necessary continue along this line The wording of this objective is it corresponds better to a measure. Edit wording to bring it into line with an objective, and the indicator to measure achievement can be measured of the Further divide the target into two: one aiming at the improvement of the coordination of programmes of monitoring of species and habitats, and another focus on berections and incidental catches. In the latter, in addition, it is proposed to include a explicit reference to improving follow-up of incidental catch for the fisheries sector (target proposed in the framework of the Istic seas II for Macaronesia)

This objective is considered as one action targeted at the general objective of “Securing conservation and recovery of biodiversity marine through instruments and effective measures” To be included as an indicator inside the objective mentioned, of the following purpose: shape: • Percentage of marine habitats/species that are not find themselves in, or under threat of, BEA. which are the subject of a plan of conservation, recovery and restoration or strategies nationals.

Progress was noted. There are active surveillance systems in place in on the spot, however, it is envisaged to complete the monitoring of Marine Spaces Protected (PME). Surveillance systems also exist remote, such as buoys, satellites, geolocalisation of vessels, by radio (AIS) and satellite (VMS), etc. It is proposed to change the objective of focus more on the monitoring compliance rules laid down in the interest of the ecosystem protection seafarers Edit indicator to provide input information on the grade of surveillance performed, such as number of infringement dossiers, surveillance or human resources intended for the purpose

In process. Despite the fact that it is have implemented a number of actions on introduction pathways, and that the outcome of the evaluation of the Descriptor 2 proved to be Good Environmental Condition”, is considered to be that no key vectors have been addressed for introduction and translocation of non-indigenous species in the Canary Islands, such as the Biouling. See initial evaluation of D2 of the DMCAN Actions: Convention on Waters of Lakes IMO (in force since 2017) Implementation of the Regulation Community species on species IS Dredging guidelines It is proposed to maintain the objective, to continue along the same line, although you do not list the possible pathways in the objective, to shorten this and to: do not limit possibilities. An indicator should be added providing information the number or percentage of tracks and anthropogenic vectors of translocation addressed by measures acting or regulated. It is proposed it should also include this objective in the group C as it is aimed at making activities compatible human beings with conservation marine environment

Objective achieved. In accordance with Initial Assessment of D2 in the case of the Canary Islands, non-indigenous species they have not increased. decreased and do not pose a threat marine habitats It is proposed to change the target. as the eradication of is very poor invasive species complex and really in many cases cannot be addressed. SE proposes to transform it into a integrated management target covering prevention (networks of early detection) and measures of management, thus covering this objective, and C.3.6.

Results MISTIC SECAS II Birds: In general, there is not enough data to assess the target in seabird species

Results MISTIC SECAS II Mammals: For most of the assessed species, no data sufficient to assess this objective. However, the sperm whale seems not to be achieve BEA for Criterion D1C1, a collisions with ships caused by collisions with vessels

Results MISTIC SECAS II Turtles: There is not enough data for evaluate the target in species of Sea turtles.

Cannot be evaluated. No information on the indicator. There are measures such as: in RN2000, non-native species cannot be grown It is proposed that the aim be maintained, on the proposal of the experts and by the foreseeable rise of aquaculture. The indicator will be changed to "prevention measures in control programmes" as the existence of the programmes themselves is mandatory. Switch to group C

Progress was noted. Is necessary continue along this line The control campaign of the Auchizo Diadema Canary Islands government anti-llarum It is proposed to link objective A.1.6. It is proposed to add: Number of initiatives/actions to reduce or prevent the increase of populations of the urchin Diadea affin. Antillarum

The objective is implicit in objective C.1. Include the specific Indicator of Coverage phanerogams, and special reference to the letters as pressure

Cannot be evaluated. No information on the indicator. It is proposed to delete as it is more than an objective. The substance of the objective is retained through amendment of A.1.4.

Canary Islands included in Rampe: 2.15 % Evaluation proposal: Progress was noted. Is necessary continue along this line The inclusion or not of a MLE in the Rampe is not an indicator of protection yes (this protection is achieved by means the MLE and the MLE declaration. approval of the respective plan of management) It is proposed to replace this objective. for the achievement of a complete network, ecologically representative: coherent and well managed areas marine protected”. To be amended also the indicator for putting it into compliance with the objectives of Rampe

% of DM Canary Islands included in RN2000: 5,11 % RN2000 in the Canary Islands’ plan with plans on gestión:0,37% This objective is considered to be more effective. a measure and is therefore proposed be included in a more targeted objective comprehensive, namely: conservation and recovery of marine biodiversity through effective instruments and measures” through inclusion as indicators of that objective: The percentage of the DM included in EMP, Percentage of surface area of habitats of Community interest included in RN2000 Percentage of MLE with a plan of management

Depending on the species. See initial evaluation of D1 of the DMCAN (Macaronesia Roof Report) It is proposed to change the target for better reflecting the balance of all the ecosystem as a whole, not only the populations of certain species

It is not possible to assess due to a lack of data. It is proposed to maintain, as it is not fully agrees with any criterion, but it supports the achievement of BEA

Cannot be evaluated due to lack of data It is proposed to delete as it is directly refers to maintaining the values descriptors in securities corresponding to BEA, we agree with the criteria of both descriptors

Since 2012, 2 reviews were carried out (in 2015 and 2016) of the List of Wild Species in Special Protection Regime and the Spanish Catalogue of Endangered Species. The Canary Islands (Cymodocea nodosa) has been included in the category ‘vulnerable’. Progress was noted. It is necessary to continue this line. The wording is considered to be closer to the concrete measure than is the case. It is proposed to change the target so as to approach marine species on the list of threatened species. The indicator could be changed to reflect the number of marine species that are/discatalogued or change category on the list of threatened species. An indicator showing whether stock assessments are ongoing should also be added. It is proposed to move to type A, as it is a tool to ensure the conservation and restoration of marine biodiversity.

