Member State report / Art11 / 2014-2020 / D1-C / 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 | 2014-10-15; 2020-10-15 |
| GES Descriptor | D1 Cephalopods |
| Member State | Netherlands |
| Region/subregion | NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea |
| Reported by | Rijkswaterstaat |
| Report date | 2014-10-16; 2020-11-17 |
| Report access |
http://cdr.eionet.europa.eu/nl/eu/msfd_mp/ansnl/envvd6rvq/ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality-16102014
http://cdr.eionet.europa.eu/nl/eu/msfd_mp/ansnl/envvd6rqw/ANSNL-D05-Sub5-OSPAR-InputAtm-15102014.xml
|
2014 data
2020 data
| Monitoring programme | Monitoring programme name | MP_D1_4_6_Birds |
MP_D1_4_6_Fish |
MP_D1_4_6_Fish |
MP_D1_4_6_Fish |
MP_D1_4_6_Fish |
MP_D1_4_6_Fish |
MP_D1_4_6_Mammals |
MP_D1_4_6_Mammals |
MP_D1_4_6_Mammals |
MP_D1_4_6_SeabedHabitats |
MP_D1_4_6_SeabedHabitats |
MP_D1_4_6_SeabedHabitats |
MP_D1_4_6_SeabedHabitats |
MP_D1_4_6_SeabedHabitats |
MP_D1_4_6_SeabedHabitats |
MP_D1_4_6_WaterColumnHabitats |
MP_D1_4_6_WaterColumnHabitats |
MP_D1_4_6_WaterColumnHabitats |
MP_D1_4_6_WaterColumnHabitats |
MP_D1_4_6_WaterColumnHabitats |
MP_D1_4_6_WaterColumnHabitats |
MP_D3 |
MP_D3 |
MP_D3 |
MP_D3 |
MP_D3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monitoring programme | Reference existing programme | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Monitoring programme | Marine Unit ID | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q4e - Programme ID | ANSNL-D146Birds |
ANSNL-D146FISH |
ANSNL-D146FISH |
ANSNL-D146FISH |
ANSNL-D146FISH |
ANSNL-D146FISH |
ANSNL-D146Mammals |
ANSNL-D146Mammals |
ANSNL-D146Mammals |
ANSNL-D146Habitats |
ANSNL-D146Habitats |
ANSNL-D146Habitats |
ANSNL-D146Habitats |
ANSNL-D146Habitats |
ANSNL-D146Habitats |
ANSNL-D146HabitatsWater |
ANSNL-D146HabitatsWater |
ANSNL-D146HabitatsWater |
ANSNL-D146HabitatsWater |
ANSNL-D146HabitatsWater |
ANSNL-D146HabitatsWater |
ANSNL-D3 |
ANSNL-D3 |
ANSNL-D3 |
ANSNL-D3 |
ANSNL-D3 |
|
| Q4f - Programme description | The Cabinet views this Draft MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. the status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5)
2. the effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of revising the entire Marine Strategy in 2020 and the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determing spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as wella as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2024.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Data on fish and shellfish is collected under the Common Fisheries Policy. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Data on fish and shellfish is collected under the Common Fisheries Policy. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Data on fish and shellfish is collected under the Common Fisheries Policy. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Data on fish and shellfish is collected under the Common Fisheries Policy. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Data on fish and shellfish is collected under the Common Fisheries Policy. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determining spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determing spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Data on fish and shellfish is collected under the Common Fisheries Policy. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determing spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Data on fish and shellfish is collected under the Common Fisheries Policy. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determing spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Data on fish and shellfish is collected under the Common Fisheries Policy. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determing spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Data on fish and shellfish is collected under the Common Fisheries Policy. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
The Cabinet views this MSFD Monitoring Programme as a guiding component of the approach to ensure a good status of the marine environment in the Dutch part of the North Sea. The MSFD Monitoring Programme has been drawn up in accordance with Article 11 of the Directive. It details the actual monitoring of the 32 indicators outlined in the Marine Strategy Part 1. Based on the measurement data, the Monitoring Programme provides insight into:
1. The status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5) in order to maintain or reach good environmental status.
2. The effectiveness of the programme of measures to be implemented under the MSFD.
Although the Monitoring Programme focuses primarily on the 32 indicators from the Marine Strategy Part 1, it also uses, for the purpose of interpreting the results, a number of supporting parameters that are included as standard during sampling (such as temperature, acidity, conductivity, salinity and dissolved oxygen). For the purpose of the next assessment of the environmental status in 2017-2018 and assessments thereafter, use will also be made of the information resulting from monitoring for research or from other statutory frameworks and policy areas. This includes information from national monitoring under the Bathing Water Directive in the area of microbial pathogens, shipping intensity monitoring (including fishing vessels) for the purpose of shipping traffic safety and bathymetric information obtained from hydrographic measurements. In determing spatial and temporal distribution of the monitoring, natural variation is taken into account as well as the possibilities to distinguish changes from natural variability. Important parameters for climate change and ocean acidification, such as temperature and pH are incorporated in the regular monitoring programmes. Data on fish and shellfish is collected under the Common Fisheries Policy. Economic data is collected by Statistics Netherlands (abbreviated as CBS in Dutch). CBS supplies the required data following receipt of a specified request for information. Thus, the requirements of MSFD Art. 8 are met and the indicative list of elements included in MSFD Appendix III is incorporated.
In this way, the MSFD Monitoring Programme provides a solid basis for updating the Marine Strategy during the second implementation cycle of the MSFD. This begins by updating the initial assessment (MSFD Art. 8) and describing the good environmental status (MSFD Art. 9), environmental targets and indicators (MSFD Art. 10) in 2018, and continues through to the adjustment of the existing programme of measures (Art. 13) in 2021.
References:
-More information on the rationale for the balance between monitoring of state/impact, pressures, activities and measures: MS II paragraph 2.3 (DPSIR –model)
-MS II Annex 4 |
|
| Q5e - Natural variability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q5d - Adequacy for assessment of GES | Q5d - Adequate data | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Q5d - Adequacy for assessment of GES | Q5d - Established methods | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
N |
N |
| Q5d - Adequacy for assessment of GES | Q5d - Adequate understanding of GES | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Q5d - Adequacy for assessment of GES | Q5d - Adequate capacity | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Q5f - Description of programme for GES assessment | a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.3 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 is implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the distribution and abundance of species are in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions. The monitoring programme aims to collect data on abundance, distribution and trends of seabirds in the Netherlands part of the North Sea. The monitoring encompasses breeding birds as well birds outside of the breeding season.
The OSPAR common indicators “species-specific trends in relative abundance of non-breeding and breeding marine birds species” and “Breeding success/failure of marine birds” will form the core of this assessment.
c) The monitoring programme renders quantitative data that is complementary to the data from longer-running monitoring in order to be able to determine trends for breeding birds as well as for birds outside of the breeding season. The data are, therefore, suitable to determine distance to GED quantitatively or semi-quantitatively (depending on the, yet to be determined, assessment criteria for GES)
The monitoring programme primarily provides insight into the status of the indicators, thereby indicating the extent to which an environmental target is achieved (MSFD, Art. 10), in order to facilitate the ongoing assessment and periodic updating of the environmental targets (MSFD, Art. 5)
The distribution of birds and the breeding success show considerable year-to-year variation, which can be related to weather conditions and other natural causes. Therefore, monitoring is done on a yearly basis. Data on weather conditions, water levels and, for some species, food availability is additionally collected. Timing and method of the counts is coordinated with neighbouring countries in order to be able to distinguish shifts in distribution from changes in population size. Information from human activities and effects of these activities are available from the monitoring and assessment programmes that are linked to licensing. Discard from fisheries, mortality through oil spills, plastic particles in Fulmar stomachs are being monitored separately under the monitoring programmes for D3, D8 and D10.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.2 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
The fish surveys for the DCF are the basis for data on fish. See descriptor 3. Work on increasing the number of species for which assessments can be made by improving data processing methods e.g. for data poor stocks is done in ICES.
Diadromous species are caught in to low numbers in in the fishsurveys at sea to determine population size and trends. Therefore these species are monitored in fresh water on places where they concentrate.
c) In inland waters numerous measures are taken to improve the suitability of the habitat of migrating fish and to restore or improve the possibility to migrate. The monitoring programme for diadromous fish species allows assessment of the effect of these measures on the stocks. In addition there are specific programmes to determine the effectivity of these measures to improve migration under the WFD.
Sharks, rays and skates are caught in too low numbers in fish surveys. Therefore data from landings are used as well. Problems with identification and the fact that not all elasmobranches caught are landed hamper the use of these data. Work to find out how to improve the monitoring of elasmobranch fish is carried out both in ICES and in a national project.
See also question 5f under the programme 'D3 Biodiversity - commercial fish and shellfish'
d) Data on variations of yearclasses are available from monitoring of eggs and young fish in specific programmes aimed in particular at commercial fish species. Natural variations are estimated by analysing datasets over as many years as possible. The spatial scale of the surveys allows detection of changes in the distribution of species that are commonly encountered in these surveys that may be correlated to climatic change. Sharks, rays and skates are caught in too low numbers in fish surveys to detect these kind of changes.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.2 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
The fish surveys for the DCF are the basis for data on fish. See descriptor 3. Work on increasing the number of species for which assessments can be made by improving data processing methods e.g. for data poor stocks is done in ICES.
Diadromous species are caught in to low numbers in in the fishsurveys at sea to determine population size and trends. Therefore these species are monitored in fresh water on places where they concentrate.
c) In inland waters numerous measures are taken to improve the suitability of the habitat of migrating fish and to restore or improve the possibility to migrate. The monitoring programme for diadromous fish species allows assessment of the effect of these measures on the stocks. In addition there are specific programmes to determine the effectivity of these measures to improve migration under the WFD.
Sharks, rays and skates are caught in too low numbers in fish surveys. Therefore data from landings are used as well. Problems with identification and the fact that not all elasmobranches caught are landed hamper the use of these data. Work to find out how to improve the monitoring of elasmobranch fish is carried out both in ICES and in a national project.
See also question 5f under the programme 'D3 Biodiversity - commercial fish and shellfish'
d) Data on variations of yearclasses are available from monitoring of eggs and young fish in specific programmes aimed in particular at commercial fish species. Natural variations are estimated by analysing datasets over as many years as possible. The spatial scale of the surveys allows detection of changes in the distribution of species that are commonly encountered in these surveys that may be correlated to climatic change. Sharks, rays and skates are caught in too low numbers in fish surveys to detect these kind of changes.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.2 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
The fish surveys for the DCF are the basis for data on fish. See descriptor 3. Work on increasing the number of species for which assessments can be made by improving data processing methods e.g. for data poor stocks is done in ICES.
Diadromous species are caught in to low numbers in in the fishsurveys at sea to determine population size and trends. Therefore these species are monitored in fresh water on places where they concentrate.
c) In inland waters numerous measures are taken to improve the suitability of the habitat of migrating fish and to restore or improve the possibility to migrate. The monitoring programme for diadromous fish species allows assessment of the effect of these measures on the stocks. In addition there are specific programmes to determine the effectivity of these measures to improve migration under the WFD.
Sharks, rays and skates are caught in too low numbers in fish surveys. Therefore data from landings are used as well. Problems with identification and the fact that not all elasmobranches caught are landed hamper the use of these data. Work to find out how to improve the monitoring of elasmobranch fish is carried out both in ICES and in a national project.
See also question 5f under the programme 'D3 Biodiversity - commercial fish and shellfish'
d) Data on variations of yearclasses are available from monitoring of eggs and young fish in specific programmes aimed in particular at commercial fish species. Natural variations are estimated by analysing datasets over as many years as possible. The spatial scale of the surveys allows detection of changes in the distribution of species that are commonly encountered in these surveys that may be correlated to climatic change. Sharks, rays and skates are caught in too low numbers in fish surveys to detect these kind of changes.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.2 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
The fish surveys for the DCF are the basis for data on fish. See descriptor 3. Work on increasing the number of species for which assessments can be made by improving data processing methods e.g. for data poor stocks is done in ICES.
Diadromous species are caught in to low numbers in in the fishsurveys at sea to determine population size and trends. Therefore these species are monitored in fresh water on places where they concentrate.
c) In inland waters numerous measures are taken to improve the suitability of the habitat of migrating fish and to restore or improve the possibility to migrate. The monitoring programme for diadromous fish species allows assessment of the effect of these measures on the stocks. In addition there are specific programmes to determine the effectivity of these measures to improve migration under the WFD.
Sharks, rays and skates are caught in too low numbers in fish surveys. Therefore data from landings are used as well. Problems with identification and the fact that not all elasmobranches caught are landed hamper the use of these data. Work to find out how to improve the monitoring of elasmobranch fish is carried out both in ICES and in a national project.
See also question 5f under the programme 'D3 Biodiversity - commercial fish and shellfish'
d) Data on variations of yearclasses are available from monitoring of eggs and young fish in specific programmes aimed in particular at commercial fish species. Natural variations are estimated by analysing datasets over as many years as possible. The spatial scale of the surveys allows detection of changes in the distribution of species that are commonly encountered in these surveys that may be correlated to climatic change. Sharks, rays and skates are caught in too low numbers in fish surveys to detect these kind of changes.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.2 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
The fish surveys for the DCF are the basis for data on fish. See descriptor 3. Work on increasing the number of species for which assessments can be made by improving data processing methods e.g. for data poor stocks is done in ICES.
Diadromous species are caught in to low numbers in in the fishsurveys at sea to determine population size and trends. Therefore these species are monitored in fresh water on places where they concentrate.
c) In inland waters numerous measures are taken to improve the suitability of the habitat of migrating fish and to restore or improve the possibility to migrate. The monitoring programme for diadromous fish species allows assessment of the effect of these measures on the stocks. In addition there are specific programmes to determine the effectivity of these measures to improve migration under the WFD.
