MS/Art11/2020/D1-B/Netherlands/NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea

Member State report / Art11 / 2020 / D1-B / Netherlands / NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea

Report type	Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article	Art. 11 Monitoring programmes (and Art. 17 updates)
Report due	2020-10-15
GES Descriptor	D1 Birds
Member State	Netherlands
Region/subregion	NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea
Reported by	Rijkswaterstaat Water, Verkeer en Leefomgeving Zuiderwagenplein 2 8224 AD Lelystad Postbus 2232 3500
Report date	2020-11-17
Report access	ART11_NL_MONpro_v20201109.xml ART11_NL_MONstrat_v20201109.xml

Simplified table

Descriptor	D1.1	D1.1	D1.1	D1.1	D1.1	D1.1	D1.1	D1.1
Monitoring strategy description	The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures. The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3. The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem. Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to	The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures. The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3. The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem. Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to	The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures. The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3. The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem. Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to	The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures. The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3. The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem. Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to	The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures. The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3. The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem. Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to	The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures. The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3. The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem. Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to	The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures. The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3. The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem. Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to	The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures. The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3. The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem. Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to
Coverage of GES criteria	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024
Gaps and plans	Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts of birds will be increased from four to six. The coastal counts will also be refined to provide greater spatial coverage. Since there was no permanent survey in place along the coast outside the Waddensea area, a survey to monitor breeding success in the Southwestern Delta will be launched for the purposes of the MSFD in 2020. There are no remaining gaps in the monitoring of bird abundance and breeding success. However, the monitoring and assessment of incidental bycatch of birds are still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including sea birds, is being developed as required by the CFP. No indicator has been formulated for incidental bycatch of birds yet.	Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts of birds will be increased from four to six. The coastal counts will also be refined to provide greater spatial coverage. Since there was no permanent survey in place along the coast outside the Waddensea area, a survey to monitor breeding success in the Southwestern Delta will be launched for the purposes of the MSFD in 2020. There are no remaining gaps in the monitoring of bird abundance and breeding success. However, the monitoring and assessment of incidental bycatch of birds are still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including sea birds, is being developed as required by the CFP. No indicator has been formulated for incidental bycatch of birds yet.	Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts of birds will be increased from four to six. The coastal counts will also be refined to provide greater spatial coverage. Since there was no permanent survey in place along the coast outside the Waddensea area, a survey to monitor breeding success in the Southwestern Delta will be launched for the purposes of the MSFD in 2020. There are no remaining gaps in the monitoring of bird abundance and breeding success. However, the monitoring and assessment of incidental bycatch of birds are still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including sea birds, is being developed as required by the CFP. No indicator has been formulated for incidental bycatch of birds yet.	Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts of birds will be increased from four to six. The coastal counts will also be refined to provide greater spatial coverage. Since there was no permanent survey in place along the coast outside the Waddensea area, a survey to monitor breeding success in the Southwestern Delta will be launched for the purposes of the MSFD in 2020. There are no remaining gaps in the monitoring of bird abundance and breeding success. However, the monitoring and assessment of incidental bycatch of birds are still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including sea birds, is being developed as required by the CFP. No indicator has been formulated for incidental bycatch of birds yet.	Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts of birds will be increased from four to six. The coastal counts will also be refined to provide greater spatial coverage. Since there was no permanent survey in place along the coast outside the Waddensea area, a survey to monitor breeding success in the Southwestern Delta will be launched for the purposes of the MSFD in 2020. There are no remaining gaps in the monitoring of bird abundance and breeding success. However, the monitoring and assessment of incidental bycatch of birds are still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including sea birds, is being developed as required by the CFP. No indicator has been formulated for incidental bycatch of birds yet.	Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts of birds will be increased from four to six. The coastal counts will also be refined to provide greater spatial coverage. Since there was no permanent survey in place along the coast outside the Waddensea area, a survey to monitor breeding success in the Southwestern Delta will be launched for the purposes of the MSFD in 2020. There are no remaining gaps in the monitoring of bird abundance and breeding success. However, the monitoring and assessment of incidental bycatch of birds are still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including sea birds, is being developed as required by the CFP. No indicator has been formulated for incidental bycatch of birds yet.	Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts of birds will be increased from four to six. The coastal counts will also be refined to provide greater spatial coverage. Since there was no permanent survey in place along the coast outside the Waddensea area, a survey to monitor breeding success in the Southwestern Delta will be launched for the purposes of the MSFD in 2020. There are no remaining gaps in the monitoring of bird abundance and breeding success. However, the monitoring and assessment of incidental bycatch of birds are still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including sea birds, is being developed as required by the CFP. No indicator has been formulated for incidental bycatch of birds yet.	Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts of birds will be increased from four to six. The coastal counts will also be refined to provide greater spatial coverage. Since there was no permanent survey in place along the coast outside the Waddensea area, a survey to monitor breeding success in the Southwestern Delta will be launched for the purposes of the MSFD in 2020. There are no remaining gaps in the monitoring of bird abundance and breeding success. However, the monitoring and assessment of incidental bycatch of birds are still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including sea birds, is being developed as required by the CFP. No indicator has been formulated for incidental bycatch of birds yet.
