Member State report / Art11 / 2020 / D1-M / 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 Mammals |
| 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 |
Descriptor |
D1.2 |
D1.2 |
D1.2 |
D1.2 |
D1.2 |
D1.2 |
D1.2 |
D1.2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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 |
There are no monitoring gaps for assessment of D1C2 (population size marine mammals), D1C3 (pupproduction seals), D1C4 (distribution marine mammals) and D1C5 (habitats marine mammals). However, the monitoring (and assessment) of incidental bycatch of marine mammals (D1C1) is still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including marine mammals, is being developed as required by the CFP. |
There are no monitoring gaps for assessment of D1C2 (population size marine mammals), D1C3 (pupproduction seals), D1C4 (distribution marine mammals) and D1C5 (habitats marine mammals). However, the monitoring (and assessment) of incidental bycatch of marine mammals (D1C1) is still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including marine mammals, is being developed as required by the CFP. |
There are no monitoring gaps for assessment of D1C2 (population size marine mammals), D1C3 (pupproduction seals), D1C4 (distribution marine mammals) and D1C5 (habitats marine mammals). However, the monitoring (and assessment) of incidental bycatch of marine mammals (D1C1) is still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including marine mammals, is being developed as required by the CFP. |
There are no monitoring gaps for assessment of D1C2 (population size marine mammals), D1C3 (pupproduction seals), D1C4 (distribution marine mammals) and D1C5 (habitats marine mammals). However, the monitoring (and assessment) of incidental bycatch of marine mammals (D1C1) is still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including marine mammals, is being developed as required by the CFP. |
There are no monitoring gaps for assessment of D1C2 (population size marine mammals), D1C3 (pupproduction seals), D1C4 (distribution marine mammals) and D1C5 (habitats marine mammals). However, the monitoring (and assessment) of incidental bycatch of marine mammals (D1C1) is still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including marine mammals, is being developed as required by the CFP. |
There are no monitoring gaps for assessment of D1C2 (population size marine mammals), D1C3 (pupproduction seals), D1C4 (distribution marine mammals) and D1C5 (habitats marine mammals). However, the monitoring (and assessment) of incidental bycatch of marine mammals (D1C1) is still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including marine mammals, is being developed as required by the CFP. |
There are no monitoring gaps for assessment of D1C2 (population size marine mammals), D1C3 (pupproduction seals), D1C4 (distribution marine mammals) and D1C5 (habitats marine mammals). However, the monitoring (and assessment) of incidental bycatch of marine mammals (D1C1) is still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including marine mammals, is being developed as required by the CFP. |
There are no monitoring gaps for assessment of D1C2 (population size marine mammals), D1C3 (pupproduction seals), D1C4 (distribution marine mammals) and D1C5 (habitats marine mammals). However, the monitoring (and assessment) of incidental bycatch of marine mammals (D1C1) is still under development. At international level, a system for monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including marine mammals, is being developed as required by the CFP. |
Related targets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coverage of targets |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Related measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coverage of measures |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Related monitoring programmes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Programme code |
ANSNL-D1-Mammals-mortality/injury-01 |
ANSNL-D1-Mammals-state of habitats-02 |
ANSNL-D1-Mammals-state of habitats-02 |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub8-Mammals |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub8-Mammals |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub8-Mammals |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub8-Mammals |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub9-SealPop |
Programme name |
Mobile species – mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Mobile species – state of habitats |
Mobile species – state of habitats |
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 |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Update type |
New programme |
New programme |
New programme |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Same programme as in 2014 |
Old programme codes |
|
|||||||
Programme description |
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.
The incidental bycatch of harbour porpoises must not exceed the threshold value adopted by ASCOBANS of 1 percent of the most recent best estimate of the population in the North Sea region. No indicator or threshold value has yet been formulated for bycatch of seals, but it is also likely to be a maximum percentage of the seal population.
Incidental bycatch of marine mammals in Dutch waters is monitored in two ways: through data collection under the EU Data Collection Framework (DCF) and through research into the cause of death of stranded harbour porpoises.
The monitoring under the DCF is covered by the protocols for the sampling of the catch on board commercial fishing vessels in the pelagic fisheries, active demersal fisheries and passive fisheries. The sampling under DCF is carried out by observers on board commercial fishing vessels or by trained crew members. Aside from discards, they keep record of incidental bycatch of marine mammals, seabirds, turtles and protected fish species. They explicitly keep a record of how much time is actually spent inspecting the incidental bycatch.