Sharks, rays and skates are caught in too low numbers in fish surveys. Therefore data from landings are used as well. Problems with identification and the fact that not all elasmobranches caught are landed hamper the use of these data. Work to find out how to improve the monitoring of elasmobranch fish is carried out both in ICES and in a national project.
See also question 5f under the programme 'D3 Biodiversity - commercial fish and shellfish'
d) Data on variations of yearclasses are available from monitoring of eggs and young fish in specific programmes aimed in particular at commercial fish species. Natural variations are estimated by analysing datasets over as many years as possible. The spatial scale of the surveys allows detection of changes in the distribution of species that are commonly encountered in these surveys that may be correlated to climatic change. Sharks, rays and skates are caught in too low numbers in fish surveys to detect these kind of changes.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.4 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 is implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the distribution and abundance of species are in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
Internationally coordinated measurements, such as the Small Cetacean Abundance Survey in the North Sea and Adjacent Waters (SCANS), are the most suitable method to gain insight into the distribution and population size of the harbour porpoise on the North Sea scale. Additionally marine mammals are also counted in the monitoring programme aimed at determining abundance and distribution of birds in the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Grey seal pup production and Harbour seal abundance give insight into the condition of seal populations.
The OSPAR common indicators ‘Abundance of grey and harbour seal at haul-out sites & within breeding colonies’, ‘Harbour seal and Grey seal pup production’, ‘Abundance at the relevant temporal scale of cetacean species regularly present’ and ‘Numbers of individuals within species being bycaught in relation to population’ will form the core of this assessment.
The frequency with which the international SCANS counts are being conducted is too low to determine trends in abundance or distribution. The Netherlands is actively trying to increase the frequency of SCANS, together with European partners, such as the United Kingdom. At the scale of the Netherlands part of the North sea trends can be determined for the most common species, however it is not clear whether these are being caused by a change in population size or by migration between the Netherlands part of the North Sea and other parts of the North Sea.
Seals are counted several times a year and the counts are coordinated with neighbouring countries in order to be able to distinguish shifts in distribution from changes in population size.
d) Monitoring of bycatch of marine mammals in pelagic fisheries and gillnet fisheries will give insight into possible impact at the population level. As part of the licensing for marine-based wind farms research is being done on the disturbance of these farms and avoidance by Harbour porpoises.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.4 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 is implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the distribution and abundance of species are in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
Internationally coordinated measurements, such as the Small Cetacean Abundance Survey in the North Sea and Adjacent Waters (SCANS), are the most suitable method to gain insight into the distribution and population size of the harbour porpoise on the North Sea scale. Additionally marine mammals are also counted in the monitoring programme aimed at determining abundance and distribution of birds in the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Grey seal pup production and Harbour seal abundance give insight into the condition of seal populations.
The OSPAR common indicators ‘Abundance of grey and harbour seal at haul-out sites & within breeding colonies’, ‘Harbour seal and Grey seal pup production’, ‘Abundance at the relevant temporal scale of cetacean species regularly present’ and ‘Numbers of individuals within species being bycaught in relation to population’ will form the core of this assessment.
The frequency with which the international SCANS counts are being conducted is too low to determine trends in abundance or distribution. The Netherlands is actively trying to increase the frequency of SCANS, together with European partners, such as the United Kingdom. At the scale of the Netherlands part of the North sea trends can be determined for the most common species, however it is not clear whether these are being caused by a change in population size or by migration between the Netherlands part of the North Sea and other parts of the North Sea.
Seals are counted several times a year and the counts are coordinated with neighbouring countries in order to be able to distinguish shifts in distribution from changes in population size.
d) Monitoring of bycatch of marine mammals in pelagic fisheries and gillnet fisheries will give insight into possible impact at the population level. As part of the licensing for marine-based wind farms research is being done on the disturbance of these farms and avoidance by Harbour porpoises.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.4 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 is implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the distribution and abundance of species are in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
Internationally coordinated measurements, such as the Small Cetacean Abundance Survey in the North Sea and Adjacent Waters (SCANS), are the most suitable method to gain insight into the distribution and population size of the harbour porpoise on the North Sea scale. Additionally marine mammals are also counted in the monitoring programme aimed at determining abundance and distribution of birds in the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Grey seal pup production and Harbour seal abundance give insight into the condition of seal populations.
The OSPAR common indicators ‘Abundance of grey and harbour seal at haul-out sites & within breeding colonies’, ‘Harbour seal and Grey seal pup production’, ‘Abundance at the relevant temporal scale of cetacean species regularly present’ and ‘Numbers of individuals within species being bycaught in relation to population’ will form the core of this assessment.
The frequency with which the international SCANS counts are being conducted is too low to determine trends in abundance or distribution. The Netherlands is actively trying to increase the frequency of SCANS, together with European partners, such as the United Kingdom. At the scale of the Netherlands part of the North sea trends can be determined for the most common species, however it is not clear whether these are being caused by a change in population size or by migration between the Netherlands part of the North Sea and other parts of the North Sea.
Seals are counted several times a year and the counts are coordinated with neighbouring countries in order to be able to distinguish shifts in distribution from changes in population size.
d) Monitoring of bycatch of marine mammals in pelagic fisheries and gillnet fisheries will give insight into possible impact at the population level. As part of the licensing for marine-based wind farms research is being done on the disturbance of these farms and avoidance by Harbour porpoises.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.1 (benthos) and 9.2.6 (Habitats) of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 is implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
Distribution of habitats: Natura2000 habitats as well as characteristic aquatic seabed habitats at EUNIS level3 can be distinguished according to differences in seabed composition and depth. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected, hence no direct monitoring is being done. Bathymetric information is available form hydrographical monitoring. Sediment composition is being registered in the benthos monitoring programmme. Activities that may change depth and seabed composition, such as sand extraction and suppletion dredging and spreading of dredged material, are registered. Biogenic Oyster reefs have disappeared and there will be no spntanuous recovery, hence there is no targeted monitoring. Relevant data are available from the Benthos monitoring programme in which also locations that were formerly Oster banks are monitored.
Habitat quality: the benthos monitoring targets biodiversity and species composition. The established monitoring with boxcores, that also link to the WFD assessment of benthos, is being continued and is being expanded with additional monitoring aimed at typical HD species as well as indicator-species that are sensitive to damage to the seabed.
c) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type, in order to be able to detect trends.
d) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type and with different monitoring equipment, in order to be able to detect changes that differ from natural variation. To distinguish the effects of terminating beam trawling, locations where beam-trawling is prohibited as well as reference locations where it is still allowed are being monitored. Distribution and population size of the invasive exotic species Ensis directus is being monitored in the shellfish monitoring programme.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.1 (benthos) and 9.2.6 (Habitats) of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 is implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
Distribution of habitats: Natura2000 habitats as well as characteristic aquatic seabed habitats at EUNIS level3 can be distinguished according to differences in seabed composition and depth. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected, hence no direct monitoring is being done. Bathymetric information is available form hydrographical monitoring. Sediment composition is being registered in the benthos monitoring programmme. Activities that may change depth and seabed composition, such as sand extraction and suppletion dredging and spreading of dredged material, are registered. Biogenic Oyster reefs have disappeared and there will be no spntanuous recovery, hence there is no targeted monitoring. Relevant data are available from the Benthos monitoring programme in which also locations that were formerly Oster banks are monitored.
Habitat quality: the benthos monitoring targets biodiversity and species composition. The established monitoring with boxcores, that also link to the WFD assessment of benthos, is being continued and is being expanded with additional monitoring aimed at typical HD species as well as indicator-species that are sensitive to damage to the seabed.
c) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type, in order to be able to detect trends.
d) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type and with different monitoring equipment, in order to be able to detect changes that differ from natural variation. To distinguish the effects of terminating beam trawling, locations where beam-trawling is prohibited as well as reference locations where it is still allowed are being monitored. Distribution and population size of the invasive exotic species Ensis directus is being monitored in the shellfish monitoring programme.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.1 (benthos) and 9.2.6 (Habitats) of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 is implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
Distribution of habitats: Natura2000 habitats as well as characteristic aquatic seabed habitats at EUNIS level3 can be distinguished according to differences in seabed composition and depth. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected, hence no direct monitoring is being done. Bathymetric information is available form hydrographical monitoring. Sediment composition is being registered in the benthos monitoring programmme. Activities that may change depth and seabed composition, such as sand extraction and suppletion dredging and spreading of dredged material, are registered. Biogenic Oyster reefs have disappeared and there will be no spntanuous recovery, hence there is no targeted monitoring. Relevant data are available from the Benthos monitoring programme in which also locations that were formerly Oster banks are monitored.
Habitat quality: the benthos monitoring targets biodiversity and species composition. The established monitoring with boxcores, that also link to the WFD assessment of benthos, is being continued and is being expanded with additional monitoring aimed at typical HD species as well as indicator-species that are sensitive to damage to the seabed.
c) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type, in order to be able to detect trends.
d) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type and with different monitoring equipment, in order to be able to detect changes that differ from natural variation. To distinguish the effects of terminating beam trawling, locations where beam-trawling is prohibited as well as reference locations where it is still allowed are being monitored. Distribution and population size of the invasive exotic species Ensis directus is being monitored in the shellfish monitoring programme.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.1 (benthos) and 9.2.6 (Habitats) of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 is implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
Distribution of habitats: Natura2000 habitats as well as characteristic aquatic seabed habitats at EUNIS level3 can be distinguished according to differences in seabed composition and depth. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected, hence no direct monitoring is being done. Bathymetric information is available form hydrographical monitoring. Sediment composition is being registered in the benthos monitoring programmme. Activities that may change depth and seabed composition, such as sand extraction and suppletion dredging and spreading of dredged material, are registered. Biogenic Oyster reefs have disappeared and there will be no spntanuous recovery, hence there is no targeted monitoring. Relevant data are available from the Benthos monitoring programme in which also locations that were formerly Oster banks are monitored.
Habitat quality: the benthos monitoring targets biodiversity and species composition. The established monitoring with boxcores, that also link to the WFD assessment of benthos, is being continued and is being expanded with additional monitoring aimed at typical HD species as well as indicator-species that are sensitive to damage to the seabed.
c) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type, in order to be able to detect trends.
d) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type and with different monitoring equipment, in order to be able to detect changes that differ from natural variation. To distinguish the effects of terminating beam trawling, locations where beam-trawling is prohibited as well as reference locations where it is still allowed are being monitored. Distribution and population size of the invasive exotic species Ensis directus is being monitored in the shellfish monitoring programme.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.1 (benthos) and 9.2.6 (Habitats) of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 is implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
Distribution of habitats: Natura2000 habitats as well as characteristic aquatic seabed habitats at EUNIS level3 can be distinguished according to differences in seabed composition and depth. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected, hence no direct monitoring is being done. Bathymetric information is available form hydrographical monitoring. Sediment composition is being registered in the benthos monitoring programmme. Activities that may change depth and seabed composition, such as sand extraction and suppletion dredging and spreading of dredged material, are registered. Biogenic Oyster reefs have disappeared and there will be no spntanuous recovery, hence there is no targeted monitoring. Relevant data are available from the Benthos monitoring programme in which also locations that were formerly Oster banks are monitored.
Habitat quality: the benthos monitoring targets biodiversity and species composition. The established monitoring with boxcores, that also link to the WFD assessment of benthos, is being continued and is being expanded with additional monitoring aimed at typical HD species as well as indicator-species that are sensitive to damage to the seabed.
c) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type, in order to be able to detect trends.
d) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type and with different monitoring equipment, in order to be able to detect changes that differ from natural variation. To distinguish the effects of terminating beam trawling, locations where beam-trawling is prohibited as well as reference locations where it is still allowed are being monitored. Distribution and population size of the invasive exotic species Ensis directus is being monitored in the shellfish monitoring programme.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.1 (benthos) and 9.2.6 (Habitats) of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 is implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
Distribution of habitats: Natura2000 habitats as well as characteristic aquatic seabed habitats at EUNIS level3 can be distinguished according to differences in seabed composition and depth. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected, hence no direct monitoring is being done. Bathymetric information is available form hydrographical monitoring. Sediment composition is being registered in the benthos monitoring programmme. Activities that may change depth and seabed composition, such as sand extraction and suppletion dredging and spreading of dredged material, are registered. Biogenic Oyster reefs have disappeared and there will be no spntanuous recovery, hence there is no targeted monitoring. Relevant data are available from the Benthos monitoring programme in which also locations that were formerly Oster banks are monitored.