Related targets	ANSNL-D1T1 ANSNL-D1T2 ANSNL-D1T3 ANSNL-D1T7 ANSNL-D1T8	ANSNL-D1T1 ANSNL-D1T2 ANSNL-D1T3 ANSNL-D1T7 ANSNL-D1T8	ANSNL-D1T1 ANSNL-D1T2 ANSNL-D1T3 ANSNL-D1T7 ANSNL-D1T8	ANSNL-D1T1 ANSNL-D1T2 ANSNL-D1T3 ANSNL-D1T7 ANSNL-D1T8	ANSNL-D1T1 ANSNL-D1T2 ANSNL-D1T3 ANSNL-D1T7 ANSNL-D1T8	ANSNL-D1T1 ANSNL-D1T2 ANSNL-D1T3 ANSNL-D1T7 ANSNL-D1T8	ANSNL-D1T1 ANSNL-D1T2 ANSNL-D1T3 ANSNL-D1T7 ANSNL-D1T8	ANSNL-D1T1 ANSNL-D1T2 ANSNL-D1T3 ANSNL-D1T7 ANSNL-D1T8
Coverage of targets	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024
Related measures	ANSNL-M001 - 'Beoordeling van (grootschalige) ingrepen en compensatie daarvan' ANSNL-M002 - 'Uitbreiding werkgebied Wet natuurbescherming' ANSNL-M003 - 'Beperking van visserij in de kustzone' ANSNL-M004 - 'Zoneren en faseren van activiteiten aan de kust' ANSNL-M005 - 'Regulering van andere activiteiten binnen de kustzone' ANSNL-M039 - 'Implementatie OSPAR-Lijst bedreigde dier- soorten en habitats' ANSNL-M040 - 'Beperking bodem- beroerende visserij op Klaverbank, Doggersbank en Friese Front' ANSNL-M041 - 'Kierbesluit gedeelte- lijke openstelling Haringvlietsluizen'	ANSNL-M001 - 'Beoordeling van (grootschalige) ingrepen en compensatie daarvan' ANSNL-M002 - 'Uitbreiding werkgebied Wet natuurbescherming' ANSNL-M003 - 'Beperking van visserij in de kustzone' ANSNL-M004 - 'Zoneren en faseren van activiteiten aan de kust' ANSNL-M005 - 'Regulering van andere activiteiten binnen de kustzone' ANSNL-M039 - 'Implementatie OSPAR-Lijst bedreigde dier- soorten en habitats' ANSNL-M040 - 'Beperking bodem- beroerende visserij op Klaverbank, Doggersbank en Friese Front' ANSNL-M041 - 'Kierbesluit gedeelte- lijke openstelling Haringvlietsluizen'	ANSNL-M001 - 'Beoordeling van (grootschalige) ingrepen en compensatie daarvan' ANSNL-M002 - 'Uitbreiding werkgebied Wet natuurbescherming' ANSNL-M003 - 'Beperking van visserij in de kustzone' ANSNL-M004 - 'Zoneren en faseren van activiteiten aan de kust' ANSNL-M005 - 'Regulering van andere activiteiten binnen de kustzone' ANSNL-M039 - 'Implementatie OSPAR-Lijst bedreigde dier- soorten en habitats' ANSNL-M040 - 'Beperking bodem- beroerende visserij op Klaverbank, Doggersbank en Friese Front' ANSNL-M041 - 'Kierbesluit gedeelte- lijke openstelling Haringvlietsluizen'	ANSNL-M001 - 'Beoordeling van (grootschalige) ingrepen en compensatie daarvan' ANSNL-M002 - 'Uitbreiding werkgebied Wet natuurbescherming' ANSNL-M003 - 'Beperking van visserij in de kustzone' ANSNL-M004 - 'Zoneren en faseren van activiteiten aan de kust' ANSNL-M005 - 'Regulering van andere activiteiten binnen de kustzone' ANSNL-M039 - 'Implementatie OSPAR-Lijst bedreigde dier- soorten en habitats' ANSNL-M040 - 'Beperking bodem- beroerende visserij op Klaverbank, Doggersbank en Friese Front' ANSNL-M041 - 'Kierbesluit gedeelte- lijke openstelling Haringvlietsluizen'	ANSNL-M001 - 'Beoordeling van (grootschalige) ingrepen en compensatie daarvan' ANSNL-M002 - 'Uitbreiding werkgebied Wet natuurbescherming' ANSNL-M003 - 'Beperking van visserij in de kustzone' ANSNL-M004 - 'Zoneren en faseren van activiteiten aan de kust' ANSNL-M005 - 'Regulering van andere activiteiten binnen de kustzone' ANSNL-M039 - 'Implementatie OSPAR-Lijst bedreigde dier- soorten en habitats' ANSNL-M040 - 'Beperking bodem- beroerende visserij op Klaverbank, Doggersbank en Friese Front' ANSNL-M041 - 'Kierbesluit gedeelte- lijke openstelling Haringvlietsluizen'	ANSNL-M001 - 'Beoordeling van (grootschalige) ingrepen en compensatie daarvan' ANSNL-M002 - 'Uitbreiding werkgebied Wet natuurbescherming' ANSNL-M003 - 'Beperking van visserij in de kustzone' ANSNL-M004 - 'Zoneren en faseren van activiteiten aan de kust' ANSNL-M005 - 'Regulering van andere activiteiten binnen de kustzone' ANSNL-M039 - 'Implementatie OSPAR-Lijst bedreigde dier- soorten en habitats' ANSNL-M040 - 'Beperking bodem- beroerende visserij op Klaverbank, Doggersbank en Friese Front' ANSNL-M041 - 'Kierbesluit gedeelte- lijke openstelling Haringvlietsluizen'	ANSNL-M001 - 'Beoordeling van (grootschalige) ingrepen en compensatie daarvan' ANSNL-M002 - 'Uitbreiding werkgebied Wet natuurbescherming' ANSNL-M003 - 'Beperking van visserij in de kustzone' ANSNL-M004 - 'Zoneren en faseren van activiteiten aan de kust' ANSNL-M005 - 'Regulering van andere activiteiten binnen de kustzone' ANSNL-M039 - 'Implementatie OSPAR-Lijst bedreigde dier- soorten en habitats' ANSNL-M040 - 'Beperking bodem- beroerende visserij op Klaverbank, Doggersbank en Friese Front' ANSNL-M041 - 'Kierbesluit gedeelte- lijke openstelling Haringvlietsluizen'	ANSNL-M001 - 'Beoordeling van (grootschalige) ingrepen en compensatie daarvan' ANSNL-M002 - 'Uitbreiding werkgebied Wet natuurbescherming' ANSNL-M003 - 'Beperking van visserij in de kustzone' ANSNL-M004 - 'Zoneren en faseren van activiteiten aan de kust' ANSNL-M005 - 'Regulering van andere activiteiten binnen de kustzone' ANSNL-M039 - 'Implementatie OSPAR-Lijst bedreigde dier- soorten en habitats' ANSNL-M040 - 'Beperking bodem- beroerende visserij op Klaverbank, Doggersbank en Friese Front' ANSNL-M041 - 'Kierbesluit gedeelte- lijke openstelling Haringvlietsluizen'
Coverage of measures	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024	Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024