For the active demersal fisheries, a reference fleet of twenty vessels is used. The vessel’s crew carries out sampling on a hundred and sixty trips every year and observers take samples on ten trips. The vessels for the sampling are randomly selected from the reference fleet. For the pelagic fisheries, observers make twelve trips on board trawlers of four fishing companies in the course of a year. For the passive fisheries, observers make ten trips every year. These trips are made on an ad hoc basis, not selected at random. Recreational gillnet fishing is excluded.
In addition to the direct records of bycatch in nets, data on the cause of death of stranded marine mammals can also provide information about bycatch. Accordingly, since 2016 autopsies have been performed every year on 50 harbour porpoises found stranded along the entire coast of the Netherlands as part of the WOT programme. The autopsies are performed on a random basis, exclus |
The extent and the condition of the habitats of marine mammals must be at least maintained. The assessment is linked to reporting on habitat quality for the Habitats Directive and is based on expert judgement. In that context, as far as possible data on population trends (see D1C2), ecological key factors (such as availability of food) and important pressure factors (see D1C1, D6C2, D8, D10 and D11) are used. There is still considerable uncertainty regarding the quality of the habitats, mainly because the impact of various pressures, both now and in the future, is unknown. Studies are being carried out as part of a number of major projects, such as the Offshore Wind Ecological Programme (Wozep), to increase knowledge of the effects of offshore windfarms. Also, there is a monitoring survey (for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality) to ascertain the cause of death of a subset of stranded porpoises, which may be extended to encompass seals in future. International efforts are also underway to further develop a system of monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including harbour porpoises and seals (see D1C1), as required by the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). |
The extent and the condition of the habitats of marine mammals must be at least maintained. The assessment is linked to reporting on habitat quality for the Habitats Directive and is based on expert judgement. In that context, as far as possible data on population trends (see D1C2), ecological key factors (such as availability of food) and important pressure factors (see D1C1, D6C2, D8, D10 and D11) are used. There is still considerable uncertainty regarding the quality of the habitats, mainly because the impact of various pressures, both now and in the future, is unknown. Studies are being carried out as part of a number of major projects, such as the Offshore Wind Ecological Programme (Wozep), to increase knowledge of the effects of offshore windfarms. Also, there is a monitoring survey (for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality) to ascertain the cause of death of a subset of stranded porpoises, which may be extended to encompass seals in future. International efforts are also underway to further develop a system of monitoring incidental bycatch of protected species, including harbour porpoises and seals (see D1C1), as required by the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy (CFP). |
D1C2
The population trends for harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) must at least be stable at Greater North Sea level (OSPAR indicator) and their population abundance at national level must correspond with the Favourable Reference Population (FRP) in the Habitats Directive (D1C2). For the monitoring of cetaceans, including harbour porpoise, OSPAR and ASCOBANS are in the process of developing a SCANS survey programme (Small Cetaceans in European Atlantic waters and the North Sea) for the entire North Sea with measurements at least once every six years. Three large-scale censuses of cetaceans have been carried out in the North Sea and adjacent areas before, since 1994. The purpose of these surveys from ships and from airplanes is to determine the numbers and the distribution of cetaceans. They involve standardised line-transect counts carried out using distance-sampling methods (Buckland et al., 2001). The counts on the DCS fall into two SCANS blocks, with six and eight line transects, respectively. The Netherlands supplements this monitoring with surveys at DCS level. The number of harbour porpoises on the DCS has been counted from a plane almost every summer since 2010. These surveys will be arranged differently (over the years and within a year) in order to produce a better estimate of the population. The method used is the same as for the SCANS surveys, but in this case the DCS is divided into four sub-areas with a total of thirty line transects. The observations extend over a total distance of approximately 3,000 km of transects, which means that over 1 percent of the DCS is covered. Germany and Belgium also use this method. The monitoring of cetaceans follows the requirements agreed on and developed in the CEMP Guideline for M4 Abundance cetaceans (OSPAR, 2018). In addition to this survey, RWS waterbird monitoring (see D1C2 population size of birds) provides valuable information. Marine mammals are also counted during these flights. Statistical analysis by Statistics Netherlands showed that although no estimates of populations can be made, trends can be clearly identified. Innovative techniques are not foreseen in near future, but developments will be followed closely. The monitoring of seals is part of OSPAR and the Habitats Directive and also adheres to the agreements under the Trilateral Wadden Sea Cooperation. The population trends for common seal (Phoca vitulina) and grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) must be at least stable at Greater North Sea lev |