Habitat quality: the benthos monitoring targets biodiversity and species composition. The established monitoring with boxcores, that also link to the WFD assessment of benthos, is being continued and is being expanded with additional monitoring aimed at typical HD species as well as indicator-species that are sensitive to damage to the seabed.
c) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type, in order to be able to detect trends.
d) A statistical analysis has been used to determine the number of monitoring sites per habitat type and with different monitoring equipment, in order to be able to detect changes that differ from natural variation. To distinguish the effects of terminating beam trawling, locations where beam-trawling is prohibited as well as reference locations where it is still allowed are being monitored. Distribution and population size of the invasive exotic species Ensis directus is being monitored in the shellfish monitoring programme.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
c,d) GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
The distribution of pelagic habitats at EUNIS level 3 is being determined by hydrographical properties such as depth, salinity, current velocity and the source of the water and the occurrence of stratification. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected. These parameters are monitored in the regular monitoring and in different sub-programmes. The most important human impact on the quality of water column habitats are the effects of eutrophication as an effect of the input of nutrients. In the Initial Assessment 2012 it has been concluded that there are no significant direct effects of human activities on zooplankton. The quality of pelagic habitats at EUNIS-3 level is being monitored by the indicators for eutrophication, fish and foodwebs. Whether additional zooplankton monitoring is useful depends on the further development of OSPAR indicators. At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme. An assessment of the effect on the quality of the water column is part of the regular licensing procedure for new human activities. Research into the possible effects of loud impulsive noise on fish larvae is part of the monitoring and evaluation programmes for marine wind farms.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
c,d) GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
The distribution of pelagic habitats at EUNIS level 3 is being determined by hydrographical properties such as depth, salinity, current velocity and the source of the water and the occurrence of stratification. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected. These parameters are monitored in the regular monitoring and in different sub-programmes. The most important human impact on the quality of water column habitats are the effects of eutrophication as an effect of the input of nutrients. In the Initial Assessment 2012 it has been concluded that there are no significant direct effects of human activities on zooplankton. The quality of pelagic habitats at EUNIS-3 level is being monitored by the indicators for eutrophication, fish and foodwebs. Whether additional zooplankton monitoring is useful depends on the further development of OSPAR indicators. At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme. An assessment of the effect on the quality of the water column is part of the regular licensing procedure for new human activities. Research into the possible effects of loud impulsive noise on fish larvae is part of the monitoring and evaluation programmes for marine wind farms.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
c,d) GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
The distribution of pelagic habitats at EUNIS level 3 is being determined by hydrographical properties such as depth, salinity, current velocity and the source of the water and the occurrence of stratification. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected. These parameters are monitored in the regular monitoring and in different sub-programmes. The most important human impact on the quality of water column habitats are the effects of eutrophication as an effect of the input of nutrients. In the Initial Assessment 2012 it has been concluded that there are no significant direct effects of human activities on zooplankton. The quality of pelagic habitats at EUNIS-3 level is being monitored by the indicators for eutrophication, fish and foodwebs. Whether additional zooplankton monitoring is useful depends on the further development of OSPAR indicators. At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme. An assessment of the effect on the quality of the water column is part of the regular licensing procedure for new human activities. Research into the possible effects of loud impulsive noise on fish larvae is part of the monitoring and evaluation programmes for marine wind farms.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
c,d) GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
The distribution of pelagic habitats at EUNIS level 3 is being determined by hydrographical properties such as depth, salinity, current velocity and the source of the water and the occurrence of stratification. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected. These parameters are monitored in the regular monitoring and in different sub-programmes. The most important human impact on the quality of water column habitats are the effects of eutrophication as an effect of the input of nutrients. In the Initial Assessment 2012 it has been concluded that there are no significant direct effects of human activities on zooplankton. The quality of pelagic habitats at EUNIS-3 level is being monitored by the indicators for eutrophication, fish and foodwebs. Whether additional zooplankton monitoring is useful depends on the further development of OSPAR indicators. At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme. An assessment of the effect on the quality of the water column is part of the regular licensing procedure for new human activities. Research into the possible effects of loud impulsive noise on fish larvae is part of the monitoring and evaluation programmes for marine wind farms.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
c,d) GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
The distribution of pelagic habitats at EUNIS level 3 is being determined by hydrographical properties such as depth, salinity, current velocity and the source of the water and the occurrence of stratification. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected. These parameters are monitored in the regular monitoring and in different sub-programmes. The most important human impact on the quality of water column habitats are the effects of eutrophication as an effect of the input of nutrients. In the Initial Assessment 2012 it has been concluded that there are no significant direct effects of human activities on zooplankton. The quality of pelagic habitats at EUNIS-3 level is being monitored by the indicators for eutrophication, fish and foodwebs. Whether additional zooplankton monitoring is useful depends on the further development of OSPAR indicators. At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme. An assessment of the effect on the quality of the water column is part of the regular licensing procedure for new human activities. Research into the possible effects of loud impulsive noise on fish larvae is part of the monitoring and evaluation programmes for marine wind farms.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
c,d) GES of the Dutch North Sea ecosystem in 2020 implies that biological diversity is maintained and that the quality and distribution of habitats is in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions.
The distribution of pelagic habitats at EUNIS level 3 is being determined by hydrographical properties such as depth, salinity, current velocity and the source of the water and the occurrence of stratification. No changes in regard to these parameters are expected. These parameters are monitored in the regular monitoring and in different sub-programmes. The most important human impact on the quality of water column habitats are the effects of eutrophication as an effect of the input of nutrients. In the Initial Assessment 2012 it has been concluded that there are no significant direct effects of human activities on zooplankton. The quality of pelagic habitats at EUNIS-3 level is being monitored by the indicators for eutrophication, fish and foodwebs. Whether additional zooplankton monitoring is useful depends on the further development of OSPAR indicators. At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme. An assessment of the effect on the quality of the water column is part of the regular licensing procedure for new human activities. Research into the possible effects of loud impulsive noise on fish larvae is part of the monitoring and evaluation programmes for marine wind farms.
e) The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b,c) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.2 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
Because different fishing gear are used to catch different species a suit of surveys is needed to provide the required data. The sampling strategy and the planning of the surveys is coordinated internationally. Work on increasing the number of species for which assessments can be made by improving data processing methods e.g. for data poor stocks is done in ICES. The national survey for shellfish is reported under benthic habitats.
d) Data on variations of yearclasses are available from monitoring of eggs and young fish in specific programmes. Natural variations are estimated by analysing datasets over as many years as possible. The spatial scale of the surveys allows detection of changes in the distribution of species that may be correlated to climatic change.
e) Any necessary adaptations of the internationally coordinated monitoring programmes should be arranged at that level. National programmes can be adapted yearly. The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b,c) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.2 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
Because different fishing gear are used to catch different species a suit of surveys is needed to provide the required data. The sampling strategy and the planning of the surveys is coordinated internationally. Work on increasing the number of species for which assessments can be made by improving data processing methods e.g. for data poor stocks is done in ICES. The national survey for shellfish is reported under benthic habitats.
d) Data on variations of yearclasses are available from monitoring of eggs and young fish in specific programmes. Natural variations are estimated by analysing datasets over as many years as possible. The spatial scale of the surveys allows detection of changes in the distribution of species that may be correlated to climatic change.
e) Any necessary adaptations of the internationally coordinated monitoring programmes should be arranged at that level. National programmes can be adapted yearly. The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b,c) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.2 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
Because different fishing gear are used to catch different species a suit of surveys is needed to provide the required data. The sampling strategy and the planning of the surveys is coordinated internationally. Work on increasing the number of species for which assessments can be made by improving data processing methods e.g. for data poor stocks is done in ICES. The national survey for shellfish is reported under benthic habitats.
d) Data on variations of yearclasses are available from monitoring of eggs and young fish in specific programmes. Natural variations are estimated by analysing datasets over as many years as possible. The spatial scale of the surveys allows detection of changes in the distribution of species that may be correlated to climatic change.
e) Any necessary adaptations of the internationally coordinated monitoring programmes should be arranged at that level. National programmes can be adapted yearly. The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b,c) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.2 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
Because different fishing gear are used to catch different species a suit of surveys is needed to provide the required data. The sampling strategy and the planning of the surveys is coordinated internationally. Work on increasing the number of species for which assessments can be made by improving data processing methods e.g. for data poor stocks is done in ICES. The national survey for shellfish is reported under benthic habitats.
d) Data on variations of yearclasses are available from monitoring of eggs and young fish in specific programmes. Natural variations are estimated by analysing datasets over as many years as possible. The spatial scale of the surveys allows detection of changes in the distribution of species that may be correlated to climatic change.
e) Any necessary adaptations of the internationally coordinated monitoring programmes should be arranged at that level. National programmes can be adapted yearly. The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
a,b,c) In the art 9 and 10 report in 2012 the Netherlands has opted for a general description of GES under art 9 and a further elaboration of the targets and associated indicators under art 10. These targets and indicators cover all criteria from the Commission Decision as far as they are considered relevant for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Therefore, they also cover the information requirement for the assessment of the descriptors and targets.
See paragraph 9.2.2 of the Marine Strategy II for a detailed description of how the targets and the information required to describe GES, via the elaboration of an information strategy, functional requirements and a monitoring strategy, are translated into the monitoring plan.
Because different fishing gear are used to catch different species a suit of surveys is needed to provide the required data. The sampling strategy and the planning of the surveys is coordinated internationally. Work on increasing the number of species for which assessments can be made by improving data processing methods e.g. for data poor stocks is done in ICES. The national survey for shellfish is reported under benthic habitats.
d) Data on variations of yearclasses are available from monitoring of eggs and young fish in specific programmes. Natural variations are estimated by analysing datasets over as many years as possible. The spatial scale of the surveys allows detection of changes in the distribution of species that may be correlated to climatic change.
e) Any necessary adaptations of the internationally coordinated monitoring programmes should be arranged at that level. National programmes can be adapted yearly. The MSFD Monitoring Plan will be updated annually in a digitally amended supplement based on the latest developments and insights in the area of indicator definitions and measurement methods, for example as a result from (sub) regional coordination within OSPAR. |
|
| Q5g - Gap-filling date for GES assessment | By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
|
| Q5h - Plans to implement monitoring for GES assessment | The OSPAR commission has established two common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016: species-specific trends in relative abundance of non-breeding and breeding marine bird species and the breeding success/failure of marine birds. Both indicators will contribute to the OSPAR intermediate assessment in 2017. The advantage of such indicators is that they allow a comprehensive assessment of the status of the various bird species on a North Sea scale. It is expected that this information requirement will not lead to supplementary monitoring. However, a separate report with seabird information will be required for OSPAR. Depending on when this process will yield results, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted in 2015 or 2016 for further elaboration of indicator (7) ‘distribution, size, health and future prospects of populations of vulnerable (endemic) bird species and the quality of the habitat’. The Netherlands together with the United Kingdom, will investigate in the coming years (2014 and 2015) whether data on breeding birds from the UK can be linked to the Dutch data on population size and distribution from the MSFD monitoring programme.
The Netherlands aims for one cohesive monitoring approach for the entire North Sea area, with due observance of the requirements under the Birds Directive. Expectations are high for the development of high-definition camera technologies in the coming years. HD cameras are expected to improve effectiveness and efficiency in counting birds and marine mammals at sea. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established two common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016: population abundance/biomass of a suite of selected species and the proportion of large fish (existing OSPAR EcoQo). Moreover, average maximum length of demersal fish and elasmobranch species (fish without a swim bladder such as sharks) has received the status of prioritised candidate indicator. The final indicator is a measure of the demographic composition of the entire fish stock. The maximum length that a species can potentially reach is a measure of the demographic characteristics of the species. The indicator measures whether in the entire fish community the ratio of small fish to fish that can grow large changes. Part of the preparatory work for this is being done in the context of ICES. The data required is already being collected in accordance with the multiannual programme under the DCF (COM 2010/93/EU). Depending on when OSPAR will decide, this indicator can be established as a common indicator in one to two years and will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Additionally the Netherlands will take the initiative in OSPAR to investigate how the value of indicator (4) relates to achieving MSY. This knowledge will be used in the Intermediate Assessment. For the entire North Sea it is being investigated whether the lack of data on rare species can be improved by bringing together the results of research and of the regular monitoring (JMP NS/CS).If necessary and depending on when results can be expected, the MSFD Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicators (4) size distribution of fish stocks and (5) population size of vulnerable and long-lived species in 2015. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established two common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016: population abundance/biomass of a suite of selected species and the proportion of large fish (existing OSPAR EcoQo). Moreover, average maximum length of demersal fish and elasmobranch species (fish without a swim bladder such as sharks) has received the status of prioritised candidate indicator. The final indicator is a measure of the demographic composition of the entire fish stock. The maximum length that a species can potentially reach is a measure of the demographic characteristics of the species. The indicator measures whether in the entire fish community the ratio of small fish to fish that can grow large changes. Part of the preparatory work for this is being done in the context of ICES. The data required is already being collected in accordance with the multiannual programme under the DCF (COM 2010/93/EU). Depending on when OSPAR will decide, this indicator can be established as a common indicator in one to two years and will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Additionally the Netherlands will take the initiative in OSPAR to investigate how the value of indicator (4) relates to achieving MSY. This knowledge will be used in the Intermediate Assessment. For the entire North Sea it is being investigated whether the lack of data on rare species can be improved by bringing together the results of research and of the regular monitoring (JMP NS/CS).If necessary and depending on when results can be expected, the MSFD Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicators (4) size distribution of fish stocks and (5) population size of vulnerable and long-lived species in 2015. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established two common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016: population abundance/biomass of a suite of selected species and the proportion of large fish (existing OSPAR EcoQo). Moreover, average maximum length of demersal fish and elasmobranch species (fish without a swim bladder such as sharks) has received the status of prioritised candidate indicator. The final indicator is a measure of the demographic composition of the entire fish stock. The maximum length that a species can potentially reach is a measure of the demographic characteristics of the species. The indicator measures whether in the entire fish community the ratio of small fish to fish that can grow large changes. Part of the preparatory work for this is being done in the context of ICES. The data required is already being collected in accordance with the multiannual programme under the DCF (COM 2010/93/EU). Depending on when OSPAR will decide, this indicator can be established as a common indicator in one to two years and will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Additionally the Netherlands will take the initiative in OSPAR to investigate how the value of indicator (4) relates to achieving MSY. This knowledge will be used in the Intermediate Assessment. For the entire North Sea it is being investigated whether the lack of data on rare species can be improved by bringing together the results of research and of the regular monitoring (JMP NS/CS).If necessary and depending on when results can be expected, the MSFD Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicators (4) size distribution of fish stocks and (5) population size of vulnerable and long-lived species in 2015. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established two common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016: population abundance/biomass of a suite of selected species and the proportion of large fish (existing OSPAR EcoQo). Moreover, average maximum length of demersal fish and elasmobranch species (fish without a swim bladder such as sharks) has received the status of prioritised candidate indicator. The final indicator is a measure of the demographic composition of the entire fish stock. The maximum length that a species can potentially reach is a measure of the demographic characteristics of the species. The indicator measures whether in the entire fish community the ratio of small fish to fish that can grow large changes. Part of the preparatory work for this is being done in the context of ICES. The data required is already being collected in accordance with the multiannual programme under the DCF (COM 2010/93/EU). Depending on when OSPAR will decide, this indicator can be established as a common indicator in one to two years and will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Additionally the Netherlands will take the initiative in OSPAR to investigate how the value of indicator (4) relates to achieving MSY. This knowledge will be used in the Intermediate Assessment. For the entire North Sea it is being investigated whether the lack of data on rare species can be improved by bringing together the results of research and of the regular monitoring (JMP NS/CS).If necessary and depending on when results can be expected, the MSFD Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicators (4) size distribution of fish stocks and (5) population size of vulnerable and long-lived species in 2015. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established two common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016: population abundance/biomass of a suite of selected species and the proportion of large fish (existing OSPAR EcoQo). Moreover, average maximum length of demersal fish and elasmobranch species (fish without a swim bladder such as sharks) has received the status of prioritised candidate indicator. The final indicator is a measure of the demographic composition of the entire fish stock. The maximum length that a species can potentially reach is a measure of the demographic characteristics of the species. The indicator measures whether in the entire fish community the ratio of small fish to fish that can grow large changes. Part of the preparatory work for this is being done in the context of ICES. The data required is already being collected in accordance with the multiannual programme under the DCF (COM 2010/93/EU). Depending on when OSPAR will decide, this indicator can be established as a common indicator in one to two years and will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Additionally the Netherlands will take the initiative in OSPAR to investigate how the value of indicator (4) relates to achieving MSY. This knowledge will be used in the Intermediate Assessment. For the entire North Sea it is being investigated whether the lack of data on rare species can be improved by bringing together the results of research and of the regular monitoring (JMP NS/CS).If necessary and depending on when results can be expected, the MSFD Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicators (4) size distribution of fish stocks and (5) population size of vulnerable and long-lived species in 2015. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established five common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016:
1. Abundance of grey and harbour seal at haul-out sites & within breeding colonies.
2. Harbour seal and Grey seal pup production (existing EcoQO).
3. Abundance at the relevant temporal scale of cetacean species regularly present.
4. Numbers of individuals within species being bycaught in relation to population.
The first two of these indicators will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017, the third will probably contribute, the fourth will most like not contribute.
