MS/Art8/2018/D6/Malta/Mediterranean: Ionian Sea & Central Mediterranean Sea

Member State report / Art8 / 2018 / D6 / Malta / Mediterranean: Ionian Sea & Central Mediterranean 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	D6 Sea-floor integrity/D1 Benthic habitats
Member State	Malta
Region/subregion	Mediterranean: Ionian Sea & Central Mediterranean Sea
Reported by	Environment and Resources Authority
Report date	2020-04-16
Report access	ART8_GES.xml

Area designated for hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation (MIC-MT-MS-02)

Simplified table

GES component	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6	D6
Feature	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Benthic broad habitats	Physical disturbance to seabed	Physical loss of the seabed
Element	Circalittoral coarse sediment	Circalittoral coarse sediment	Circalittoral coarse sediment	Circalittoral mixed sediment	Circalittoral mud	Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef	Circalittoral sand	Infralittoral coarse sediment	Infralittoral mixed sediment	Infralittoral mud	Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef	Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef	Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef	Infralittoral sand	Infralittoral sand	Infralittoral sand	Littoral rock and biogenic reef	Littoral rock and biogenic reef	Littoral rock and biogenic reef	Littoral sediment	Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef	Lower bathyal sediment	Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment	Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment	Offshore circalittoral mud	Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic	Offshore circalittoral sand	Posidonia oceanica meadows	Posidonia oceanica meadows	Posidonia oceanica meadows	Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef	Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef	Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef	Upper bathyal sediment	Upper bathyal sediment	Upper bathyal sediment
Element code	HabBenCircalitCoarSed	HabBenCircalitCoarSed	HabBenCircalitCoarSed	HabBenCircalitMxdSed	HabBenCircalitMud	HabBenCircalitRock	HabBenCircalitSand	HabBenInfralitCoarSed	HabBenInfralitMxdSed	HabBenInfralitMud	HabBenInfralitRock	HabBenInfralitRock	HabBenInfralitRock	HabBenInfralitSand	HabBenInfralitSand	HabBenInfralitSand	HabBenLitRock	HabBenLitRock	HabBenLitRock	HabBenLitSed	HabBenBathyalLowRock	HabBenBathyalLowSed	HabBenOffshCoarSed	HabBenOffshMxdSed	HabBenOffshMud	HabBenOffshRock	HabBenOffshSand	1120	1120	1120	HabBenBathyalUpReef	HabBenBathyalUpReef	HabBenBathyalUpReef	HabBenBathyalUpSed	HabBenBathyalUpSed	HabBenBathyalUpSed
Element code source	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view	Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU
Criterion	D6C3	D6C4	D6C5								D6C3	D6C4	D6C5	D6C3	D6C4	D6C5	D6C3	D6C4	D6C5									D6C3	D6C4	D6C5	D6C3	D6C4	D6C5	D6C3	D6C4	D6C5	D6C2	D6C1
Parameter	Extent	Extent	Habitat condition								Other	Extent	Other	Other	Extent	Habitat condition	Other	Extent	Habitat condition									Extent	Extent	Habitat condition	Extent	Extent	Habitat condition	Extent	Extent	Habitat condition	Extent	Extent
Parameter other											Extent achieving Threshold for Good/High Status		Extent achieving Threshold for Good/High Status	Extent achieving Threshold for Good/High Status			Extent achieving Threshold for Good/High Status
Threshold value upper											1.0		1.0	1.0		1.0	1.0		1.0									1.0		1.0
Threshold value lower											0.6		0.6	0.58		0.58	0.6		0.6									0.55		0.55
Threshold qualitative	Trend in undisturbed habitat extent is stable	Trend in habitat extent is stable	to be determined									Trend in habitat extent is stable			Trend in habitat extent is stable			Trend in habitat extent is stable											Trend in habitat extent is stable		to be determined	Trend in habitat extent is stable	to be determined	Trend in undisturbed habitat extent is stable	Trend in habitat extent is stable	to be determined	No threshold value – contributes to other assessments	No threshold value – contributes to other assessments
Threshold value source													Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)		Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)	Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)		Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper
Value achieved lower
Value unit	square kilometre	square kilometre									Other	square kilometre	Other	Other	square kilometre	Other	Other	square kilometre	Other									Other	square kilometre	Other		square kilometre			square kilometre
Value unit other											EQR		EQR	EQR		EQR	EQR		EQR									EQR		EQR
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved	36.14										100.0		100.0	95.0	0.02	95.0	100.0	2.0	100.0									95.0	0.01	95.0							11119.0	0.08
Proportion threshold value unit	extent in km2 of pressure	extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected									% area of MRU achieving threshold value	extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	% area of habitat achieving threshold value	extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected	% area of habitat achieving threshold value	% area of MRU achieving threshold value	extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected	% area of MRU achieving threshold value									% area of habitat achieving threshold value	extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected	% area of habitat achieving threshold value		extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected			extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected		extent in km2 of pressure	extent in km2 of pressure
Trend	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown								Improving	Unknown	Improving	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Improving	Stable	Improving									Stable	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Not relevant	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Stable
Parameter achieved	Yes, based on low risk	Yes	Unknown								Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes									Yes	Yes	Yes	Not assessed	Yes	Unknown	Unknown	Yes	Unknown	Unknown	Yes, based on low risk