D1C2
The population trends for harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) must at least be stable at Greater North Sea level (OSPAR indicator) and their population abundance at national level must correspond with the Favourable Reference Population (FRP) in the Habitats Directive (D1C2). For the monitoring of cetaceans, including harbour porpoise, OSPAR and ASCOBANS are in the process of developing a SCANS survey programme (Small Cetaceans in European Atlantic waters and the North Sea) for the entire North Sea with measurements at least once every six years. Three large-scale censuses of cetaceans have been carried out in the North Sea and adjacent areas before, since 1994. The purpose of these surveys from ships and from airplanes is to determine the numbers and the distribution of cetaceans. They involve standardised line-transect counts carried out using distance-sampling methods (Buckland et al., 2001). The counts on the DCS fall into two SCANS blocks, with six and eight line transects, respectively. The Netherlands supplements this monitoring with surveys at DCS level. The number of harbour porpoises on the DCS has been counted from a plane almost every summer since 2010. These surveys will be arranged differently (over the years and within a year) in order to produce a better estimate of the population. The method used is the same as for the SCANS surveys, but in this case the DCS is divided into four sub-areas with a total of thirty line transects. The observations extend over a total distance of approximately 3,000 km of transects, which means that over 1 percent of the DCS is covered. Germany and Belgium also use this method. The monitoring of cetaceans follows the requirements agreed on and developed in the CEMP Guideline for M4 Abundance cetaceans (OSPAR, 2018). In addition to this survey, RWS waterbird monitoring (see D1C2 population size of birds) provides valuable information. Marine mammals are also counted during these flights. Statistical analysis by Statistics Netherlands showed that although no estimates of populations can be made, trends can be clearly identified. Innovative techniques are not foreseen in near future, but developments will be followed closely. The monitoring of seals is part of OSPAR and the Habitats Directive and also adheres to the agreements under the Trilateral Wadden Sea Cooperation. The population trends for common seal (Phoca vitulina) and grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) must be at least stable at Greater North Sea lev |
D1C2
The population trends for harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) must at least be stable at Greater North Sea level (OSPAR indicator) and their population abundance at national level must correspond with the Favourable Reference Population (FRP) in the Habitats Directive (D1C2). For the monitoring of cetaceans, including harbour porpoise, OSPAR and ASCOBANS are in the process of developing a SCANS survey programme (Small Cetaceans in European Atlantic waters and the North Sea) for the entire North Sea with measurements at least once every six years. Three large-scale censuses of cetaceans have been carried out in the North Sea and adjacent areas before, since 1994. The purpose of these surveys from ships and from airplanes is to determine the numbers and the distribution of cetaceans. They involve standardised line-transect counts carried out using distance-sampling methods (Buckland et al., 2001). The counts on the DCS fall into two SCANS blocks, with six and eight line transects, respectively. The Netherlands supplements this monitoring with surveys at DCS level. The number of harbour porpoises on the DCS has been counted from a plane almost every summer since 2010. These surveys will be arranged differently (over the years and within a year) in order to produce a better estimate of the population. The method used is the same as for the SCANS surveys, but in this case the DCS is divided into four sub-areas with a total of thirty line transects. The observations extend over a total distance of approximately 3,000 km of transects, which means that over 1 percent of the DCS is covered. Germany and Belgium also use this method. The monitoring of cetaceans follows the requirements agreed on and developed in the CEMP Guideline for M4 Abundance cetaceans (OSPAR, 2018). In addition to this survey, RWS waterbird monitoring (see D1C2 population size of birds) provides valuable information. Marine mammals are also counted during these flights. Statistical analysis by Statistics Netherlands showed that although no estimates of populations can be made, trends can be clearly identified. Innovative techniques are not foreseen in near future, but developments will be followed closely. The monitoring of seals is part of OSPAR and the Habitats Directive and also adheres to the agreements under the Trilateral Wadden Sea Cooperation. The population trends for common seal (Phoca vitulina) and grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) must be at least stable at Greater North Sea lev |
D1C2
