(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

(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

According to the pressure analysis, the minimum surface area of the sea bottom of the Strait and Alborán sea bed has suffered some sort of disturbance during the present assessment period is 108 million m², or 0.43 %. However, the fact that trawl fishing could not be taken into account, an activity highly relevant to this analysis, is considered to be impossible to determine whether or not the target is met. It is proposed to maintain the objective, simplifying its wording and focusing more on indicators towards the main pressures from the Demarcación Marina Strait and Alborán, on the other hand. The indicator is too general to assess the target and it is therefore proposed to amend it and to combine it with other indicators to assess the initiatives launched to achieve pressure reduction. It is also proposed to include this objective in group C as it is clearly intended to make human activities compatible with the conservation of the marine environment.

The minimum surface area of the seabed from the levantic DM which has been if you have suffered some sort of disturbance during the current period of evaluation is 311 million m². representing 0.13 % 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

Progress was noted. It is desirable to continue this line. Actions: • IMO Waters Convention (in force since 2017) • Implementation of the EU Regulation on Invasive Species • Dredging guidelines However, there is a problem of non-native species growing in the strait and Alborán area (see initial evaluation of D2) and the measures to prevent their expansion should be stepped up. It is proposed to maintain the objective, without listing the possible pathways in the target, to shorten it and not to limit the possibilities. Indicating the pathways and translocation of non-native species identified in the initial assessment of D2. It is appropriate to modify the indicator so that it provides information on the number or percentage of anthropogenic pathways and vectors of translocation dealt with by policy or regulated measures. This indicator should indicate the pathways for the introduction and translocation of non-indigenous species, in particular those identified in the initial assessment of D2. It is also proposed to include this objective in group C since it is intended to make human activities compatible with the conservation of the marine environment.

Progress was noted. It is desirable continue along this line. Actions: Convention on Aguas de Lastre IMO (in force since 2017) Implementation of the Regulation Community species on species IS Dredging guidelines However, there is one in the DMALBA. the problem of non-native species in expansion (see initial evaluation of D2) and should therefore be stepped up measures to prevent their expansion It is proposed to maintain the objective, without list the possible pathways into the objective, to shorten it and not narrow down the 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. In this indicator, the routes of introduction and translocation of non-indigenous species in particular identified in the initial assessment from D2 It is also proposed to include this target group C as it is making it compatible with: human activities with marine conservation

According to the Initial Assessment of D2 Estrecho y Alborán, there has been an increase of invasive non-indigenous species, particularly important algae. It is proposed to change the target, as the eradication of IS is very complex and indeed in many cases cannot be addressed. It is proposed to be transformed into an integrated management objective, covering prevention (early detection networks) and management measures, thus covering this objective and C.3.6. It is proposed to amend the indicator to reflect the percentage of invasive species that have been committed.

C.3.6. It is proposed to modify the indicator for form reflecting the percentage of invasive species that have been action to be taken. Shall be made. specific mention of species identified in the initial assessment of D2 as the most problematic in demarcation

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. It changes to group C.

Cannot be evaluated. No information on the indicator. There are measures such as: in RN2000, non-native species cannot be grown It is proposed to maintain the objective: experts proposal and expected growth in aquaculture. The flag will be changed to “existence of prevention measures in control programmes”, as the

Progress was noted. Active surveillance systems exist on the ground, although the monitoring of protected areas of protected areas (EMP) is to be completed. There are also remote surveillance systems such as buoys, satellites, radio-positioning of vessels by radio (AIS) and satellite (VMS), etc. It is proposed to change the target in order to focus more on monitoring compliance with the established rules, with a view to protecting marine ecosystems. Modify indicators to provide information on the degree of surveillance carried out, such as the number of infringement files, surveillance hours or the human resources allocated for this purpose.

Progress was noted. There are systems in situ active surveillance, however it is planned to complete the monitoring of Protected marine areas (EMP) 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

% DM ESAL included in Rampe: 10.28 % % biogenic/protected/special interest in Rampe: There is no information to reply to this indicator. Progress was noted. It is necessary to continue this line. The inclusion or not of an MLE in Rampe is not an indicator of protection in itself (this protection is achieved through the MLE statement and the approval of the corresponding management plan). It is proposed to replace this objective with the objective of “Achieving a complete, ecologically representative, coherent and well managed network of marine protected areas”. The indicator will also be amended to ensure that it complies with the objectives of Rampe.