Related monitoring programmes	ANSNL-D1-Birds-mortality/injury-01 ANSNL-D1-Birds-population characteristics-03 ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds	ANSNL-D1-Birds-mortality/injury-01 ANSNL-D1-Birds-population characteristics-03 ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds	ANSNL-D1-Birds-mortality/injury-01 ANSNL-D1-Birds-population characteristics-03 ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds	ANSNL-D1-Birds-mortality/injury-01 ANSNL-D1-Birds-population characteristics-03 ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds	ANSNL-D1-Birds-mortality/injury-01 ANSNL-D1-Birds-population characteristics-03 ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds	ANSNL-D1-Birds-mortality/injury-01 ANSNL-D1-Birds-population characteristics-03 ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds	ANSNL-D1-Birds-mortality/injury-01 ANSNL-D1-Birds-population characteristics-03 ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds	ANSNL-D1-Birds-mortality/injury-01 ANSNL-D1-Birds-population characteristics-03 ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds
Programme code	ANSNL-D1-Birds-mortality/injury-01	ANSNL-D1-Birds-population characteristics-03	ANSNL-D1-Birds-population characteristics-03	ANSNL-D1-Birds-population characteristics-03	ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds	ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds	ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds	ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds
Programme name	Mobile species – mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental)	Mobile species – population characteristics	Mobile species – population characteristics	Mobile species – population characteristics	Mobile species – distribution, abundance and/or biomass	Mobile species – distribution, abundance and/or biomass	Mobile species – distribution, abundance and/or biomass	Mobile species – distribution, abundance and/or biomass
Update type	New programme	New programme	New programme	New programme	Modified from 2014	Modified from 2014	Modified from 2014	Modified from 2014
Old programme codes
Programme description	The necessary monitoring of incidental bycatch corresponds with the existing European rules laid down in Regulation 2017/1004, according to which, since 2017 the monitoring of bycatch of all species, and particularly protected species, falls under the EU Data Collection Framework (DCF). It is too early to formulate GES, an indicator or threshold values at this stage because there is still too little known about bycatch of marine birds. It is also not yet possible to start a monitoring programme. The current aim therefore is to commence a process that will eventually lead to the development of a monitoring programme, with the associated indicator and threshold values, for the bycatch of marine birds. This is similar to the process that has been initiated by ICES, OSPAR and HELCOM for marine mammals (see D1C1 marine mammals).	GES is achieved if breeding failure does not occur in more than three of every six years (OSPAR indicator). The applicable scale for the OSPAR assessment of breeding success is the Greater North Sea. The reporting for OSPAR (North Sea level) also includes breeding birds that depend on intertidal areas. The OSPAR assessment is supplemented by an assessment at national level for the MSFD, which is specifically focused on breeding birds that depend to a large extent on the Dutch section of the North Sea for their food during the breeding season. The data from the Wadden Sea area and the Southwestern Delta are particularly important for determining the breeding success in the Netherlands. There is a strong similarity in terms of objectives and agreements with the Trilateral Monitoring and Assessment Programme (TMAP). The Wadden Sea Reproduction Monitoring Scheme was established in 2004, for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. This survey monitors the breeding success in the international Wadden Sea of ten species of birds that are regarded as representative of specific habitats and food groups: Spoonbill, Oystercatcher, Avocet, Lesser black-backed gull, Herring gull, Black-headed gull, Eider, Sandwich tern, Arctic tern and Common tern. Of these, the Lesser black-backed gull, the Herring gull, the Sandwich tern, the Arctic tern and the Common tern depend to a large extent on the North Sea coast or the EEZ for their food. The survey focuses primarily on measuring the number of fledglings per breeding pair each season. To gain insight in the stage of the breeding cycle in which losses occur, data are also collected on the success rates in the egg and chick phase. The monitoring frequency is annually. To ensure that the monitoring is representative in spatial terms, the international Wadden Sea is divided into fifteen areas in the TMAP programme. The aim is to perform one or more surveys of the breeding success of each species found there. There has never been a permanent monitoring survey for breeding success in the Delta area and along the Dutch North Sea coast. Previous surveys were carried out on an ad hoc basis. In the Southwest Delta, the breeding success of gulls and terns will therefore be monitored for the MSFD annually from 2020 onwards.	