The population trends for harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) must at least be stable at Greater North Sea level (OSPAR indicator) and their population abundance at national level must correspond with the Favourable Reference Population (FRP) in the Habitats Directive (D1C2). For the monitoring of cetaceans, including harbour porpoise, OSPAR and ASCOBANS are in the process of developing a SCANS survey programme (Small Cetaceans in European Atlantic waters and the North Sea) for the entire North Sea with measurements at least once every six years. Three large-scale censuses of cetaceans have been carried out in the North Sea and adjacent areas before, since 1994. The purpose of these surveys from ships and from airplanes is to determine the numbers and the distribution of cetaceans. They involve standardised line-transect counts carried out using distance-sampling methods (Buckland et al., 2001). The counts on the DCS fall into two SCANS blocks, with six and eight line transects, respectively. The Netherlands supplements this monitoring with surveys at DCS level. The number of harbour porpoises on the DCS has been counted from a plane almost every summer since 2010. These surveys will be arranged differently (over the years and within a year) in order to produce a better estimate of the population. The method used is the same as for the SCANS surveys, but in this case the DCS is divided into four sub-areas with a total of thirty line transects. The observations extend over a total distance of approximately 3,000 km of transects, which means that over 1 percent of the DCS is covered. Germany and Belgium also use this method. The monitoring of cetaceans follows the requirements agreed on and developed in the CEMP Guideline for M4 Abundance cetaceans (OSPAR, 2018). In addition to this survey, RWS waterbird monitoring (see D1C2 population size of birds) provides valuable information. Marine mammals are also counted during these flights. Statistical analysis by Statistics Netherlands showed that although no estimates of populations can be made, trends can be clearly identified. Innovative techniques are not foreseen in near future, but developments will be followed closely. The monitoring of seals is part of OSPAR and the Habitats Directive and also adheres to the agreements under the Trilateral Wadden Sea Cooperation. The population trends for common seal (Phoca vitulina) and grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) must be at least stable at Greater North Sea lev |
The average number of pups must not decline by more than 1 per cent a year. For the grey seal, this indicator corresponds with the OSPAR indicator for the North Sea. There is no OSPAR indicator for pup production of the common seal. However, the production of common seal pups in Dutch territory is included as a national supplement to the OSPAR indicator, since this information provides insight into the extent to which GES is achieved. Furthermore, it ties in with assessments for the Habitats Directive and the Trilateral Wadden Sea Cooperation. The monitoring and assessment of the common seal in Dutch territory is the same as for the grey seal and at least meets OSPAR’s requirements. However, the level of assessment is different: it is the national level for the common seal and the North Sea region for the grey seal. The counting of seal pups is linked to the pupping period. For grey seals, that is December and January; for common seals it is June and July.
Seals in the Wadden area are counted from an airplane for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. The counts cover the haul-out sites in the entire area. Common seals and grey seals are counted every year on the sandbars at low tide. There are at least three counts during the pupping period and two during the moulting period. Aerial counts are carried out for grey seals in the winter (November–January) and spring (March–April), and for the common seal in the summer (June–August). During every census, all of the adults and any pups of both species are registered.
Common seals and grey seals (including pups) are also counted on sandbars in the Delta area on behalf of Rijkswaterstaat and the Province of Zeeland. Seals have been counted in the Delta area since the end of the 1990s, but the MWTL counts in their current form date from 2014. Counts in the Delta waters are carried out throughout the year. They are combined with the counts of waterbirds in the area and are carried out from a plane at low tide in the Voordelta, Oosterschelde and Westerschelde, and often from a ship on Lake Grevelingen. During every count, the two species and any pups are registered at specific haul-out sites.
There are no changes in the monitoring programmes compared with the MSFD monitoring programme in 2014. Innovative techniques are not foreseen in near future, but developments will be followed closely so that, when opportune, adjustments can be made. |
Monitoring purpose |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other policies and conventions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regional cooperation - coordinating body |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regional cooperation - countries involved |
NL |
NL |
NL |
NL |
NL |
|||
Regional cooperation - implementation level |
Coordinated data collection |
Agreed data collection methods |
Agreed data collection methods |
Coordinated data collection |
Coordinated data collection |
Coordinated data collection |
Coordinated data collection |
Coordinated data collection |
Monitoring details |
Cetacean monitoring by pelagic trawlers started in 2005. From 2017 this monitoring is also operational for other fisheries (DCF obligation). |
D1C2 Seals:
Seals in the Wadden area are counted from an airplane for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. The counts cover the haul-out sites in the entire area. Common seals and grey seals are counted every year on the sandbars at low tide. There are at least three counts during the pupping period and two during the moulting period. Aerial counts are carried out for grey seals in the winter (November–January) and spring (March–April), and for the common seal in the summer (June–August). During every census, all of the adults and any pups of both species are registered.