Description parameter	The extent reported represents circalittoral sediments subject to a number of pressures, including trawling. However, when excluding trawling, only >10 % of the NE mearl bed is potentially subject to pressures leading to physical disturbance. Considering extrapolations in terms of both habitat cover and extent of pressure, it may be difficult to ascertain the exact degree of physical disturbance, although a level of physical disturbance of low significance may be safely deduced	Activities related with physical loss of the seabed are not relevant to this habitat type. Therefore ‘coastal detritic bottoms with rhodoliths’ (MC3.52) as the representative habitat for circalittoral coarse sediments is considered to be in good status in terms of criterion D6C4.									Overall habitat condition for algal dominated infralittorral rock and reefs (MB2.51) was deduced to range from high to good as extrapolated from CARLIT results for adjacent coastlines.	When considering the total area of algal dominated infralitorral rock (3.73km2), and the extent of anthropogenic activities associated with physical loss overlapping with this habitat type, only 0.002% of MB2.51 may have been affected by physical loss throughout the reporting period. This area is not considered significant, implying good status for broad habitat MB1 in terms MSFD criterion D6C4.	Overall habitat condition for algal dominated infralittorral rock and reefs (MB2.51) was deduced to range from high to good as extrapolated from CARLIT results for adjacent coastlines.	As per BENTIX index, benthic communities in infralittoral sediments reflect an overall high or good status: 13 stations in high status, 8 stations in good status and 1 station in moderate status. The achievement of GES is assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good-moderate boundary (0.58), reported as the lower Threshold Value; and taking the assessed stations as representative of the total extent of the habitat. Whilst a maximum allowable extent of adverse effects as a proportion of the total natural extent of this habitat in Maltese waters, is yet to be determined, the predominance of stations classifying in high and good status indicates the overall achievement of GES for infralittoral sediments under D6C5. The condition at the waterbody level (representing the mean value for stations in each waterbody) is also at a high/good status.	The extent of loss of infralittoral sediments, mainly resulting from interventions to quays and jetties in harbour areas is minor (0.02km2 = 0.05% of the total extent of the broad habitat type) and hence insignificant, resulting in good status under this criterion.	As per BENTIX index, benthic communities in infralittoral sediments reflect an overall high or good status: 13 stations in high status, 8 stations in good status and 1 station in moderate status. The achievement of GES is assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good-moderate boundary (0.58), reported as the lower Threshold Value; and taking the assessed stations as representative of the total extent of the habitat. Whilst a maximum allowable extent of adverse effects as a proportion of the total natural extent of this habitat in Maltese waters, is yet to be determined, the predominance of stations classifying in high and good status indicates the overall achievement of GES for infralittoral sediments under D6C5. The condition at the waterbody level (representing the mean value for stations in each waterbody) is also at a high/good status.	Assessment of this criterion is based on habitat in good/high status on the basis of results when applying the CARLIT index. The achievement of GES is hence assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good-moderate boundary (0.6), reported as the lower Threshold Value. The CARLIT index shows that the majority of the Littoral Rock along the Maltese coastline is in good/high status with localized stretches of moderate status. In comparison with the status assessment presented in previous years, Littoral Rock shows a general improvement in status. Such index is indicative of status along the on length of coastline rather than the area of this habitat type, which is in turn indicative of the status of the adjacent WFD coastal water bodies. For this, status is reported as % Area of MRU achieving threshold.	Loss of habitat types belonging to the MSFD Broad habitat type - Littoral Rock’and biogenic reef- is considered to be insignificant (0.7% of length of coastline), implying good status for this habitat under D6C4.	Assessment of this criterion is based on habitat in good/high status on the basis of results when applying the CARLIT index. The achievement of GES is hence assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good-moderate boundary (0.6), reported as the lower Threshold Value. The CARLIT index shows that the majority of the Littoral Rock along the Maltese coastline is in good/high status with localized stretches of moderate status. In comparison with the status assessment presented in previous years, Littoral Rock shows a general improvement in status. Such index is indicative of status along the on length of coastline rather than the area of this habitat type, which is in turn indicative of the status of the adjacent WFD coastal water bodies. For this, status is reported as % Area of MRU achieving threshold.									The achievement of GES is assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good/moderate boundary (0.55), reported as the lower Threshold Value; and taking the assessed stations as representative of the total extent of the habitat. Whilst a maximum allowable extent of adverse effects as a proportion of the total natural extent of this habitat in Maltese waters, is yet to be determined, the predominance of stations (21/22) classifying in high or good status indicates the overall achievement of GES for Posidonia oceanica under D6C5. The condition at the waterbody level (representing the mean value for stations in each waterbody) is also at a high/good status. No data is available for the Grand Harbour area since Posidonia does not occur in this water body.	The extent of loss of Posidonia oceanica meadows, mainly resulting from interventions to quays and jetties in harbour areas is negligible (0.01km2 = 0.02% of the total extent of the broad habitat types) and may be attributed to overestimations resulting from coarse mapping. The status of this habitat in terms of criterion D6C4 can thus be considered to be good.	The achievement of GES is assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good-moderate boundary (0.55), reported as the lower Threshold Value; and taking the assessed stations as representative of the total extent of the habitat. Whilst a maximum allowable extent of adverse effects as a proportion of the total natural extent of this habitat in Maltese waters, is yet to be determined, the predominance of stations (21/22) classifying in high or good status indicates the overall achievement of GES for Posidonia oceanica under D6C5. The condition at the waterbody level (representing the mean value for stations in each waterbody) is also at a high/good status. No data is available for the Grand Harbour area since Posidonia does not occur in this water body.					The only activity that results in physical loss within this zone may be ‘Extraction of oil and gas’. Four exploratory wells have been drilled in the upper bathyal zone, of which one during the reporting period. However, as explained in the chapter on ‘physical loss and physical damage’ the area of loss is minimal – approximately 0.65 m2 per well. It is thus concluded that status of the habitat is not affected by physical loss, and good environmental status is achieved in terms of criterion D6C4.