GES is achieved if breeding failure does not occur in more than three of every six years (OSPAR indicator). The applicable scale for the OSPAR assessment of breeding success is the Greater North Sea. The reporting for OSPAR (North Sea level) also includes breeding birds that depend on intertidal areas. The OSPAR assessment is supplemented by an assessment at national level for the MSFD, which is specifically focused on breeding birds that depend to a large extent on the Dutch section of the North Sea for their food during the breeding season. The data from the Wadden Sea area and the Southwestern Delta are particularly important for determining the breeding success in the Netherlands. There is a strong similarity in terms of objectives and agreements with the Trilateral Monitoring and Assessment Programme (TMAP). The Wadden Sea Reproduction Monitoring Scheme was established in 2004, for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. This survey monitors the breeding success in the international Wadden Sea of ten species of birds that are regarded as representative of specific habitats and food groups: Spoonbill, Oystercatcher, Avocet, Lesser black-backed gull, Herring gull, Black-headed gull, Eider, Sandwich tern, Arctic tern and Common tern. Of these, the Lesser black-backed gull, the Herring gull, the Sandwich tern, the Arctic tern and the Common tern depend to a large extent on the North Sea coast or the EEZ for their food. The survey focuses primarily on measuring the number of fledglings per breeding pair each season. To gain insight in the stage of the breeding cycle in which losses occur, data are also collected on the success rates in the egg and chick phase. The monitoring frequency is annually. To ensure that the monitoring is representative in spatial terms, the international Wadden Sea is divided into fifteen areas in the TMAP programme. The aim is to perform one or more surveys of the breeding success of each species found there. There has never been a permanent monitoring survey for breeding success in the Delta area and along the Dutch North Sea coast. Previous surveys were carried out on an ad hoc basis. In the Southwest Delta, the breeding success of gulls and terns will therefore be monitored for the MSFD annually from 2020 onwards.	GES is achieved if breeding failure does not occur in more than three of every six years (OSPAR indicator). The applicable scale for the OSPAR assessment of breeding success is the Greater North Sea. The reporting for OSPAR (North Sea level) also includes breeding birds that depend on intertidal areas. The OSPAR assessment is supplemented by an assessment at national level for the MSFD, which is specifically focused on breeding birds that depend to a large extent on the Dutch section of the North Sea for their food during the breeding season. The data from the Wadden Sea area and the Southwestern Delta are particularly important for determining the breeding success in the Netherlands. There is a strong similarity in terms of objectives and agreements with the Trilateral Monitoring and Assessment Programme (TMAP). The Wadden Sea Reproduction Monitoring Scheme was established in 2004, for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. This survey monitors the breeding success in the international Wadden Sea of ten species of birds that are regarded as representative of specific habitats and food groups: Spoonbill, Oystercatcher, Avocet, Lesser black-backed gull, Herring gull, Black-headed gull, Eider, Sandwich tern, Arctic tern and Common tern. Of these, the Lesser black-backed gull, the Herring gull, the Sandwich tern, the Arctic tern and the Common tern depend to a large extent on the North Sea coast or the EEZ for their food. The survey focuses primarily on measuring the number of fledglings per breeding pair each season. To gain insight in the stage of the breeding cycle in which losses occur, data are also collected on the success rates in the egg and chick phase. The monitoring frequency is annually. To ensure that the monitoring is representative in spatial terms, the international Wadden Sea is divided into fifteen areas in the TMAP programme. The aim is to perform one or more surveys of the breeding success of each species found there. There has never been a permanent monitoring survey for breeding success in the Delta area and along the Dutch North Sea coast. Previous surveys were carried out on an ad hoc basis. In the Southwest Delta, the breeding success of gulls and terns will therefore be monitored for the MSFD annually from 2020 onwards.	GES for the population abundance is measured by OSPAR and Birds Directive requirements. This means that population abundance in the southern North sea of at least 75% of the bird species in each ‘functional group’ must be above the threshold value in 1992 (OSPAR). The objective of the Birds Directive is ‘to maintain the populations of all wild bird species in the EU at a level which corresponds to their ecological, scientific and cultural requirements, or to adapt the population of these species to that level’. This description is regarded as comparable with the term ‘favourable conservation status’ in the Habitats Directive. The populations of seabird species are determined mainly on the basis of aerial counts (MWTL programme Rijkswaterstaat; see also https://waterinfo-extra.rws.nl/). The aerial counts commenced in 1991, since then there have been some changes, for example in the spatial pattern, the frequency and the flight altitude (for details, see Fijn et al. 2018). The spatial coverage is largely determined by area characteristics, resulting in a distinction between areas with a high bird density and many different species in the coastal zone, areas with a high bird density but few different species in the (planned) birds directive areas in the EEZ, and areas with a relatively low bird density and little diversity in the EEZ outside the birds directive areas. The monitoring timing and frequency cover the occurrence of most sea bird species. The homogeneous distribution of the various transects (cross-wise to the coast) makes it possible to extrapolate the size of the population of each species on the DCS, including a confidence interval. In the Natura 2000 areas in the EEZ (Frisian Front and (potentially) Brown Ridge), a higher spatial resolution is maintained by flying in a zig-zag pattern. Based on statistical analysis, these surveys have intensified. Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts will increase from four to six (equal to the coastal zone). Furthermore, the coastal counts will be refined to improve spatial coverage. Common scoter are counted together with other scoter species every year in the Dutch coastal waters and the Wadden Sea. These counts are also carried out by plane as part of the MWTL programme. During the survey, the coastal zone is crossed once to spot scoter groups using binoculars and to estimate their numbers (Lilypaly et al., 2018). Counts by volunteers from the coast (seabird migration counts) and da	GES for the population abundance is measured by OSPAR and Birds Directive requirements. This means that population abundance in the southern North sea of at least 75% of the bird species in each ‘functional group’ must be above the threshold value in 1992 (OSPAR). The objective of the Birds Directive is ‘to maintain the populations of all wild bird species in the EU at a level which corresponds to their ecological, scientific and cultural requirements, or to adapt the population of these species to that level’. This description is regarded as comparable with the term ‘favourable conservation status’ in the Habitats Directive. The populations of seabird species are determined mainly on the basis of aerial counts (MWTL programme Rijkswaterstaat; see also https://waterinfo-extra.rws.nl/). The aerial counts commenced in 1991, since then there have been some changes, for example in the spatial pattern, the frequency and the flight altitude (for details, see Fijn et al. 2018). The spatial coverage is largely determined by area characteristics, resulting in a distinction between areas with a high bird density and many different species in the coastal zone, areas with a high bird density but few different species in the (planned) birds directive areas in the EEZ, and areas with a relatively low bird density and little diversity in the EEZ outside the birds directive areas. The monitoring timing and frequency cover the occurrence of most sea bird species. The homogeneous distribution of the various transects (cross-wise to the coast) makes it possible to extrapolate the size of the population of each species on the DCS, including a confidence interval. In the Natura 2000 areas in the EEZ (Frisian Front and (potentially) Brown Ridge), a higher spatial resolution is maintained by flying in a zig-zag pattern. Based on statistical analysis, these surveys have intensified. Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts will increase from four to six (equal to the coastal zone). Furthermore, the coastal counts will be refined to improve spatial coverage. Common scoter are counted together with other scoter species every year in the Dutch coastal waters and the Wadden Sea. These counts are also carried out by plane as part of the MWTL programme. During the survey, the coastal zone is crossed once to spot scoter groups using binoculars and to estimate their numbers (Lilypaly et al., 2018). Counts by volunteers from the coast (seabird migration counts) and da	GES for the population abundance is measured by OSPAR and Birds Directive requirements. This means that population abundance in the southern North sea of at least 75% of the bird species in each ‘functional group’ must be above the threshold value in 1992 (OSPAR). The objective of the Birds Directive is ‘to maintain the populations of all wild bird species in the EU at a level which corresponds to their ecological, scientific and cultural requirements, or to adapt the population of these species to that level’. This description is regarded as comparable with the term ‘favourable conservation status’ in the Habitats Directive. The populations of seabird species are determined mainly on the basis of aerial counts (MWTL programme Rijkswaterstaat; see also https://waterinfo-extra.rws.nl/). The aerial counts commenced in 1991, since then there have been some changes, for example in the spatial pattern, the frequency and the flight altitude (for details, see Fijn et al. 2018). The spatial coverage is largely determined by area characteristics, resulting in a distinction between areas with a high bird density and many different species in the coastal zone, areas with a high bird density but few different species in the (planned) birds directive areas in the EEZ, and areas with a relatively low bird density and little diversity in the EEZ outside the birds directive areas. The monitoring timing and frequency cover the occurrence of most sea bird species. The homogeneous distribution of the various transects (cross-wise to the coast) makes it possible to extrapolate the size of the population of each species on the DCS, including a confidence interval. In the Natura 2000 areas in the EEZ (Frisian Front and (potentially) Brown Ridge), a higher spatial resolution is maintained by flying in a zig-zag pattern. Based on statistical analysis, these surveys have intensified. Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts will increase from four to six (equal to the coastal zone). Furthermore, the coastal counts will be refined to improve spatial coverage. Common scoter are counted together with other scoter species every year in the Dutch coastal waters and the Wadden Sea. These counts are also carried out by plane as part of the MWTL programme. During the survey, the coastal zone is crossed once to spot scoter groups using binoculars and to estimate their numbers (Lilypaly et al., 2018). Counts by volunteers from the coast (seabird migration counts) and da	GES for the population abundance is measured by OSPAR and Birds Directive requirements. This means that population abundance in the southern North sea of at least 75% of the bird species in each ‘functional group’ must be above the threshold value in 1992 (OSPAR). The objective of the Birds Directive is ‘to maintain the populations of all wild bird species in the EU at a level which corresponds to their ecological, scientific and cultural requirements, or to adapt the population of these species to that level’. This description is regarded as comparable with the term ‘favourable conservation status’ in the Habitats Directive. The populations of seabird species are determined mainly on the basis of aerial counts (MWTL programme Rijkswaterstaat; see also https://waterinfo-extra.rws.nl/). The aerial counts commenced in 1991, since then there have been some changes, for example in the spatial pattern, the frequency and the flight altitude (for details, see Fijn et al. 2018). The spatial coverage is largely determined by area characteristics, resulting in a distinction between areas with a high bird density and many different species in the coastal zone, areas with a high bird density but few different species in the (planned) birds directive areas in the EEZ, and areas with a relatively low bird density and little diversity in the EEZ outside the birds directive areas. The monitoring timing and frequency cover the occurrence of most sea bird species. The homogeneous distribution of the various transects (cross-wise to the coast) makes it possible to extrapolate the size of the population of each species on the DCS, including a confidence interval. In the Natura 2000 areas in the EEZ (Frisian Front and (potentially) Brown Ridge), a higher spatial resolution is maintained by flying in a zig-zag pattern. Based on statistical analysis, these surveys have intensified. Compared with 2014, the number of annual offshore counts will increase from four to six (equal to the coastal zone). Furthermore, the coastal counts will be refined to improve spatial coverage. Common scoter are counted together with other scoter species every year in the Dutch coastal waters and the Wadden Sea. These counts are also carried out by plane as part of the MWTL programme. During the survey, the coastal zone is crossed once to spot scoter groups using binoculars and to estimate their numbers (Lilypaly et al., 2018). Counts by volunteers from the coast (seabird migration counts) and da
Monitoring purpose	Effectiveness of measures Environmental state and impacts	Environmental state and impacts	Environmental state and impacts	Environmental state and impacts	Environmental state and impacts	Environmental state and impacts	Environmental state and impacts	Environmental state and impacts
Other policies and conventions	Data Collection Framework Multi-Annual Plan (Common Fisheries Policy)	OSPAR Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme	OSPAR Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme	OSPAR Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme	Birds Directive OSPAR Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme	Birds Directive OSPAR Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme	Birds Directive OSPAR Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme	Birds Directive OSPAR Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme
Regional cooperation - coordinating body	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR	OSPAR
Regional cooperation - countries involved					NL	NL	NL	NL
Regional cooperation - implementation level	Agreed data collection methods	Coordinated data collection	Coordinated data collection	Coordinated data collection	Coordinated data collection	Coordinated data collection	Coordinated data collection	Coordinated data collection
Monitoring details	The monitoring for D1C1 is operational, but optimizations will be necessary in the coming years.
Features	Species affected by incidental by-catch	Pelagic-feeding birds	Surface-feeding birds	Wading birds	Benthic-feeding birds	Pelagic-feeding birds	Surface-feeding birds	Wading birds
Elements	Not Applicable	Phalacrocorax carbo	Larus argentatus Larus marinus Sterna hirundo Sterna paradisaea Sterna sandvicensis Sternula albifrons	Larus canus Larus fuscus	Melanitta nigra	Fratercula arctica Gavia arctica Gavia stellata Morus bassanus Phalacrocorax carbo Podiceps cristatus Uria aalge	Fulmarus glacialis Hydrocoloeus minutus Larus argentatus Larus canus Larus marinus Rissa tridactyla Stercorarius skua Sterna hirundo Sterna sandvicensis	Larus fuscus Larus ridibundus
GES criteria	D1C1	D1C3	D1C3	D1C3	D1C2	D1C2	D1C2	D1C2