Common seals and grey seals (including pups) are also counted on sandbars in the Delta area on behalf of Rijkswaterstaat and the Province of Zeeland. Seals have been counted in the Delta area since the end of the 1990s, but the MWTL counts in their current form date from 2014. Counts in the Delta waters are carried out throughout the year. They are combined with the counts of waterbirds in the area and are carried out from a plane at low tide in the Voordelta, Oosterschelde and Westerschelde, and often from a ship on Lake Grevelingen. During every count, the two species and any pups are registered at specific haul-out sites. |
D1C2 Seals:
Seals in the Wadden area are counted from an airplane for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. The counts cover the haul-out sites in the entire area. Common seals and grey seals are counted every year on the sandbars at low tide. There are at least three counts during the pupping period and two during the moulting period. Aerial counts are carried out for grey seals in the winter (November–January) and spring (March–April), and for the common seal in the summer (June–August). During every census, all of the adults and any pups of both species are registered.
Common seals and grey seals (including pups) are also counted on sandbars in the Delta area on behalf of Rijkswaterstaat and the Province of Zeeland. Seals have been counted in the Delta area since the end of the 1990s, but the MWTL counts in their current form date from 2014. Counts in the Delta waters are carried out throughout the year. They are combined with the counts of waterbirds in the area and are carried out from a plane at low tide in the Voordelta, Oosterschelde and Westerschelde, and often from a ship on Lake Grevelingen. During every count, the two species and any pups are registered at specific haul-out sites. |
D1C2 Seals:
Seals in the Wadden area are counted from an airplane for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. The counts cover the haul-out sites in the entire area. Common seals and grey seals are counted every year on the sandbars at low tide. There are at least three counts during the pupping period and two during the moulting period. Aerial counts are carried out for grey seals in the winter (November–January) and spring (March–April), and for the common seal in the summer (June–August). During every census, all of the adults and any pups of both species are registered.
Common seals and grey seals (including pups) are also counted on sandbars in the Delta area on behalf of Rijkswaterstaat and the Province of Zeeland. Seals have been counted in the Delta area since the end of the 1990s, but the MWTL counts in their current form date from 2014. Counts in the Delta waters are carried out throughout the year. They are combined with the counts of waterbirds in the area and are carried out from a plane at low tide in the Voordelta, Oosterschelde and Westerschelde, and often from a ship on Lake Grevelingen. During every count, the two species and any pups are registered at specific haul-out sites. |
D1C2 Seals:
Seals in the Wadden area are counted from an airplane for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. The counts cover the haul-out sites in the entire area. Common seals and grey seals are counted every year on the sandbars at low tide. There are at least three counts during the pupping period and two during the moulting period. Aerial counts are carried out for grey seals in the winter (November–January) and spring (March–April), and for the common seal in the summer (June–August). During every census, all of the adults and any pups of both species are registered.