Related indicator
Criteria status	Good	Good	Not assessed								Good	Good	Good	Not assessed	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good									Good	Good	Good	Not assessed	Good	Not assessed	Not assessed	Good	Not assessed	Unknown	Good, based on low risk
Description criteria			More data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5.										Overall habitat condition for algal dominated infralittorral rock and reefs (MB2.51) was deduced to range from high to good as extrapolated from CARLIT results for adjacent coastline.				Qualitative assessment for Littoral rock (macroalgae) is based on results for the CARLIT index. Physical disturbance not deemed relevant for biogenic reef (L.bissoides)	Result for this criterion is based on the extent of loss of macroalgal communities and Lithophyllum bissoides reef habitats.	Habitat condition for Littoral rock based on quantitative assessment as based on CARLIT index. Assessment of Lithophyllum bissoides under this criterion is pending further investigation.															Based on exclusive consideration of bathyal areas surveyed in greater detail through LIFE BaHar for N2K, disturbance on these benthic habitats is highly unlikely. However, no conclusion on status under D6C3 is being drawn at this stage		More data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5.	The extent of natural seabed within the assessment area that has been physically disturbed is 11,119 km2, with such disturbance occurring primarily as a result of otter board trawling, which activity takes place within 99.8% of all area considered to be disturbed. Other key activities leading to disturbance of the seabed are anchoring linked to transport, tourism and leisure activities, and aquaculture farms; these activities take place within 12 nautical miles from shore, within 0.8% and 0.2% of all area considered to be disturbed. The indicated extent of disturbed area is considered to be an over-estimation: disturbance from trawling is based on the spatial distribution of fishing effort (VMS hours > 0) over four years in each grid cell of an area of approximately 25 km2 and does not take into consideration activity variations within each grid cell or the variation in intensity within these disturbed areas, noting that the total fishing hours over the period range from 0.17 hours to 1452.3 hours in individual grid cells.
Element status	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Good	Good	Good	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description element											This BHT is represented and assessed by reefs in algal-dominated habitat (MB2.51).	This BHT is represented and assessed by reefs in algal-dominated habitat (MB2.51).	This BHT is represented and assessed by reefs in algal-dominated habitat (MB2.51).	The assessment of Infralittoral sediments is here being reported under 'infralittoral sands' noting that most of the sampled areas resulted in high proportions of sand. Nevertheless further surveys are necessary to corroborate the reported extent for infralittoral sediments according to the benthic habitat classification of the Commission Decision 2017/848/EU.	The assessment of Infralittoral sediments is here being reported under 'infralittoral sands' noting that most of the sampled areas resulted in high proportions of sand. Nevertheless further surveys are necessary to corroborate the reported extent for infralittoral sediments according to the benthic habitat classification of the Commission Decision 2017/848/EU.	The assessment of Infralittoral sediments is here being reported under 'infralittoral sands' noting that most of the sampled areas resulted in high proportions of sand. Nevertheless further surveys are necessary to corroborate the reported extent for infralittoral sediments according to the benthic habitat classification of the Commission Decision 2017/848/EU.															Although it is highly unlikely that these benthic habitats are impacted through physical disturbance, no conclusion on status under D6C3 is being drawn at this stage.	Although it is highly unlikely that these benthic habitats are impacted through physical disturbance, no conclusion on status under D6C3 is being drawn at this stage.	Although it is highly unlikely that these benthic habitats are impacted through physical disturbance, no conclusion on status under D6C3 is being drawn at this stage.
Integration rule type parameter
Integration rule description parameter
Integration rule type criteria
Integration rule description criteria
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not relevant	Not relevant
Description overall status	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.	4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5. For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats.
Assessments period	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018	2012-2018
Related pressures	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed Physical loss of the seabed	Physical disturbance to seabed	Physical loss of the seabed
Related targets	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b	MT_Target_2019_D6C5a MT_Target_2019_D6C5b