Depending on when this process will yield results, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted in 2015 or 2016 for the further elaboration of indicator (8) ‘Distribution, size, health and future prospects of populations and the quality of the habitat. As stated above, the Netherlands would prefer one cohesive monitoring approach for the entire North Sea area, with due observance of the requirements under the Habitats Directive.
Expectations are high for the development of high-definition camera technologies in the coming years. HD cameras are expected to improve effectiveness and efficiency in counting birds and marine mammals at sea. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established five common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016:
1. Abundance of grey and harbour seal at haul-out sites & within breeding colonies.
2. Harbour seal and Grey seal pup production (existing EcoQO).
3. Abundance at the relevant temporal scale of cetacean species regularly present.
4. Numbers of individuals within species being bycaught in relation to population.
The first two of these indicators will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017, the third will probably contribute, the fourth will most like not contribute.
Depending on when this process will yield results, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted in 2015 or 2016 for the further elaboration of indicator (8) ‘Distribution, size, health and future prospects of populations and the quality of the habitat. As stated above, the Netherlands would prefer one cohesive monitoring approach for the entire North Sea area, with due observance of the requirements under the Habitats Directive.
Expectations are high for the development of high-definition camera technologies in the coming years. HD cameras are expected to improve effectiveness and efficiency in counting birds and marine mammals at sea. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established five common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016:
1. Abundance of grey and harbour seal at haul-out sites & within breeding colonies.
2. Harbour seal and Grey seal pup production (existing EcoQO).
3. Abundance at the relevant temporal scale of cetacean species regularly present.
4. Numbers of individuals within species being bycaught in relation to population.
The first two of these indicators will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017, the third will probably contribute, the fourth will most like not contribute.
Depending on when this process will yield results, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted in 2015 or 2016 for the further elaboration of indicator (8) ‘Distribution, size, health and future prospects of populations and the quality of the habitat. As stated above, the Netherlands would prefer one cohesive monitoring approach for the entire North Sea area, with due observance of the requirements under the Habitats Directive.
Expectations are high for the development of high-definition camera technologies in the coming years. HD cameras are expected to improve effectiveness and efficiency in counting birds and marine mammals at sea. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission designated two prioritised candidate indicators, which can be established as a common indicator in one to two years: decrease in habitat area and extent of physical damage. The indicator on the extent of physical damage is being tested in 2014 and can, depending on the results and a decision in OSPAR on whether to establish this as a common indicator, contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this.
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established the multimetric indices for benthic habitats as a common indicator for habitats throughout the Northwest Atlantic region. This indicator is due to be adopted by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016. This indicator makes it possible to compare the conditions of similar benthic communities at a regional level, and links up with the methods used under the WFD to assess benthos. In addition, typical composition of species has received the status of ‘prioritised candidate indicator’, which means that it may be adopted as a common indicator in one to two years. This indicator comprises not only ‘typical species’ in accordance with the Habitats Directive, but also a selection of species that are sensitive to sea-floor disturbance.
If necessary and depending on when this OSPAR development will yield results, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicator (15) indices for the composition of benthic communities in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive must be observed.
Part of the benthos is monitored using an innovative sampling method developed by Dutch research institutes. The use of this ‘deep dragging dredge’ yields significant efficiency gains, as the sampling can be done faster and is more reliable than the current method.
Bringing together and, where possible, coordinating monitoring programmes in the North Sea is the focus of a project that is co-financed by the European union (JMP NS/CS). This project delivers proposals for a coherent and efficient monitoring of benthos. Based in knowledge on geographical distribution of benthos in relation to physical properties of the seabed the monitoring can be organised more effectively. In OSPAR this knowledge is shared and underlined (in the OSPAR science agenda) for the Intermediate Assessment in 2017. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission designated two prioritised candidate indicators, which can be established as a common indicator in one to two years: decrease in habitat area and extent of physical damage. The indicator on the extent of physical damage is being tested in 2014 and can, depending on the results and a decision in OSPAR on whether to establish this as a common indicator, contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this.
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established the multimetric indices for benthic habitats as a common indicator for habitats throughout the Northwest Atlantic region. This indicator is due to be adopted by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016. This indicator makes it possible to compare the conditions of similar benthic communities at a regional level, and links up with the methods used under the WFD to assess benthos. In addition, typical composition of species has received the status of ‘prioritised candidate indicator’, which means that it may be adopted as a common indicator in one to two years. This indicator comprises not only ‘typical species’ in accordance with the Habitats Directive, but also a selection of species that are sensitive to sea-floor disturbance.
If necessary and depending on when this OSPAR development will yield results, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicator (15) indices for the composition of benthic communities in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive must be observed.
Part of the benthos is monitored using an innovative sampling method developed by Dutch research institutes. The use of this ‘deep dragging dredge’ yields significant efficiency gains, as the sampling can be done faster and is more reliable than the current method.
Bringing together and, where possible, coordinating monitoring programmes in the North Sea is the focus of a project that is co-financed by the European union (JMP NS/CS). This project delivers proposals for a coherent and efficient monitoring of benthos. Based in knowledge on geographical distribution of benthos in relation to physical properties of the seabed the monitoring can be organised more effectively. In OSPAR this knowledge is shared and underlined (in the OSPAR science agenda) for the Intermediate Assessment in 2017. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission designated two prioritised candidate indicators, which can be established as a common indicator in one to two years: decrease in habitat area and extent of physical damage. The indicator on the extent of physical damage is being tested in 2014 and can, depending on the results and a decision in OSPAR on whether to establish this as a common indicator, contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this.
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established the multimetric indices for benthic habitats as a common indicator for habitats throughout the Northwest Atlantic region. This indicator is due to be adopted by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016. This indicator makes it possible to compare the conditions of similar benthic communities at a regional level, and links up with the methods used under the WFD to assess benthos. In addition, typical composition of species has received the status of ‘prioritised candidate indicator’, which means that it may be adopted as a common indicator in one to two years. This indicator comprises not only ‘typical species’ in accordance with the Habitats Directive, but also a selection of species that are sensitive to sea-floor disturbance.
If necessary and depending on when this OSPAR development will yield results, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicator (15) indices for the composition of benthic communities in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive must be observed.
Part of the benthos is monitored using an innovative sampling method developed by Dutch research institutes. The use of this ‘deep dragging dredge’ yields significant efficiency gains, as the sampling can be done faster and is more reliable than the current method.
Bringing together and, where possible, coordinating monitoring programmes in the North Sea is the focus of a project that is co-financed by the European union (JMP NS/CS). This project delivers proposals for a coherent and efficient monitoring of benthos. Based in knowledge on geographical distribution of benthos in relation to physical properties of the seabed the monitoring can be organised more effectively. In OSPAR this knowledge is shared and underlined (in the OSPAR science agenda) for the Intermediate Assessment in 2017. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission designated two prioritised candidate indicators, which can be established as a common indicator in one to two years: decrease in habitat area and extent of physical damage. The indicator on the extent of physical damage is being tested in 2014 and can, depending on the results and a decision in OSPAR on whether to establish this as a common indicator, contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this.
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established the multimetric indices for benthic habitats as a common indicator for habitats throughout the Northwest Atlantic region. This indicator is due to be adopted by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016. This indicator makes it possible to compare the conditions of similar benthic communities at a regional level, and links up with the methods used under the WFD to assess benthos. In addition, typical composition of species has received the status of ‘prioritised candidate indicator’, which means that it may be adopted as a common indicator in one to two years. This indicator comprises not only ‘typical species’ in accordance with the Habitats Directive, but also a selection of species that are sensitive to sea-floor disturbance.
If necessary and depending on when this OSPAR development will yield results, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicator (15) indices for the composition of benthic communities in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive must be observed.
Part of the benthos is monitored using an innovative sampling method developed by Dutch research institutes. The use of this ‘deep dragging dredge’ yields significant efficiency gains, as the sampling can be done faster and is more reliable than the current method.
Bringing together and, where possible, coordinating monitoring programmes in the North Sea is the focus of a project that is co-financed by the European union (JMP NS/CS). This project delivers proposals for a coherent and efficient monitoring of benthos. Based in knowledge on geographical distribution of benthos in relation to physical properties of the seabed the monitoring can be organised more effectively. In OSPAR this knowledge is shared and underlined (in the OSPAR science agenda) for the Intermediate Assessment in 2017. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission designated two prioritised candidate indicators, which can be established as a common indicator in one to two years: decrease in habitat area and extent of physical damage. The indicator on the extent of physical damage is being tested in 2014 and can, depending on the results and a decision in OSPAR on whether to establish this as a common indicator, contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this.
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established the multimetric indices for benthic habitats as a common indicator for habitats throughout the Northwest Atlantic region. This indicator is due to be adopted by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016. This indicator makes it possible to compare the conditions of similar benthic communities at a regional level, and links up with the methods used under the WFD to assess benthos. In addition, typical composition of species has received the status of ‘prioritised candidate indicator’, which means that it may be adopted as a common indicator in one to two years. This indicator comprises not only ‘typical species’ in accordance with the Habitats Directive, but also a selection of species that are sensitive to sea-floor disturbance.
If necessary and depending on when this OSPAR development will yield results, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicator (15) indices for the composition of benthic communities in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive must be observed.
Part of the benthos is monitored using an innovative sampling method developed by Dutch research institutes. The use of this ‘deep dragging dredge’ yields significant efficiency gains, as the sampling can be done faster and is more reliable than the current method.
Bringing together and, where possible, coordinating monitoring programmes in the North Sea is the focus of a project that is co-financed by the European union (JMP NS/CS). This project delivers proposals for a coherent and efficient monitoring of benthos. Based in knowledge on geographical distribution of benthos in relation to physical properties of the seabed the monitoring can be organised more effectively. In OSPAR this knowledge is shared and underlined (in the OSPAR science agenda) for the Intermediate Assessment in 2017. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission designated two prioritised candidate indicators, which can be established as a common indicator in one to two years: decrease in habitat area and extent of physical damage. The indicator on the extent of physical damage is being tested in 2014 and can, depending on the results and a decision in OSPAR on whether to establish this as a common indicator, contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this.
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established the multimetric indices for benthic habitats as a common indicator for habitats throughout the Northwest Atlantic region. This indicator is due to be adopted by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016. This indicator makes it possible to compare the conditions of similar benthic communities at a regional level, and links up with the methods used under the WFD to assess benthos. In addition, typical composition of species has received the status of ‘prioritised candidate indicator’, which means that it may be adopted as a common indicator in one to two years. This indicator comprises not only ‘typical species’ in accordance with the Habitats Directive, but also a selection of species that are sensitive to sea-floor disturbance.
If necessary and depending on when this OSPAR development will yield results, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicator (15) indices for the composition of benthic communities in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive must be observed.
Part of the benthos is monitored using an innovative sampling method developed by Dutch research institutes. The use of this ‘deep dragging dredge’ yields significant efficiency gains, as the sampling can be done faster and is more reliable than the current method.
Bringing together and, where possible, coordinating monitoring programmes in the North Sea is the focus of a project that is co-financed by the European union (JMP NS/CS). This project delivers proposals for a coherent and efficient monitoring of benthos. Based in knowledge on geographical distribution of benthos in relation to physical properties of the seabed the monitoring can be organised more effectively. In OSPAR this knowledge is shared and underlined (in the OSPAR science agenda) for the Intermediate Assessment in 2017. |
OSPAR has established two prioritised candidate indicators for pelagic habitats: ' Changes of plankton functional types (life form)' and 'Plankton biomass and/or abundance'. If these indicators will be established as common indicators they will possibly contribute to the OSPAR intermediate assessment in 2017. For the indicators for pelagic habitats the Netherlands can in any case use the phytoplankton data from the eutrophication monitoring programme (chlorophyll concentrations & changes in species composition/ indicator type Phaeocystis). At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme.
Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this. |
OSPAR has established two prioritised candidate indicators for pelagic habitats: ' Changes of plankton functional types (life form)' and 'Plankton biomass and/or abundance'. If these indicators will be established as common indicators they will possibly contribute to the OSPAR intermediate assessment in 2017. For the indicators for pelagic habitats the Netherlands can in any case use the phytoplankton data from the eutrophication monitoring programme (chlorophyll concentrations & changes in species composition/ indicator type Phaeocystis). At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme.
Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this. |
OSPAR has established two prioritised candidate indicators for pelagic habitats: ' Changes of plankton functional types (life form)' and 'Plankton biomass and/or abundance'. If these indicators will be established as common indicators they will possibly contribute to the OSPAR intermediate assessment in 2017. For the indicators for pelagic habitats the Netherlands can in any case use the phytoplankton data from the eutrophication monitoring programme (chlorophyll concentrations & changes in species composition/ indicator type Phaeocystis). At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme.
Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this. |
OSPAR has established two prioritised candidate indicators for pelagic habitats: ' Changes of plankton functional types (life form)' and 'Plankton biomass and/or abundance'. If these indicators will be established as common indicators they will possibly contribute to the OSPAR intermediate assessment in 2017. For the indicators for pelagic habitats the Netherlands can in any case use the phytoplankton data from the eutrophication monitoring programme (chlorophyll concentrations & changes in species composition/ indicator type Phaeocystis). At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme.
Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this. |
OSPAR has established two prioritised candidate indicators for pelagic habitats: ' Changes of plankton functional types (life form)' and 'Plankton biomass and/or abundance'. If these indicators will be established as common indicators they will possibly contribute to the OSPAR intermediate assessment in 2017. For the indicators for pelagic habitats the Netherlands can in any case use the phytoplankton data from the eutrophication monitoring programme (chlorophyll concentrations & changes in species composition/ indicator type Phaeocystis). At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme.
Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this. |
OSPAR has established two prioritised candidate indicators for pelagic habitats: ' Changes of plankton functional types (life form)' and 'Plankton biomass and/or abundance'. If these indicators will be established as common indicators they will possibly contribute to the OSPAR intermediate assessment in 2017. For the indicators for pelagic habitats the Netherlands can in any case use the phytoplankton data from the eutrophication monitoring programme (chlorophyll concentrations & changes in species composition/ indicator type Phaeocystis). At this moment it is unclear whether the proposed indexes for zooplankton are meaningful for the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Depending on further development the Netherlands will consider to take part in the Continuous Plankton Recorder programme.
Depending on whether and, if so, when this process yields any results that the Netherlands can use, the Monitoring Plan will be adjusted as necessary for indicators (13) ‘Distribution and size of common habitats’ and (14) ‘Seabed area that is not disturbed’ in 2015 or 2016. The requirements under the Habitats Directive will have to be observed for this. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established two common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016: population abundance/biomass of a suite of selected species and the proportion of large fish (existing OSPAR EcoQo). Moreover, average maximum length of demersal fish and elasmobranch species (fish without a swim bladder such as sharks) has received the status of prioritised candidate indicator. The final indicator is a measure of the demographic composition of the entire fish stock. The maximum length that a species can potentially reach is a measure of the demographic characteristics of the species. The indicator measures whether in the entire fish community the ratio of small fish to fish that can grow large changes. Part of the preparatory work for this is being done in the context of ICES. The data required is already being collected in accordance with the multiannual programme under the DCF (COM 2010/93/EU). Depending on when OSPAR will decide, this indicator can be established as a common indicator in one to two years and will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Additionally the Netherlands will take the initiative in OSPAR to investigate how the value of indicator (4) relates to achieving MSY. This knowledge will be used in the Intermediate Assessment. For the entire North Sea it is being investigated whether the lack of data on rare species can be improved by bringing together the results of research and of the regular monitoring (JMP NS/CS).If necessary and depending on when results can be expected, the MSFD Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicators (4) size distribution of fish stocks and (5) population size of vulnerable and long-lived species in 2015. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established two common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016: population abundance/biomass of a suite of selected species and the proportion of large fish (existing OSPAR EcoQo). Moreover, average maximum length of demersal fish and elasmobranch species (fish without a swim bladder such as sharks) has received the status of prioritised candidate indicator. The final indicator is a measure of the demographic composition of the entire fish stock. The maximum length that a species can potentially reach is a measure of the demographic characteristics of the species. The indicator measures whether in the entire fish community the ratio of small fish to fish that can grow large changes. Part of the preparatory work for this is being done in the context of ICES. The data required is already being collected in accordance with the multiannual programme under the DCF (COM 2010/93/EU). Depending on when OSPAR will decide, this indicator can be established as a common indicator in one to two years and will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Additionally the Netherlands will take the initiative in OSPAR to investigate how the value of indicator (4) relates to achieving MSY. This knowledge will be used in the Intermediate Assessment. For the entire North Sea it is being investigated whether the lack of data on rare species can be improved by bringing together the results of research and of the regular monitoring (JMP NS/CS).If necessary and depending on when results can be expected, the MSFD Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicators (4) size distribution of fish stocks and (5) population size of vulnerable and long-lived species in 2015. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established two common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016: population abundance/biomass of a suite of selected species and the proportion of large fish (existing OSPAR EcoQo). Moreover, average maximum length of demersal fish and elasmobranch species (fish without a swim bladder such as sharks) has received the status of prioritised candidate indicator. The final indicator is a measure of the demographic composition of the entire fish stock. The maximum length that a species can potentially reach is a measure of the demographic characteristics of the species. The indicator measures whether in the entire fish community the ratio of small fish to fish that can grow large changes. Part of the preparatory work for this is being done in the context of ICES. The data required is already being collected in accordance with the multiannual programme under the DCF (COM 2010/93/EU). Depending on when OSPAR will decide, this indicator can be established as a common indicator in one to two years and will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Additionally the Netherlands will take the initiative in OSPAR to investigate how the value of indicator (4) relates to achieving MSY. This knowledge will be used in the Intermediate Assessment. For the entire North Sea it is being investigated whether the lack of data on rare species can be improved by bringing together the results of research and of the regular monitoring (JMP NS/CS).If necessary and depending on when results can be expected, the MSFD Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicators (4) size distribution of fish stocks and (5) population size of vulnerable and long-lived species in 2015. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established two common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016: population abundance/biomass of a suite of selected species and the proportion of large fish (existing OSPAR EcoQo). Moreover, average maximum length of demersal fish and elasmobranch species (fish without a swim bladder such as sharks) has received the status of prioritised candidate indicator. The final indicator is a measure of the demographic composition of the entire fish stock. The maximum length that a species can potentially reach is a measure of the demographic characteristics of the species. The indicator measures whether in the entire fish community the ratio of small fish to fish that can grow large changes. Part of the preparatory work for this is being done in the context of ICES. The data required is already being collected in accordance with the multiannual programme under the DCF (COM 2010/93/EU). Depending on when OSPAR will decide, this indicator can be established as a common indicator in one to two years and will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Additionally the Netherlands will take the initiative in OSPAR to investigate how the value of indicator (4) relates to achieving MSY. This knowledge will be used in the Intermediate Assessment. For the entire North Sea it is being investigated whether the lack of data on rare species can be improved by bringing together the results of research and of the regular monitoring (JMP NS/CS).If necessary and depending on when results can be expected, the MSFD Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicators (4) size distribution of fish stocks and (5) population size of vulnerable and long-lived species in 2015. |
In 2013, the OSPAR commission established two common indicators for the North Sea region, which will be put into practice by the North Sea countries jointly between 2014 and 2016: population abundance/biomass of a suite of selected species and the proportion of large fish (existing OSPAR EcoQo). Moreover, average maximum length of demersal fish and elasmobranch species (fish without a swim bladder such as sharks) has received the status of prioritised candidate indicator. The final indicator is a measure of the demographic composition of the entire fish stock. The maximum length that a species can potentially reach is a measure of the demographic characteristics of the species. The indicator measures whether in the entire fish community the ratio of small fish to fish that can grow large changes. Part of the preparatory work for this is being done in the context of ICES. The data required is already being collected in accordance with the multiannual programme under the DCF (COM 2010/93/EU). Depending on when OSPAR will decide, this indicator can be established as a common indicator in one to two years and will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017. Additionally the Netherlands will take the initiative in OSPAR to investigate how the value of indicator (4) relates to achieving MSY. This knowledge will be used in the Intermediate Assessment. For the entire North Sea it is being investigated whether the lack of data on rare species can be improved by bringing together the results of research and of the regular monitoring (JMP NS/CS).If necessary and depending on when results can be expected, the MSFD Monitoring Plan will be adjusted for indicators (4) size distribution of fish stocks and (5) population size of vulnerable and long-lived species in 2015. |
|
| Q6a -Relevant targets | Q6a - Environmental target | 1 1f 1h 1i |
1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1e 1h 1i 1m |
1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1e 1h 1i 1m |
1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1e 1h 1i 1m |
1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1e 1h 1i 1m |
1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1e 1h 1i 1m |
1 1g 1h 1i |
1 1g 1h 1i |
1 1g 1h 1i |
1 1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1 1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1 1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1 1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1 1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1 1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1h 1i 5b 5c |
1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1h 1i 5b 5c |
1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1h 1i 5b 5c |
1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1h 1i 5b 5c |
1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1h 1i 5b 5c |
1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1h 1i 5b 5c |
1 1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1e 1h |
1 1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1e 1h |
1 1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1e 1h |
1 1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1e 1h |
1 1b 1c1 1c2 1d 1e 1h |
| Q6a -Relevant targets | Q6a - Associated indicator | 1f 1h 1i |
1b 1e 1i 1k |
1b 1e 1i 1k |
1b 1e 1i 1k |
1b 1e 1i 1k |
1b 1e 1i 1k |
1g 1h 1i |
1g 1h 1i |
1g 1h 1i |
1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1a 1j 1k 1l 1m |
1b 1c1 1d 1i 5b 5c&5d |
1b 1c1 1d 1i 5b 5c&5d |
1b 1c1 1d 1i 5b 5c&5d |
1b 1c1 1d 1i 5b 5c&5d |
1b 1c1 1d 1i 5b 5c&5d |
1b 1c1 1d 1i 5b 5c&5d |
1a 1b 1c1 1d 1e 1i |
1a 1b 1c1 1d 1e 1i |
1a 1b 1c1 1d 1e 1i |
1a 1b 1c1 1d 1e 1i |
1a 1b 1c1 1d 1e 1i |
| Q6b - Adequacy for assessment of targets | Q6b_SuitableData | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
N |
N |
N |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Q6b - Adequacy for assessment of targets | Q6b_EstablishedMethods | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Q6b - Adequacy for assessment of targets | Q6d_AdequateCapacity | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Q6c - Target updating | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
|
| Q6d - Description of programme for targets assessment |
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
See 5f
|
see 5f
|
see 5f
|
see 5f
|
see 5f
|
see 5f
|
see 5f
|
See question 5f
|
See question 5f
|
See question 5f
|
See question 5f
|
See question 5f
|
|
| Q6e - Gap-filling date for targets assessment | By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
|
| Q6f - Plans to implement monitoring for targets assessment |
See 5g.
|
See 5g
|
See 5g
|
See 5g
|
See 5g
|
See 5g
|
see 5g
|
see 5g
|
see 5g
|
See question 5h
|
See question 5h
|
See question 5h
|
See question 5h
|
See question 5h
|
|||||||||||||
| Q7a - Relevant activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q7b - Description of monitoring of activities | Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
Annex 4 of the Marine Strategy part 2 shows the DPSIR relations between ecosystem elements/descriptors, pressures and activities, as well as how the pressures and activities and their effects are monitored.
Annex 3 of the Marine Strategy part 2 gives the relation between elements from the MSFD Annex 3 and the MSFD monitoring programme. |
|
| Q7c - Relevant measures |
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Adequate data | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Established methods | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Adequate understanding of GES | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Adequate capacity | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Addresses activities and pressures | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
||||||
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Addresses effectiveness of measures | Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
Y |
| Q7d - Description of monitoring for measures | The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on bird populations in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution and condition of species in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution and condition of species in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution and condition of species in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution and condition of species in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution and condition of species in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the presence and condition of marine mammals in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the presence and condition of marine mammals in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the presence and condition of marine mammals in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution and condition of habitats and the area of habitat damage in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution and condition of habitats and the area of habitat damage in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution and condition of habitats and the area of habitat damage in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution and condition of habitats and the area of habitat damage in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution and condition of habitats and the area of habitat damage in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution and condition of habitats and the area of habitat damage in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution, abundance and condition of fish species in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution, abundance and condition of fish species in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution, abundance and condition of fish species in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution, abundance and condition of fish species in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
The monitoring programme renders quantitative information on the distribution, abundance and condition of fish species in the Netherlands part of the Greater North Sea. This information gives insight in the effectiveness of current and future measures. |
|||||||
| Q7f - Gap-filling date for activities and measures | By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
By2014 |
|
| Q8a - Links to existing Monitoring Programmes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Reference sub-programme | Sub-programme ID | ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub4-SharkRays |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub8-Mammals |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub9-SealPop |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub10-Benthos |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub11-UndisturbedSeafloor |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub4-SharkRays |
ANSNL-D05-Sub3-OSPAR-Chlorophyll |
ANSNL-D05-Sub6-Phaeocystis |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub4-SharkRays |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub4-SharkRays |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards |
| Reference sub-programme | Sub-programme name | Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Benthic species - abundance and/or biomass |
Other |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Plankton blooms (biomass, frequency) |
Plankton blooms (biomass, frequency) |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
| Q4g - Sub-programmes | Sub-programme ID | ANSNL-D1346-Sub7-Birds |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub4-SharkRays |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub8-Mammals |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub9-SealPop |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub10-Benthos |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub11-UndisturbedSeafloor |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub4-SharkRays |
ANSNL-D05-Sub3-OSPAR-Chlorophyll |
ANSNL-D05-Sub6-Phaeocystis |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub4-SharkRays |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub4-SharkRays |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards |
| Q4g - Sub-programmes | Sub-programme name | Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Benthic species - abundance and/or biomass |
Other |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Plankton blooms (biomass, frequency) |
Plankton blooms (biomass, frequency) |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - mortality/injury rates from fisheries (targeted and/or incidental) |
| Q4k - Monitoring purpose | StateImpact |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact Pressurse |
StateImpact |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact Pressurse Measures |
Pressurse Activities |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact |
StateImpact Pressurse Measures |
StateImpact |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact |
StateImpact Measures |
|
| Q4l - Links of monitoring programmes of other Directives and Conventions | The targets and monitoring for birds are in keeping with the national targets of the Birds Directive (BD). The BD aims to ensure a favourable conservation status for all species for which the Dutch part of the North Sea is vital part of their habitat.