Common seals and grey seals (including pups) are also counted on sandbars in the Delta area on behalf of Rijkswaterstaat and the Province of Zeeland. Seals have been counted in the Delta area since the end of the 1990s, but the MWTL counts in their current form date from 2014. Counts in the Delta waters are carried out throughout the year. They are combined with the counts of waterbirds in the area and are carried out from a plane at low tide in the Voordelta, Oosterschelde and Westerschelde, and often from a ship on Lake Grevelingen. During every count, the two species and any pups are registered at specific haul-out sites. |
|||
Features |
Species affected by incidental by-catch
|
Small toothed cetaceans
|
Seals
|
Small toothed cetaceans
|
Seals
|
Small toothed cetaceans
|
Seals
|
Seals
|
Elements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GES criteria |
D1C1 |
D1C5 |
D1C5 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C4 |
D1C4 |
D1C3 |
Parameters |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parameter Other |
Habitat condition
Suitability |
Habitat condition
Suitability |
||||||
Spatial scope |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marine reporting units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Temporal scope (start date - end date) |
2005-9999 |
2014-9999 |
2014-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
Monitoring frequency |
Continually |
Other |
Other |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Monitoring type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring method |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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. |
The assessment is linked to reporting for the Habitats Directive and is based on expert judgement. In that context, as far as possible data on population trends (see D1C2), ecological key factors (such as availability of food) and important pressure factors (see D1C1, D6C2, D8, D10 and D11) are used. |
The assessment is linked to reporting for the Habitats Directive and is based on expert judgement. In that context, as far as possible data on population trends (see D1C2), ecological key factors (such as availability of food) and important pressure factors (see D1C1, D6C2, D8, D10 and D11) are used. |
|||||
Quality control |
EU Data Collection Framework (DCF)
|
"Various monitoring networks are operational for monitoring marine mammals, for which quality control is organized in different ways. For the aircraft counts carried out under the MWTL, certified contractors (ISO 9001) are used. The counts are therefore performed in accordance with the established protocols. In addition, trend calculations are performed on the basis of the data, whereby the plausibility of the data obtained is assessed. Every year a report is drawn up on the monitoring carried out.
The aircraft counts on the DCS on behalf of LNV are carried out by WMR. These counts are performed by experienced researchers according to strict protocols. This guarantees the quality of the collected data as well as possible.
Seal counts are carried out in the Wadden Sea and the Delta. Both measurement programs are carried out by experienced researchers. The counting results form the basis for trend calculations. The collected data is assessed for plausibility. The quality of the data is guaranteed as well as possible with this process. |
"Various monitoring networks are operational for monitoring marine mammals, for which quality control is organized in different ways. For the aircraft counts carried out under the MWTL, certified contractors (ISO 9001) are used. The counts are therefore performed in accordance with the established protocols. In addition, trend calculations are performed on the basis of the data, whereby the plausibility of the data obtained is assessed. Every year a report is drawn up on the monitoring carried out.
The aircraft counts on the DCS on behalf of LNV are carried out by WMR. These counts are performed by experienced researchers according to strict protocols. This guarantees the quality of the collected data as well as possible.
Seal counts are carried out in the Wadden Sea and the Delta. Both measurement programs are carried out by experienced researchers. The counting results form the basis for trend calculations. The collected data is assessed for plausibility. The quality of the data is guaranteed as well as possible with this process. |
Various monitoring surveys are operational for marine mammals, for which quality control is organized in different ways. For the aircraft counts carried out under the MWTL, certified contractors (ISO 9001) are used. The counts are therefore performed in accordance with the established protocols. In addition, trend calculations are performed on the basis of the data, whereby the plausibility of the data obtained is assessed. Every year a report is drawn up on the monitoring carried out.
The aircraft counts on the DCS on behalf of LNV are carried out by WMR. These counts are performed by experienced researchers according to strict protocols. This guarantees the quality of the collected data as well as possible.
Seal counts are carried out in the Wadden Sea and the Delta. Both measurement programs are carried out by experienced researchers. The counting results form the basis for trend calculations. The collected data are assessed for plausibility. The quality of the data is guaranteed as well as possible with this process.
Geelhoed S.C.V. & Scheidat M. (2013) Monitoring harbour porpoise abundance and distribution in Dutch waters. Report C162/13, IMARES, The Netherlands.
Hammond P.S., Lacey C., Gilles A., Viquerat S., Börjesson P., Herr H., Macleod K., Ridoux V., Santos M.B., Scheidat M., Teilmann J., Vingada J. & Øien N. (2017) Estimates of cetacean abundance in European Atlantic waters in summer 2016 from the SCANS-III aerial and shipboard surveys. |
Various monitoring surveys are operational for marine mammals, for which quality control is organized in different ways. For the aircraft counts carried out under the MWTL, certified contractors (ISO 9001) are used. The counts are therefore performed in accordance with the established protocols. In addition, trend calculations are performed on the basis of the data, whereby the plausibility of the data obtained is assessed. Every year a report is drawn up on the monitoring carried out.
The aircraft counts on the DCS on behalf of LNV are carried out by WMR. These counts are performed by experienced researchers according to strict protocols. This guarantees the quality of the collected data as well as possible.