Progress was noted. Is necessary continue along this line % DM LEABA included in Rampe: 8.46 % % biogenic/protected dot/ special interest in Rampe: Does not exist information to respond to this indicator 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

2 reviews have been carried out since 2012 (in 2015 and 2016) of the List of wild species under special protection regime and the Spanish catalogue of endangered species. For the Mediterranean, in 2015, the list of wild species was included under the special protection regime: The Mediterranean box (Galeorhinus galeus). — Mediterranean shortfin mako (Isurus oxyrinchus). In the Mediterranean (Lamna nasus). Red ray (Leucoraja circularis) — Southern Mediterranean ray (Leucoraja melitensis). — Guitopa barbanegra de del Mediterraneo (Rhinobatos cemiculus). Mediterranean common guitar (Rhinobatos rhinobatos). the objective is therefore considered to be progressing and should be continued on 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 catalogued/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.

2 has been completed since 2012 revisions (in 2015 and 2016) of List of wild species in Special Protection Regime and Spanish Catalogue of Species Endangered. For the Mediterranean Sea, in 2015 they were included in the list of species. Protection scheme wild special: The Mediterranean box (Galeorhinus galeus) — Southern Mediterranean shortfin mako sharks (Isurus oxyrinchus) — Mediterranean caking (Lamna) nasus) — false ray of the Mediterranean (Leucoraja circularis) — Southern Mediterranean skate (Leucoraja melitensis) — Drum guitar from Mediterranean (Rhinobatos) cmiculus.) Mediterranean guitar (rhinobatos rhinobatos) the objective is therefore considered to be: progress is in progress and should be addressed. continue along this line. The wording is considered to be closer to the concept of a specific measure to be targeted. It is proposed to change the target. so it is approached in consider marine species on species lists endangered. The indicator could: to be amended to reflect the number of marine species which they are catalogued/discatalogued, or change category in list of threatened species. Should also be added indicator showing whether or not there is any carrying out evaluation of stocks. It is proposed to pass type A, given it is an instrument for the purpose of conservation and recovery of biodiversity marine

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: 22 (BIO) including INTEMARES • Volunteering: • Meetings with sectors: 1 workshop on socio-economic analysis • Public consultation of documents from the Member States: 3 It is proposed to keep this objective for the second cycle, so as to ensure social participation in the Member States.

Objective achieved: Expert Workshops on PoS: 14 (Workshops and meetings with administrations and survey) Design experts workshop MIP: 21 — Dissemination: 1 workshop (by DM), 1 Material campaign (materials) informative) 2 CONAMAS Education projects and participation: 22 (FBIO) including INTEMARES Voluntary campaigns: Meetings with sectors: 1 workshop on socio-economic analysis Public consultation of documents Member States: 3 It is proposed to maintain this target for the second cycle, to ensure participation social in Member States

Target achieved • ICES meetings: 6 • Follow-up Committee meetings ESAL 6 • Autonomous Community meetings on marine biodiversity: 5 • DMESAL data flow establishment • 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”.

Target achieved ICES meetings: 6 Committee meetings of LEBA monitoring: 6 Communities meetings regions on biodiversity marine: 16 Establishment of the flow rate of DMALBA data 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 on coordination of general government It is proposed to add as follows: indicator: “number of thematic areas in which take initiatives of coordination with regard to previous cycle”

Very generic indicator. It is proposed to change the wording of the target in order to make it more specific and linked to the BEA, and that of the indicator, as it is very generic and does not correspond strictly to the objective. The indicator could be in line with the number of measures taken for each human action that causes physical alterations.

Very generic indicator It is proposed to change the wording of the target in order to make it more specific and linked to the BEA, and that of the indicator, as it is very generic and does not correspond strictly to the objective. The indicator could be in line with the number of mitigation measures taken for each human action that causes physical alterations.

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.

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 was noted. In order to simplify, it is proposed to join all the objectives for the increase of knowledge in the following unit objective: “studies and scientific projects address the knowledge gaps identified in the IA”. 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. 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 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.

Progress is detected on 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.