Parameters	Incidence	Fecundity (breeding rate)	Fecundity (breeding rate)	Fecundity (breeding rate)	Abundance (number of individuals) Distribution (spatial)	Abundance (number of individuals) Distribution (spatial)	Abundance (number of individuals) Distribution (spatial)	Abundance (number of individuals) Distribution (spatial)
Parameter Other
Spatial scope	EEZ (or similar)	Coastal waters (WFD) Terrestrial part of MS	Coastal waters (WFD) Terrestrial part of MS	Coastal waters (WFD) Terrestrial part of MS	EEZ (or similar)	EEZ (or similar)	EEZ (or similar)	EEZ (or similar)
Marine reporting units	L1.2	ANS-NL-MS-1 L1.2	ANS-NL-MS-1 L1.2	ANS-NL-MS-1 L1.2	ANS-NL-MS-1 L2.2.5	ANS-NL-MS-1 L2.2.5	ANS-NL-MS-1 L2.2.5	ANS-NL-MS-1 L2.2.5
Temporal scope (start date - end date)	2017-9999	2004-9999	2004-9999	2004-9999	1991-9999	1991-9999	1991-9999	1991-9999
Monitoring frequency	Continually	Yearly	Yearly	Yearly	Other	Other	Other	Other
Monitoring type	In-situ sampling coastal In-situ sampling offshore	In-situ sampling coastal In-situ sampling offshore	In-situ sampling coastal In-situ sampling offshore	In-situ sampling coastal In-situ sampling offshore	In-situ sampling coastal In-situ sampling offshore	In-situ sampling coastal In-situ sampling offshore	In-situ sampling coastal In-situ sampling offshore	In-situ sampling coastal In-situ sampling offshore
Monitoring method	Other monitoring method	OSPAR CEMP Guideline: Common Indicator - Marine Bird Breeding Success/Failure (B3) (Agreement 2016-10)	OSPAR CEMP Guideline: Common Indicator - Marine Bird Breeding Success/Failure (B3) (Agreement 2016-10)	OSPAR CEMP Guideline: Common Indicator - Marine Bird Breeding Success/Failure (B3) (Agreement 2016-10)	OSPAR CEMP Guideline: Common Indicator - Marine Bird Abundance (B1) (Agreement 2016-09)	OSPAR CEMP Guideline: Common Indicator - Marine Bird Abundance (B1) (Agreement 2016-09)	OSPAR CEMP Guideline: Common Indicator - Marine Bird Abundance (B1) (Agreement 2016-09)	OSPAR CEMP Guideline: Common Indicator - Marine Bird Abundance (B1) (Agreement 2016-09)
Monitoring method other	Monitoring aims to provide insight into both the size and composition of the bycatch. The data collection is designed to help achieve the objectives of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). The necessary monitoring of incidental bycatch is prescribed at EU level in Regulation 2017/1004, by virtue of which the monitoring of bycatch of all species, and particularly protected species, falls under the EU Data Collection Framework (DCF) since 2017.				MWTL monitoring frequency: Six counts a year for both the coastal zone and the EEZ.	MWTL monitoring frequency: Six counts a year for both the coastal zone and the EEZ.	MWTL monitoring frequency: Six counts a year for both the coastal zone and the EEZ.	MWTL monitoring frequency: Six counts a year for both the coastal zone and the EEZ.
Quality control	EU Data Collection Framework (DCF)	Ongoing data quality checks by SOVON and OSPAR. For more information see: OSPAR CEMP Guideline: Common Indicator - Marine Bird Breeding Success/Failure (B3) (Agreement 2016-10).	Ongoing data quality checks by SOVON and OSPAR. For more information see: OSPAR CEMP Guideline: Common Indicator - Marine Bird Breeding Success/Failure (B3) (Agreement 2016-10).	Ongoing data quality checks by SOVON and OSPAR. For more information see: OSPAR CEMP Guideline: Common Indicator - Marine Bird Breeding Success/Failure (B3) (Agreement 2016-10).	Various monitoring surveys are in place for birds, for which quality control is organized differently per survey. The MWTL aircraft counts are carried out by certified (ISO 9001) contractors on behalf of Rijkswaterstaat. Based on the collected data, trends are calculated by Statistics Netherlands (CBS). CBS is an independent organization whose special position is laid down by law. Any deviations in the counting method can be observed by CBS due to the occurrence of trend breaks in long-term datasets. Overall coordination takes place in the Ecological Monitoring Network. The migration and water bird counts from shore are carried out by volunteers. Bird Research Netherlands (SOVON) supports this activity with, among other things, manuals and advice (www.sovon.nl/sites/default/files/doc/gids-trektellen_nieuw.pdf and www.sovon.nl/sites/default/files/doc/gids- pull count_new.pdf). The NEM analyses the data in collaboration with SOVON, assesses the quality of the monitoring and advises on possible further optimization. The NEM reports annually on the main findings.	Various monitoring surveys are in place for birds, for which quality control is organized differently per survey. The MWTL aircraft counts are carried out by certified (ISO 9001) contractors on behalf of Rijkswaterstaat. Based on the collected data, trends are calculated by Statistics Netherlands (CBS). CBS is an independent organization whose special position is laid down by law. Any deviations in the counting method can be observed by CBS due to the occurrence of trend breaks in long-term datasets. Overall coordination takes place in the Ecological Monitoring Network. The migration and water bird counts from shore are carried out by volunteers. Bird Research Netherlands (SOVON) supports this activity with, among other things, manuals and advice (www.sovon.nl/sites/default/files/doc/gids-trektellen_nieuw.pdf and www.sovon.nl/sites/default/files/doc/gids- pull count_new.pdf). The NEM analyses the data in collaboration with SOVON, assesses the quality of the monitoring and advises on possible further optimization. The NEM reports annually on the main findings.	