Progress was noted. It is necessary to continue along this line Spain has actively participated in MISTIC SEAS I projects, which was designed to design and test joint monitoring programmes between Spain and Portugal for turtles, mammals and seabirds in the Macaronesian region. ICCAT evaluation groups It is proposed to keep the objective with drafting changes, in order to make it more suitable for an objective, as it currently could correspond to a specific measure. It is proposed to move to type A, as it is a tool to ensure the conservation and restoration of marine biodiversity.

Objective achieved: Expert PdS workshops: 14 (Workshops and meetings with administrations and survey) Expert workshop for the design of the MIP: 21 • Dissemination: 1 workshop (by DM), • 1 Dissemination campaign (dissemination materials) • 2 CONAMAS • Education and participation projects: 7 (BIO) including INTEMARES • volunteering campaigns • meetings with sectors: 1 workshop on socio-economic analysis • public consultation of documents from the Member States: 3 • Public consultation of project results MISTIC SEAS: 2 It is proposed to keep this objective for the second cycle, so as to ensure social participation in the Member States.

Target achieved • ICES meetings: 6 • meetings meetings of the CAN Monitoring Committee: 6 • Autonomous Community meetings on marine biodiversity: 7 • Generating DMCAN data flow • Working groups: WG Biodiversity: 1 Marine cartography: 10 Descriptor 9 GT: 1 WG Seat-Data: 2 WG Technical WG Costa: 6 • Meetings with sectors: 1 workshop on socio-economic analysis It is proposed to maintain the objective, by improving the wording for the second cycle, to make further progress in the coordination of public administrations. It is proposed to add as indicator: “Number of thematic areas in which coordination initiatives are taken, compared to the previous cycle”.

Progress is being made, although not all recreational marine activities are regulated Pocket management plans: 24 It is proposed to change the target and indicator to cover all activities and uses, in line with the Maritime Spatial Planning Directive.

Progress was noted. It is necessary to continue along this line See initial evaluation of D3 in the DMCAN. It is proposed that the aim should be maintained, by improving the wording and focusing on all stocks that fall outside the scope of the BEA.

The objective is considered to have been achieved Indicator value for the period 2011-2016: 1 583 816 m². 0.0003 % of the area of the Demarcación Canario has been affected by permanent physical alterations in the period under examination (2011-2016). See evaluation of the pressure “physical losses” on the DMCAN. It is proposed to amend as it is very similar to criterion D6C1. It could be transformed into a pressure target so as to ensure that new activities of human activities do not significantly increase the surface area affected by physical loss of natural marine resources compared to the previous cycle. The indicators may also distinguish the area occupied by coastal defence infrastructure from which they do not have this objective.

It is not possible to assess precisely. It is proposed to maintain the objective, by improving the wording. It is proposed to modify the indicator in a way that is quantifiable, and to add another concerning the proportion of compatibility reports on existing installations.

Cannot be evaluated

Target achieved All Member State documents are publicly available on MITECO’s website. However, it can be improved. For the second cycle, it is proposed to specify and extend the target audience, so as to improve access to information on the marine environment available to all maritime administrations and institutions, as well as to the general public.

Progress detected Indicator Value: 0.96 % It is proposed to maintain the objective, by merging C.3.2, C.3.3. And to pass on to type A, simplifying its wording.

Progress detected Indicator Value: 8.03 % It is proposed to maintain the objective, by merging C.3.2, C.3.3. And to pass on to type A, simplifying its wording.

Progress detected There are data that provide information on the professional fishing activity provided by the SGP, which could not be analysed in depth. There are also data on recreational fishing and shellfishing activities (licences, et). It is proposed to delete the target, as this information is collected, through the monitoring programmes.

Progress was noted. In order to simplify, it is proposed to join all the objectives for the increase of knowledge in the following unit objective: “Scientific studies and projects address the knowledge gaps identified in the IS” Of this objective, it is proposed to keep the improvement of knowledge on the effects of climate change on the marine environment separately and to incorporate the intention to consider this variable in the different phases of marine strategies.

Progress was noted. It is necessary to continue this line. It is proposed to remove the objective since it overlaps with the implementation of commercial species monitoring programmes.

Progress was detected. As can be seen in the initial assessment of D4 in the DMCAN, progress has been made in the area of OSPAR in this regard. It is proposed to maintain, with a simpler wording, as it fully matches the needs of D4. It is proposed to go to type A.

Progress is detected on the monitoring of river basin variability but no alert system has yet been established. The objective and the indicator overlap. It is proposed to change the wording of the target so as to make it more general, and its compliance can be measured by the indicator.