OSPAR - In OSPAR no specific requirements have yet been developed for frequency and spatial coverage. However, OSPAR is working on two common indicators (See Q5h on the Programme level) |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention). Ecological Quality Objectives for the North Sea. EcoQO on changes in the proportion of large fish. http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/publications/p00307/p00307_ecoqo%20handbook%202009%202nd%20edition.pdf |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
For the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD -Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy) the International River Commissions have drafted programmes targeted at monitoring the state of waters. These programmes contribute to gain a coherent and comprehensive survey of the state of waters. The programmes are applicable since end 2006. The programmes, including fish monitoring, are summarized in Reports on the Coordination of Surveillance Monitoring Programmes in the River Districts;
Rhine: http://www.iksr.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumente_de/PLEN-CC_06-06d_rev._15.03.07_m.K..pdf.
Meuse: http://www.cipm-icbm.be/files/files/Rapport_faitier_monitoring_Mmonitor_07_1_n_def2_.pdf.
Ems: http://www.ems-eems.nl/uploads/media/070319_Rapport_NL_Tekst.pdf.
Scheldt: link not available. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 812/2004 of 26.4.2004 laying down measures concerning incidental catches
of cetaceans in fisheries and amending Regulation (EC) No 88/98 |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 812/2004 of 26.4.2004 laying down measures concerning incidental catches
of cetaceans in fisheries and amending Regulation (EC) No 88/98 |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy: As parrt of the fisheries policy agreements are made on the maximum allowed bycatch of harbour porpoises as a percentage of the total population. Tis requires insight in the population size. Because of the mobility of fish and harbour porpoise this needs to be done at the level of the North Sea.
Bird and Habitats Directive (BHD) - Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora: The Habitats Directive prescribes that the Netherlands reports once every six years on the conservation status of the Grey seal, the Harbour Seal and the Harbour Porpoise, as well as on the effectiveness of measurs.
At the national level, the information requirements under the MSFD and the Habitats Directive are the same. At the area level, however, Natura 2000 does require some additional information, particularly for tracking the effects of human activities and mitigating measures.
Trilateral Wadden Sea Cooperation (TWSC) - Under the umbrella of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention) a trilateral Seal Agreement has been concluded between Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands. It contains provisions, amongst others, on research and monitoring. A monitoring manual can be downloaded: http://www.waddensea-secretariat.org/monitoring-tmap/manual-guidelines
OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR
Convention). OSPAR has been developing the EcoQO system for the North Sea, in collaboration with the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). One of the EcoQOs that has been developed is the EcoQO on Bycatch of Harbour Porpoises. See EcoQO handbook (http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/publications/p00307/p00307_EcoQO%20Handbook%202009%202nd%20edition.pdf) and Background Document on the Ecological Quality Objective on Bycatch of Harbour Porpoises in the North Sea (http://www.ospar.org/documents/DBASE/Publications/p00244/p00244_Background%20Document%20EcoQ%20-%20porpoises.pdf) |
Trilateral Wadden Sea Cooperation (TWSC) - Under the umbrella of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention) a trilateral Seal Agreement has been concluded between Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands. It contains provisions, amongst others, on research and monitoring. A monitoring manual can be downloaded: http://www.waddensea-secretariat.org/monitoring-tmap/manual-guidelines
OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR
Convention). OSPAR has been developing the EcoQO system for the North Sea, in collaboration with the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). The condition of seals can be determined on the basis of two OSPAR EcoQOs: population trends for seals in the North Sea and grey seal pup production. The Netherlands determines these EcoQOs for the Wadden Sea population by means of the current monitoring of the sandbanks.
International coordination is necessary, because the common seal and grey seal populations cross borders. This coordination is already taking shape for the OSPAR EcoQOs referred to.
OSPAR EcoQO handbook: http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/publications/p00307/p00307_EcoQO%20Handbook%202009%202nd%20edition.pdf.
OSPAR Background Document on the Ecological Quality Objective for Seal Population Trends in the North Sea: http://www.ospar.org/documents/DBASE/Publications/p00245/p00245_Background%20Document%20EcoQO%20-%20seals.pdf. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy. |
Bird and Habitats Directive (BHD) - Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora: |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF
THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2244/2003 of 18 December 2003 laying down detailed provisions regarding satellite-based Vessel Monitoring Systems.
OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention) Ecological Quality Objectives for the North Sea: OSPAR is developing a common indicator on seabed disturbance. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention). Ecological Quality Objectives for the North Sea. EcoQO on changes in the proportion of large fish. http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/publications/p00307/p00307_ecoqo%20handbook%202009%202nd%20edition.pdf |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
For the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD -Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy) the International River Commissions have drafted programmes targeted at monitoring the state of waters. These programmes contribute to gain a coherent and comprehensive survey of the state of waters. The programmes are applicable since end 2006. The programmes, including fish monitoring, are summarized in Reports on the Coordination of Surveillance Monitoring Programmes in the River Districts;
Rhine: http://www.iksr.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumente_de/PLEN-CC_06-06d_rev._15.03.07_m.K..pdf.
Meuse: http://www.cipm-icbm.be/files/files/Rapport_faitier_monitoring_Mmonitor_07_1_n_def2_.pdf.
Ems: http://www.ems-eems.nl/uploads/media/070319_Rapport_NL_Tekst.pdf.
Scheldt: link not available. |
OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention).
OSPAR Contracting Parties implement the Eutrophication Monitoring Programme (EMP) Agreement (reference number: 2005-4 (as updated in 2013) supersedes the Nutrient Monitoring Programme adopted by OSPAR 1995 (Reference number 1995-5)) [F], which is part of the OSPAR ‘Co-ordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme’ (CEMP) [FF]. It is carried out primarily to assess the extent to which the objectives of the OSPAR Eutrophication Strategy have been met. Contracting Parties apply the OSPAR Common Procedure (Reference number: 2013-8, supersedes agreements 1997-11 and 2002-20.) Monitoring, in the form of repeated measurements of chlorophyll-a concentrations at key locations provides information on direct effects of nutriënt enrichment.
[F] http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/decrecs/agreements/05-04e_eut_mon_prog.doc.
[FF] http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/decrecs/agreements/10-01e_the%20cemp.doc |
OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention). OSPAR Contracting Parties implement the Eutrophication Monitoring Programme (EMP) Agreement (reference number: 2005-4 (as updated in 2013) supersedes the Nutrient Monitoring Programme adopted by OSPAR 1995 (Reference number 1995-5)) [F], which is part of the OSPAR ‘Co-ordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme’ (CEMP) [FF] It is carried out primarily to assess the extent to which the objectives of the OSPAR Eutrophication Strategy have been met Contracting Parties apply the OSPAR Common Procedure (Reference number: 2013-8, supersedes agreements 1997-11 and 2002-20.) Monitoring of biomass and duration of blooms of area-specific phytoplankton indicator species for eutrophication (phaeocystis for the Netherlands) provides information on direct effects of nutriënt enrichment.
[F] http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/decrecs/agreements/05-04e_eut_mon_prog.doc.
[FF] http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/decrecs/agreements/10-01e_the%20cemp.doc
WFD: Within the 1-mile coastal zone, where WFD and OSPAR overlap, monitoring also complies to WFD standards. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention). Ecological Quality Objectives for the North Sea. EcoQO on changes in the proportion of large fish. http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/publications/p00307/p00307_ecoqo%20handbook%202009%202nd%20edition.pdf |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
For the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD -Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy) the International River Commissions have drafted programmes targeted at monitoring the state of waters. These programmes contribute to gain a coherent and comprehensive survey of the state of waters. The programmes are applicable since end 2006. The programmes, including fish monitoring, are summarized in Reports on the Coordination of Surveillance Monitoring Programmes in the River Districts;
Rhine: http://www.iksr.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumente_de/PLEN-CC_06-06d_rev._15.03.07_m.K..pdf.
Meuse: http://www.cipm-icbm.be/files/files/Rapport_faitier_monitoring_Mmonitor_07_1_n_def2_.pdf.
Ems: http://www.ems-eems.nl/uploads/media/070319_Rapport_NL_Tekst.pdf.
Scheldt: link not available. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
OSPAR Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR Convention). Ecological Quality Objectives for the North Sea. EcoQO on changes in the proportion of large fish. http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/publications/p00307/p00307_ecoqo%20handbook%202009%202nd%20edition.pdf |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
For the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD -Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy) the International River Commissions have drafted programmes targeted at monitoring the state of waters. These programmes contribute to gain a coherent and comprehensive survey of the state of waters. The programmes are applicable since end 2006. The programmes, including fish monitoring, are summarized in Reports on the Coordination of Surveillance Monitoring Programmes in the River Districts;
Rhine: http://www.iksr.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumente_de/PLEN-CC_06-06d_rev._15.03.07_m.K..pdf.
Meuse: http://www.cipm-icbm.be/files/files/Rapport_faitier_monitoring_Mmonitor_07_1_n_def2_.pdf.
Ems: http://www.ems-eems.nl/uploads/media/070319_Rapport_NL_Tekst.pdf.
Scheldt: link not available. |
Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) - REGULATION (EU) No 1380/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 11 December 2013 on the Common Fisheries Policy.
COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 812/2004 of 26.4.2004 laying down measures concerning incidental catches
of cetaceans in fisheries and amending Regulation (EC) No 88/98 |
|
| Q5c - Features | Q5c - Habitats |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q5c - Features | Q5c - Species list |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q5c - Features | Q5c - Physical/Chemical features |
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
| Q5c - Features | Q5c - Pressures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q9a - Elements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q5a - GES criteria | Relevant GES criteria |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q5b - GES indicators | Relevant GES indicators |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Species distribution |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Species population size |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Species population characteristics |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Species impacts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Habitat distribution |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Habitat extent |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Habitat condition (physical-chemical) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Habitat condition (biological) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Habitat impacts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (pressures) | Pressure input | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (pressures) | Pressure output | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (activity) | Activity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
| Q9b Parameters monitored (other) | Other | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q41 Spatial scope | WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
MSland_FW WFD_TW WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_TW WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_TW WFD_CW |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
MSland_FW WFD_TW WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
MSland_FW WFD_TW WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
MSland_FW WFD_TW WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
WFD_CW TerritorialWaters EEZ CS BeyondMSwaters |
|
| Q4j - Description of spatial scope | The monitoring strategy 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. |
ICES fish stock assessments for the North Sea are used. These data render a better insight in the fishing mortality than information on the Netherlands EEZ only, because the fish stocks are not limited to the Netherlands EEZ.
Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea. |
ICES fish stock assessments for the North Sea are used. These data render a better insight in the spawning stock biomass than information on the Netherlands EEZ only, because the fish stocks are not limited to the Netherlands EEZ.
Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea. |
The indicator on size distribution of fish species requires data collection by independent research ships. This data is collected according to the Common Fisheries Policy allthough additional assessment of the data is necessary. It is expected that this indicator will be further developed within ICES framework. |
For sharks, skates and rays data comes from the ICES fish stock assessments and also from by-catch records (see subprogrammes ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality, ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass and ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards). Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea.
For diadromous fish, monitoring comprises information from landside passage monitoring (PASMON) because these species are not frequently encountered in the regular fish surveys at sea. |
ICES fish stock assessments for the North Sea are used. These data render a better insight in the total amount of discards than information on the Netherlands EEZ only, because the fish stocks are not limited to the Netherlands EEZ. Based on the requirements of the DCF 90% of the Dutch fisheries should be covered by a monitoring programme.
Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea. |
ICES fish stock assessments for the North Sea are used. These data render a better insight in the total amount of discards than information on the Netherlands EEZ only, because the fish stocks are not limited to the Netherlands EEZ. Based on the requirements of the DCF 90% of the Dutch fisheries should be covered by a monitoring programme.
Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea. |
Spatial scope:
A. Coastal waters: WOT seal count Wadde Sea (MINEZ).
B. Transitional and coastal waters (Delta and Voordelta): plane-based counts seals (RWS and Province of Zeeland).
C. Coastal Waters + Territorial waters + EEZ: plane-based counts Harbour Porpoise, for spatial distribution (RWS).
D. Territorial waters + EEZ: EU survey SCANS and SCANSII cetaceans North Sea for population estimate Harbour Porpoise
E. Coastal waters: Netherlands stranding network cetaceans
F. Coastal waters + Territorial waters + EEZ + Beyond EEZ: WOT Discards
The differences in spatial scope are determined by the distribution of the species and technical considerations: Harbour Porpoises are mainly present in open water and additional information is being drawn from strandings. Distribution, population size and trends of seals are best determined using standardised sandbank counts, at low tide and preferably during the pup and shedding periods. |
The health of seals can be determined using existing OSPAR indicators. The Netherlands determines these EcoQOs for the Wadden Sea population by means of the current monitoring of the sandbanks in the Wadden Sea (hence outside MSFD waters). |
ICES fish stock assessments for the North Sea are used. These data render a better insight in the fishing mortality than information on the Netherlands EEZ only, because the fish stocks are not limited to the Netherlands EEZ.
Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea. |
The Habitats Directive and MSFD are both intended to ensure protection of the sea-floor habitat. The monitoring therefore focuses on the information requirement that follows from both directives. In the Marine Stategy Part I (2012) the Netherlands has decided to use benthos for biodiversity-criteria from the Commission Decision (COM 2010/477/EU) on species-level as well as on habitat- level.
For reasons of cost efficiency and consistency, the MSFD Monitoring Plan follows the existing HD and WFD Monitoring Programmes wherever possible. Any outstanding monitoring demands can be met using the extensive MWTL benthos measurement network, supplemented with information from the WOT (statutory research tasks) for Fisheries (shellfish surveys section) and by means of supplementary area monitoring. The measurement sites are all supplementary to the existing measurement networks in the coastal zone and the EEZ.
The required number of samples per type and per habitat has been determined using statistical analysis. Where relevant, the distribution of indicative seabed-communities within habitats and within areas where the seafloor is protectedhas been taken into account. Within these areas the sample locations are randomly distributed (stratified random sampling).
Additionally some boxcorer sampling locationd from MWTL will be continued, on behalf of continuity and to keep the possibility to compare with measurements from the past |
This indicator is regarded as an administrative indicator. The undisturbed surface of the seabed is calculated on the basis of sand extraction data from Rijkswaterstaat’s licensing database and data on the intensity of fishing activities from the Vessel Monitoring System (VMS). |
ICES fish stock assessments for the North Sea are used. These data render a better insight in the spawning stock biomass than information on the Netherlands EEZ only, because the fish stocks are not limited to the Netherlands EEZ.
Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea. |
The indicator on size distribution of fish species requires data collection by independent research ships. This data is collected according to the Common Fisheries Policy allthough additional assessment of the data is necessary. It is expected that this indicator will be further developed within ICES framework. |
For sharks, skates and rays data comes from the ICES fish stock assessments and also from by-catch records (see subprogrammes ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality, ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass and ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards). Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea.
For diadromous fish, monitoring comprises information from landside passage monitoring (PASMON) because these species are not frequently encountered in the regular fish surveys at sea. |
The programme covers OSPAR maritime area, divided into suitable assessment units. COMP 2013 para 2.11 “Contracting Parties should divide their waters in the OSPAR maritime area into suitable assessment units based on the relevant physical features. This process of characterisation could be undertaken in accordance with the Annex II to the Water Framework Directive. Guidance on this typology is given in Section 3.” The Eutrophication Monitoring Programme (EMP) is related to the Comprehensive Procedure that contains a screening procedure to inform riskbased monitoring. There is a differentiation in monitoring effort (spatial and temporal intensity and frequency) depending on eutrophication status. Monitoring programme is designed on a risk-based approach, so that monitoring effort is concentrated on ‘at-risk’ areas. Monitoring is conducted as recommended by the OSPAR Common Procedure (i.e. in accordance with the OSPAR Agreement on a Eutrophication Monitoring Programme).
http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/decrecs/agreements/05-04e_eut_mon_prog.doc |
The programme covers OSPAR maritime area, divided into suitable assessment units. COMP 2013 para 2.11
“Contracting Parties should divide their waters in the OSPAR maritime area into suitable assessment units
based on the relevant physical features. This process of characterisation could be undertaken in accordance
with the Annex II to the Water Framework Directive. Guidance on this typology is given in Section 3.” The
Eutrophication Monitoring Programme (EMP) is related to the Comprehensive Procedure that contains a
screening procedure to inform riskbased monitoring. There is a differentiation in monitoring effort (spatial
and temporal intensity and frequency) depending on eutrophication status. Monitoring programme is
designed on a risk-based approach, so that monitoring effort is concentrated on ‘at-risk’ areas. Monitoring is
conducted as recommended by the OSPAR Common Procedure (i.e. in accordance with the OSPAR
Agreement on a Eutrophication Monitoring Programme).
http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/decrecs/agreements/05-04e_eut_mon_prog.doc |
ICES fish stock assessments for the North Sea are used. These data render a better insight in the fishing mortality than information on the Netherlands EEZ only, because the fish stocks are not limited to the Netherlands EEZ.
Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea. |
ICES fish stock assessments for the North Sea are used. These data render a better insight in the spawning stock biomass than information on the Netherlands EEZ only, because the fish stocks are not limited to the Netherlands EEZ.
Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea. |
The indicator on size distribution of fish species requires data collection by independent research ships. This data is collected according to the Common Fisheries Policy allthough additional assessment of the data is necessary. It is expected that this indicator will be further developed within ICES framework. |
For sharks, skates and rays data comes from the ICES fish stock assessments and also from by-catch records (see subprogrammes ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality, ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass and ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards). Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea.
For diadromous fish, monitoring comprises information from landside passage monitoring (PASMON) because these species are not frequently encountered in the regular fish surveys at sea. |
ICES fish stock assessments for the North Sea are used. These data render a better insight in the fishing mortality than information on the Netherlands EEZ only, because the fish stocks are not limited to the Netherlands EEZ.
Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea. |
ICES fish stock assessments for the North Sea are used. These data render a better insight in the spawning stock biomass than information on the Netherlands EEZ only, because the fish stocks are not limited to the Netherlands EEZ.
Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea. |
The indicator on size distribution of fish species requires data collection by independent research ships. This data is collected according to the Common Fisheries Policy allthough additional assessment of the data is necessary. It is expected that this indicator will be further developed within ICES framework. |
For sharks, skates and rays data comes from the ICES fish stock assessments and also from by-catch records (see subprogrammes ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality, ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass and ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards). Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea.
For diadromous fish, monitoring comprises information from landside passage monitoring (PASMON) because these species are not frequently encountered in the regular fish surveys at sea. |
ICES fish stock assessments for the North Sea are used. These data render a better insight in the total amount of discards than information on the Netherlands EEZ only, because the fish stocks are not limited to the Netherlands EEZ. Based on the requirements of the DCF 90% of the Dutch fisheries should be covered by a monitoring programme.
Stock monitoring is not confined to the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea but covers various ICES areas. The Dutch part of the North Sea is located within areas IVb AND IVc. The Netherlands also conducts surveys outside the Dutch part of the North Sea, as other Member States conduct surveys within the boundaries of the Dutch part of the North Sea. |
|
| Marine Unit IDs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q4h - Temporal scope | Start date- End date | 1991-9999 |
1969-9999 |
1969-9999 |
2014-9999 |
2014-9999 |
2014-9999 |
2014-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1969-9999 |
2014-9999 |
2014-9999 |
1969-9999 |
2014-9999 |
2014-9999 |
1987-9999 |
1990-9999 |
1969-9999 |
1969-9999 |
2014-9999 |
2014-9999 |
1969-9999 |
1969-9999 |
2014-9999 |
2014-9999 |
2014-9999 |
| Q9h - Temporal resolution of sampling |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q9c - Monitoring method | Plane-based counts form the core of the measurement programme on account of their good quality at a relatively low cost. These counts are incorporated in the MWTL monitoring programme, for methods see Arts 2011: http://publicaties.minienm.nl/download-bijlage/23394/bm-12-25-monitoring-van-zeevogels-en-zeezoogdieren-op-het-ncp-1991-2011.pdf
For species identification (some species are difficult to distinguish from the air) and in order to collect information on habitats additional ship-based counts are conducted. For methods see Van Bemmelen 2011: http://www.noordzeeloket.nl/images/Ship-based%20monitoring%20of%20seabirds%20and%20cetaceans_820.pdf |
Fishing mortality has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E] , Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx
[B] ICES WBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx
[B] ICES WGBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx |
Size distribution is not a standard parameter yet, however, the required data for the assessment is available through the regular surveys that are done for the DCF. Additional analyses of the data are necessary. The required data can be derived from the current database and based on this information the size distribution can be determined. |
Stock monitoring and monitoring of discards has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Based on the requirements of the DCF 90% of the Dutch fisheries should be covered by a monitoring programme. These programmes aim to get insight in the quantity as well as the composition of discards, unless these are less than 5%. Based on EU regulation 812/2004 research has to be carried out on the bycatch of cetatceans.
A large part of the data is being gathered outside the Netherlands part of the North Sea.
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. International coordination of the collection of data on discard is being done by the ICES Planning Group on Commercial Catch, Discards and Biological Sampling, PGCCDBS. http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/PGCCDBS.aspx.
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx.
[B] ICES WGBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx.
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx.
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx.
For the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD -Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy) the International Commission for Protection of the Rhine (ICPR), the International Commission for the Meuse, the Ems/Eems commission and the International Scheldt Commission have drafted programmes targeted at monitoring the state of waters. These programmes contribute to gain a coherent and comprehensive survey of the state of waters. The programmes are applicable since end 2006. The programmes, including fish monitoring, are summarized in Reports on the Coordination of Surveillance Monitoring Programmes in the River Districts;
Rhine: http://www.iksr.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumente_de/PLEN-CC_06-06d_rev._15.03.07_m.K..pdf.
Meuse: http://www.cipm-icbm.be/files/files/Rapport_faitier_monitoring_Mmonitor_07_1_n_def2_.pdf .
Ems: http://www.ems-eems.nl/uploads/media/070319_Rapport_NL_Tekst.pdf .
Scheldt: link not available. |
Monitoring of discards has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Based on the requirements of the DCF 90% of the Dutch fisheries should be covered by a monitoring programme. These programmes aim to get insight in the quantity as well as the composition of discards, unless these are less than 5%. Based on EU regulation 812/2004 research has to be carried out on the bycatch of cetatceans.
A large part of the data is being gathered outside the Netherlands part of the North Sea.
International coordination of the collection of data on discard is being done by the ICES Planning Group on Commercial Catch, Discards and Biological Sampling, PGCCDBS. http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/PGCCDBS.aspx |
Monitoring of discards has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Based on the requirements of the DCF 90% of the Dutch fisheries should be covered by a monitoring programme. These programmes aim to get insight in the quantity as well as the composition of discards, unless these are less than 5%. Based on EU regulation 812/2004 research has to be carried out on the bycatch of cetatceans.
A large part of the data is being gathered outside the Netherlands part of the North Sea.
International coordination of the collection of data on discard is being done by the ICES Planning Group on Commercial Catch, Discards and Biological Sampling, PGCCDBS. http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/PGCCDBS.aspx |
Harbour porpoise and other cetaceans:
Internationally coordinated measurements, such as the Small Cetacean Abundance Survey in the North Sea and Adjacent Waters (SCANS), are the most suitable method to gain insight into the population size and distribution of the harbour porpoise on the North Sea scale (http://biology.st-andrews.ac.uk/scans2/index.html) . An important aim is to make use of these international counts. Until then, national counts will be carried out. Moreover, specific harbour porpoise counts and combined counts (with birds) are being considered to monitor the distribution in the Netherlands part of the North Sea. Reports on by-catches in gill nets are also included, see subprogramme ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards.
Dutch strandingennetwerk: reports of all
types of stranded cetaceans (http://www.walvisstrandingen.nl)
Common seal and grey seal:
The distribution, population size and trends relating to the common seal and the grey seal are best determined using standardised sandbank counts, at low tide and preferably during the pup and shedding periods (November-December).
All mammals:
Additionaly, use is made of counts of mammals during the regular plane- and ship- based seabird counts . For methods see http://publicaties.minienm.nl/download-bijlage/23394/bm-12-25-monitoring-van-zeevogels-en-zeezoogdieren-op-het-ncp-1991-2011.pdf (plane-based counts) and http://www.noordzeeloket.nl/images/Ship-based%20monitoring%20of%20seabirds%20and%20cetaceans_820.pdf (ship-based counts)
Expectations are high for the development of high-definition camera technologies in the coming years. HD cameras are expected to improve effectiveness and efficiency in counting birds and marine mammals at sea. |
The distribution, population size and trends relating to the common seal and the grey seal are best determined using standardised sandbank counts, at low tide and preferably during the pup and shedding periods (November-December).
OSPAR EcoQO handbook: http://www.ospar.org/v_publications/download.asp?v1=p00307
TWSC TMAP handbook http://www.waddensea-secretariat.org/monitoring-tmap/manual-guidelines |
Fishing mortality has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E] , Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx
[B] ICES WBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx |
The regular survey networks that will be used are: The Rijkswaterstaat MWTL benthos measurement network [A], supplemented with information from the WOT (statutory research tasks from the Ministry of Economic Affairs) for Fisheries (shellfish surveys section [B] )
[A] MWTL Meetplan 2015 (will be available at http://www.helpdeskwater.nl/onderwerpen/monitoring/gegevensinwinning/ ).
[B] WOT 05-406-008 - http://www.wageningenur.nl/nl/project/Monitoring-schelpdierbestanden.htm. Most recent report, including methodology: http://edepot.wur.nl/278820.
Before sea-floor protection measures come into effect, the baseline situation of the areas protected under the MSFD and HD (baseline measurement) is determined.
Sampling is focused on the designated areas protected under the HD and on the MSFD areas of search for sea floor protection. Within those, both areas under protective measures and relevant reference areas that are not under protective measures are covered. Within each of these areas, the measurement locations are randomly distributed. With the exception of the ‘medium-deep mixed sand’ of the Southern Bight, the ‘common habitats’ reported in the MSFD Initial Assessment are thus also covered at EUNIS level 3. For this reason, the Southern Bight is sampled – additionally – in the same way as the protected areas.
Table 7 of the Marine Strategy Part II (Par. 9.2.1, Page 84) gives an overview of the number and distribution of sampling locations, as well as the monitoring method and sampled habitat types. |
The undisturbed surface of the sea floor is calculated on the basis of sand extraction data from Rijkswaterstaat’s licensing database and the fishery data from the Vessel Monitoring System (VMS).
Sand extraction
The ICES working group on Effects of Extraction of Marine Sediments on the Marine Ecosystem (WGEXT) publishes annual reports for OSPAR with summary of data on marine sediment extraction for the OSPAR Area. The data are extracted from a database in which all licences for sand extraction are registered. all companies that intend to extract sand from the North Sea, have to apply for a licence to Rijkswaterstaat, based on the 'Besluit Ontgrondingen in Rijkswateren' http://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0023362).