Various monitoring surveys are in place for birds, for which quality control is organized differently per survey. The MWTL aircraft counts are carried out by certified (ISO 9001) contractors on behalf of Rijkswaterstaat. Based on the collected data, trends are calculated by Statistics Netherlands (CBS). CBS is an independent organization whose special position is laid down by law. Any deviations in the counting method can be observed by CBS due to the occurrence of trend breaks in long-term datasets. Overall coordination takes place in the Ecological Monitoring Network. The migration and water bird counts from shore are carried out by volunteers. Bird Research Netherlands (SOVON) supports this activity with, among other things, manuals and advice (www.sovon.nl/sites/default/files/doc/gids-trektellen_nieuw.pdf and www.sovon.nl/sites/default/files/doc/gids- pull count_new.pdf). The NEM analyses the data in collaboration with SOVON, assesses the quality of the monitoring and advises on possible further optimization. The NEM reports annually on the main findings.	Various monitoring surveys are in place for birds, for which quality control is organized differently per survey. The MWTL aircraft counts are carried out by certified (ISO 9001) contractors on behalf of Rijkswaterstaat. Based on the collected data, trends are calculated by Statistics Netherlands (CBS). CBS is an independent organization whose special position is laid down by law. Any deviations in the counting method can be observed by CBS due to the occurrence of trend breaks in long-term datasets. Overall coordination takes place in the Ecological Monitoring Network. The migration and water bird counts from shore are carried out by volunteers. Bird Research Netherlands (SOVON) supports this activity with, among other things, manuals and advice (www.sovon.nl/sites/default/files/doc/gids-trektellen_nieuw.pdf and www.sovon.nl/sites/default/files/doc/gids- pull count_new.pdf). The NEM analyses the data in collaboration with SOVON, assesses the quality of the monitoring and advises on possible further optimization. The NEM reports annually on the main findings.
Data management		Marine Information and Data Centre	Marine Information and Data Centre	Marine Information and Data Centre	Marine Information and Data Centre	Marine Information and Data Centre	Marine Information and Data Centre	Marine Information and Data Centre
Data access	www.ICES.dk	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/krm/viewer/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/krm/viewer/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/krm/viewer/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/krm/viewer/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/krm/viewer/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/krm/viewer/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/krm/viewer/
Related indicator/name		Marine Bird Breeding Success / Failure	Marine Bird Breeding Success / Failure	Marine Bird Breeding Success / Failure	Marine Bird Abundance	Marine Bird Abundance	Marine Bird Abundance	Marine Bird Abundance
Contact		https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/uk/secundaire-navigatie/contact/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/uk/secundaire-navigatie/contact/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/uk/secundaire-navigatie/contact/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/uk/secundaire-navigatie/contact/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/uk/secundaire-navigatie/contact/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/uk/secundaire-navigatie/contact/	https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/uk/secundaire-navigatie/contact/
References					Fijn R.C., Arts F.A., De Jong J.W., Beuker D., Bravo Rebolledo E.L., Engels B.W.R., Hoekstein M.S.J., Jonkvorst R.J., Lilipaly S., Sluijter M., Van Straalen K.D. & Wolf P.A. (2018) Verspreiding en abundantie van zeevogels en zeezoogdieren op het Nederlands Continentaal Plat in 2017-2018. RWS CIV rapportnr. BM 18.28, Bureau Waardenburg rapportnr. 18-319. Bureau Waardenburg en Delta Project Management, Culemborg.	Fijn R.C., Arts F.A., De Jong J.W., Beuker D., Bravo Rebolledo E.L., Engels B.W.R., Hoekstein M.S.J., Jonkvorst R.J., Lilipaly S., Sluijter M., Van Straalen K.D. & Wolf P.A. (2018) Verspreiding en abundantie van zeevogels en zeezoogdieren op het Nederlands Continentaal Plat in 2017-2018. RWS CIV rapportnr. BM 18.28, Bureau Waardenburg rapportnr. 18-319. Bureau Waardenburg en Delta Project Management, Culemborg.	Fijn R.C., Arts F.A., De Jong J.W., Beuker D., Bravo Rebolledo E.L., Engels B.W.R., Hoekstein M.S.J., Jonkvorst R.J., Lilipaly S., Sluijter M., Van Straalen K.D. & Wolf P.A. (2018) Verspreiding en abundantie van zeevogels en zeezoogdieren op het Nederlands Continentaal Plat in 2017-2018. RWS CIV rapportnr. BM 18.28, Bureau Waardenburg rapportnr. 18-319. Bureau Waardenburg en Delta Project Management, Culemborg.	Fijn R.C., Arts F.A., De Jong J.W., Beuker D., Bravo Rebolledo E.L., Engels B.W.R., Hoekstein M.S.J., Jonkvorst R.J., Lilipaly S., Sluijter M., Van Straalen K.D. & Wolf P.A. (2018) Verspreiding en abundantie van zeevogels en zeezoogdieren op het Nederlands Continentaal Plat in 2017-2018. RWS CIV rapportnr. BM 18.28, Bureau Waardenburg rapportnr. 18-319. Bureau Waardenburg en Delta Project Management, Culemborg.