Seal counts are carried out in the Wadden Sea and the Delta. Both measurement programs are carried out by experienced researchers. The counting results form the basis for trend calculations. The collected data are assessed for plausibility. The quality of the data is guaranteed as well as possible with this process.
Geelhoed S.C.V. & Scheidat M. (2013) Monitoring harbour porpoise abundance and distribution in Dutch waters. Report C162/13, IMARES, The Netherlands.
Hammond P.S., Lacey C., Gilles A., Viquerat S., Börjesson P., Herr H., Macleod K., Ridoux V., Santos M.B., Scheidat M., Teilmann J., Vingada J. & Øien N. (2017) Estimates of cetacean abundance in European Atlantic waters in summer 2016 from the SCANS-III aerial and shipboard surveys. |
Various monitoring surveys are operational for marine mammals, for which quality control is organized in different ways. For the aircraft counts carried out under the MWTL, certified contractors (ISO 9001) are used. The counts are therefore performed in accordance with the established protocols. In addition, trend calculations are performed on the basis of the data, whereby the plausibility of the data obtained is assessed. Every year a report is drawn up on the monitoring carried out.
The aircraft counts on the DCS on behalf of LNV are carried out by WMR. These counts are performed by experienced researchers according to strict protocols. This guarantees the quality of the collected data as well as possible.
Seal counts are carried out in the Wadden Sea and the Delta. Both measurement programs are carried out by experienced researchers. The counting results form the basis for trend calculations. The collected data are assessed for plausibility. The quality of the data is guaranteed as well as possible with this process.
Geelhoed S.C.V. & Scheidat M. (2013) Monitoring harbour porpoise abundance and distribution in Dutch waters. Report C162/13, IMARES, The Netherlands.
Hammond P.S., Lacey C., Gilles A., Viquerat S., Börjesson P., Herr H., Macleod K., Ridoux V., Santos M.B., Scheidat M., Teilmann J., Vingada J. & Øien N. (2017) Estimates of cetacean abundance in European Atlantic waters in summer 2016 from the SCANS-III aerial and shipboard surveys. |
Various monitoring surveys are operational for marine mammals, for which quality control is organized in different ways. For the aircraft counts carried out under the MWTL, certified contractors (ISO 9001) are used. The counts are therefore performed in accordance with the established protocols. In addition, trend calculations are performed on the basis of the data, whereby the plausibility of the data obtained is assessed. Every year a report is drawn up on the monitoring carried out.
The aircraft counts on the DCS on behalf of LNV are carried out by WMR. These counts are performed by experienced researchers according to strict protocols. This guarantees the quality of the collected data as well as possible.
Seal counts are carried out in the Wadden Sea and the Delta. Both measurement programs are carried out by experienced researchers. The counting results form the basis for trend calculations. The collected data are assessed for plausibility. The quality of the data is guaranteed as well as possible with this process.
Geelhoed S.C.V. & Scheidat M. (2013) Monitoring harbour porpoise abundance and distribution in Dutch waters. Report C162/13, IMARES, The Netherlands.
Hammond P.S., Lacey C., Gilles A., Viquerat S., Börjesson P., Herr H., Macleod K., Ridoux V., Santos M.B., Scheidat M., Teilmann J., Vingada J. & Øien N. (2017) Estimates of cetacean abundance in European Atlantic waters in summer 2016 from the SCANS-III aerial and shipboard surveys. |
Seal counts are carried out in the Wadden Sea and the Delta. Both programs are carried out by experienced researchers. The counting results form the basis for trend calculations. The collected data are assessed for plausibility.
reference:
Galatius A., Brasseur S., Cremer J., Czeck R., Jensen L.F., Armin J., Körber P., Pund R., Siebert U., Teilmann J. & Klöpper S. (2018)
Trilateral Seal Expert Group (TSEG). Aerial surveys of Harbour Seals in the Wadden Sea in 2018. Another record year for pups. CWSS,
Willemshaven. |
Data management |
www.ices.dk
|
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,www.ospar.org |
|||||||
Related indicator/name |
||||||||
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 |
Galatius A., Brasseur S., Cremer J., Czeck R., Jensen L.F., Armin J., Körber P., Pund R., Siebert U., Teilmann J. & Klöpper S. (2018) Trilateral Seal Expert Group (TSEG). Aerial surveys of Harbour Seals in the Wadden Sea in 2018. Another record year for pups. CWSS, Willemshaven. |