See http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGEXT.aspx.
Intensity of fishing activities VMS)
Ships are being electronically followed with the Vessel Monitoring Systems (VMS) deployed by the Fisheries Monitoring Centre (FMC) of the Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (NVWA) in Echt. All fishery vessels send a signal to a satelite. The data (position, speeds and direction) are directly transferred to the FMC. These data can be analysed to show where a ship was fishing with which method, and whether or not this caused seabed disturbance. ICES and OSPAR are jointly developing a coordinated method, see http://www.ices.dk/news-and-events/news-archive/news/Pages/ICES-maps-the-intensity-of-fishing-activities-affecting-the-seabed-.aspx. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx
[B] ICES WGBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx |
Size distribution is not a standard parameter yet, however, the required data for the assessment is available through the regular surveys that are done for the DCF. Additional analyses of the data are necessary. The required data can be derived from the current database and based on this information the size distribution can be determined. |
Stock monitoring and monitoring of discards has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Based on the requirements of the DCF 90% of the Dutch fisheries should be covered by a monitoring programme. These programmes aim to get insight in the quantity as well as the composition of discards, unless these are less than 5%. Based on EU regulation 812/2004 research has to be carried out on the bycatch of cetatceans.
A large part of the data is being gathered outside the Netherlands part of the North Sea.
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. International coordination of the collection of data on discard is being done by the ICES Planning Group on Commercial Catch, Discards and Biological Sampling, PGCCDBS. http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/PGCCDBS.aspx.
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx.
[B] ICES WGBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx.
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx.
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx.
For the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD -Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy) the International Commission for Protection of the Rhine (ICPR), the International Commission for the Meuse, the Ems/Eems commission and the International Scheldt Commission have drafted programmes targeted at monitoring the state of waters. These programmes contribute to gain a coherent and comprehensive survey of the state of waters. The programmes are applicable since end 2006. The programmes, including fish monitoring, are summarized in Reports on the Coordination of Surveillance Monitoring Programmes in the River Districts;
Rhine: http://www.iksr.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumente_de/PLEN-CC_06-06d_rev._15.03.07_m.K..pdf.
Meuse: http://www.cipm-icbm.be/files/files/Rapport_faitier_monitoring_Mmonitor_07_1_n_def2_.pdf .
Ems: http://www.ems-eems.nl/uploads/media/070319_Rapport_NL_Tekst.pdf .
Scheldt: link not available. |
JAMP Eutrophication monitoring guidelines on chlorophyll - revised cf. OSPAR Agreement 2012-11.
http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/decrecs/agreements/12- 11e_JAMP_GL_Chrolophyll.doc |
JAMP Eutrophication Monitoring Guidelines on Phytoplankton Species Composition cf. OSPAR agreement 1997-05: http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/decrecs/agreements/97-05e.doc |
Fishing mortality has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E] , Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx
[B] ICES WBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx
[B] ICES WGBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx |
Size distribution is not a standard parameter yet, however, the required data for the assessment is available through the regular surveys that are done for the DCF. Additional analyses of the data are necessary. The required data can be derived from the current database and based on this information the size distribution can be determined. |
Stock monitoring and monitoring of discards has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Based on the requirements of the DCF 90% of the Dutch fisheries should be covered by a monitoring programme. These programmes aim to get insight in the quantity as well as the composition of discards, unless these are less than 5%. Based on EU regulation 812/2004 research has to be carried out on the bycatch of cetatceans.
A large part of the data is being gathered outside the Netherlands part of the North Sea.
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. International coordination of the collection of data on discard is being done by the ICES Planning Group on Commercial Catch, Discards and Biological Sampling, PGCCDBS. http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/PGCCDBS.aspx.
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx.
[B] ICES WGBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx.
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx.
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx.
For the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD -Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy) the International Commission for Protection of the Rhine (ICPR), the International Commission for the Meuse, the Ems/Eems commission and the International Scheldt Commission have drafted programmes targeted at monitoring the state of waters. These programmes contribute to gain a coherent and comprehensive survey of the state of waters. The programmes are applicable since end 2006. The programmes, including fish monitoring, are summarized in Reports on the Coordination of Surveillance Monitoring Programmes in the River Districts;
Rhine: http://www.iksr.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumente_de/PLEN-CC_06-06d_rev._15.03.07_m.K..pdf.
Meuse: http://www.cipm-icbm.be/files/files/Rapport_faitier_monitoring_Mmonitor_07_1_n_def2_.pdf .
Ems: http://www.ems-eems.nl/uploads/media/070319_Rapport_NL_Tekst.pdf .
Scheldt: link not available. |
Fishing mortality has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E] , Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx
[B] ICES WBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx
[B] ICES WGBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx |
Size distribution is not a standard parameter yet, however, the required data for the assessment is available through the regular surveys that are done for the DCF. Additional analyses of the data are necessary. The required data can be derived from the current database and based on this information the size distribution can be determined. |
Stock monitoring and monitoring of discards has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Based on the requirements of the DCF 90% of the Dutch fisheries should be covered by a monitoring programme. These programmes aim to get insight in the quantity as well as the composition of discards, unless these are less than 5%. Based on EU regulation 812/2004 research has to be carried out on the bycatch of cetatceans.
A large part of the data is being gathered outside the Netherlands part of the North Sea.
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. International coordination of the collection of data on discard is being done by the ICES Planning Group on Commercial Catch, Discards and Biological Sampling, PGCCDBS. http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/PGCCDBS.aspx.
Links to ICES working groups and methodology:
[A] ICES WGNSSK - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGNSSK.aspx.
[B] ICES WGBEAM - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGBEAM.aspx.
[C] http://www.ices.dk/sites/pub/Publication%20Reports/ICES%20Survey%20Protocols%20%28SISP%29/SISP1-IBTSVIII.pdf.
[D] ICES WGIPS – http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGIPS.aspx.
[E] ICES WGMEGS - http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/WGMEGS.aspx.
For the implementation of the Water Framework Directive (WFD -Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy) the International Commission for Protection of the Rhine (ICPR), the International Commission for the Meuse, the Ems/Eems commission and the International Scheldt Commission have drafted programmes targeted at monitoring the state of waters. These programmes contribute to gain a coherent and comprehensive survey of the state of waters. The programmes are applicable since end 2006. The programmes, including fish monitoring, are summarized in Reports on the Coordination of Surveillance Monitoring Programmes in the River Districts;
Rhine: http://www.iksr.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Dokumente_de/PLEN-CC_06-06d_rev._15.03.07_m.K..pdf.
Meuse: http://www.cipm-icbm.be/files/files/Rapport_faitier_monitoring_Mmonitor_07_1_n_def2_.pdf .
Ems: http://www.ems-eems.nl/uploads/media/070319_Rapport_NL_Tekst.pdf .
Scheldt: link not available. |
Monitoring of discards has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Based on the requirements of the DCF 90% of the Dutch fisheries should be covered by a monitoring programme. These programmes aim to get insight in the quantity as well as the composition of discards, unless these are less than 5%. Based on EU regulation 812/2004 research has to be carried out on the bycatch of cetatceans.
A large part of the data is being gathered outside the Netherlands part of the North Sea.
International coordination of the collection of data on discard is being done by the ICES Planning Group on Commercial Catch, Discards and Biological Sampling, PGCCDBS. http://www.ices.dk/community/groups/Pages/PGCCDBS.aspx |
|
| Q9d - Description of alteration to method | OSPAR EMP: http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/decrecs/agreements/05-04e_eut_mon_prog.doc; (See JAMP guidelines in 9c) |
OSPAR EMP: http://www.ospar.org/documents/dbase/decrecs/agreements/05-04e_eut_mon_prog.doc;
(See JAMP guidelines in 9c) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q9e - Quality assurance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q9f - Quality control | OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
Unknown |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
OtherQC |
|
| Q9g - Spatial resolution of sampling | Q9g - Proportion of area covered % | 100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
100 |
|
| Q9g - Spatial resolution of sampling | Q9g - No. of samples | In the coastal zone 6 plane-based counts per year are conducted. In the EEZ 4 plane-based counts per year. In addition to this 4 times a year ship-based counts are conducted.
Coastal and territiorial waters: High spatial resolution of plane-based counts (zigzag patterm, ca. 750 km).
EEZ: The entire route of the plane-based counts is approximately 2500 km, plus extra kilometers for the areas 'Friese Front' and 'Bruine Bank'. In these areas (respectively designated and potential area for the Birds Directive) the density of the flight pattern is approximately twice as high as in the rest of the EEZ. The flight routes in the EEZ are flown perpendicular to the coast, the protected areas in a zigzag pattern. |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
Harbour porpoise and other cetaceans:
Internationally coordinated measurements, SCANS and SCANSII, have been conducted in 1994 and 2006. The Netherlands aims to increase this frequency of internationally coordinated measurements.
Seals:
WOT seal count Wadden Sea: 5 counts per year
Monitoring seals Delta (province of Zeeland): 12 counts per year
All mammals:
In the coastal zone 6 plane-based counts per year are conducted. In the EEZ 4 plane-based counts per year. In addition to this 4 times a year ship-based counts are conducted. |
All sandbanks in the Wadden Sea are covered by the counts. |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
MWTL Benthos: Benthos is monitored on approximately 514 locations. This number is excluding the monitoring that is being carried out in order to determine the effectiveness of seafloor protection measures. See table 7 on page 84 of the Marine Strategy part II.
WOT Shellfish monitoring: The Dutch part of the “Noordzeekustzone” is monitored on the presence of shellfish. Along the coast approximately 855 locations are monitored each year.
Supplementary area monitoring: On top of the 514 locations from the MWTL, at least another 95 locations are monitored. For the Voordelta the number of extra locations has not yet been determined. See table 7 on page 84 of the Marine Strategy part II. |
Continuous registration of activities covering the entire Netherlands part of the North Sea. |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
In a 6-yr MSFD cycle all waters are sampled, because even areas not at-risk are subject to periodic checks as part of OSPAR COMP.
The spatial resolution of nutrient monitoring is informed by the EMP screening procedure based on identifying areas with consistently low nutrients, as set out in the Comprehensive
Procedure. The screening procedure enables a risk-based monitoring programme to be established. There is a differentiation in monitoring effort (spatial resolution) depending
on eutrophication status. The monitoring programme is designed on a risk-based approach, so that monitoring effort is concentrated on ‘at-risk’ areas, referring to areas where there are eutrophication problems. Monitoring is less frequent in areas where there are no eutrophication problems. |
Approximately 154 samples per year are taken |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
See links in Q9c for information on where and how often the surveys are conducted |
| Q9i - Description of sample representivity | Annual counting of birds in the coastal zone during the winter months (November, January and February), and in the spring and summer (April, June and August). Counting in the EEZ is done in the winter (November, January, February) and the summer (August). |
Temporal resolution:
All mammals:
For the plane-based counts: Annual counting of birds in the coastal zone during the winter months (November, January and February), and in the spring and summer (April, June and August). Counting in the EEZ is done in the winter (November, January, February) and the summer (August). In addition to this 4 times a year ship-based counts are conducted.
Seals:
WOT seal count Wadden Sea: 5 counts per year
Monitoring seals Delta (province of Zeeland): 12 counts per year
Dutch strandingennetwerk: continuous overview of notifications of stranded cetaceans on the Dutch coast |
Temporal frequency: MWTL Benthos – every 3 years: 2015, 2018 and 2021. WOT Shellfish monitoring: yearly. Supplementary area monitoring: every 3 years. |
Demand driven data collection. Monitoring is at frequencies recommended by the OSPAR Common Procedure (OSPAR Eutrophication Monitoring Programme Agreement) [F] - COMP
recommendations: (1) Non-problem areas – about every three years during winter; (2) Potential problem areas and Problem areas – annually during winter when algal growth is at a minimum and during monitoring of direct and indirect effect.
The Netherlands has identified 4 OSPAR areas, of which 2 areas (Coastal Waters and the Southern Bight) are assessed as problem areas for the period 2006-2012, and 2 areas (Oyster Grounds and Dogger Bank) are assessed as Non-Problem areas. At present all areas are monitored anually. |
Temporal resolution of sampling varies, depending on the distance to the coast and based on the risk-based aproach.
Monitoring is at freqencies recommended by the OSPAR Common Procedure (OSPAR Eutophication Monitoring Programme Agreement) [F] |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q10a - Scale for aggregation of data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Q10b - Other scale for aggregation of data | OSPAR is looking into how data from several Member States can be combined on teh regional and/or sub-regional level (Common indicator testing 2014) |
International coordination is necessary, because cetaceans and seals populations cross borders. For seals this coordination is already taking shape within OSPAR. |
Data can be aggregated at the level of the Wadden Sea ( TWSC) and at the level of the North Sea (OSPAR) |
OSPAR Common Procedure guidance on aggregation paragraphs 1.2, 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 [F] OSPAR Agreement Reference number: 2013-8; http://www.ospar.org/v_measures/get_page.asp?v0=13-08e_common_proc_eutrophication.doc&v1=5 |
OSPAR Common Procedure guidance [F] on aggregation paragraphs 1.2, 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5.
[F] OSPAR Agreement Reference number: 2013-8; http://www.ospar.org/v_measures/get_page.asp?v0=13-08e_common_proc_eutrophication.doc&v1=5 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c - Data type | ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
UnprocessedData |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
ProcessedData DataProducts |
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c - Data access mechanism | URLdownload |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
URLdownload |
URLdownload |
LocationInternationalDC |
URLdownload |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
URLdownload |
URLdownload |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
LocationInternationalDC |
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c - Data access rights | Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
Open |
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c - INSPIRE standard | SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
EnvMonitoringFacilities |
LandUse |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
EnvMonitoringFacilities |
EnvMonitoringFacilities |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c Date data are available | 2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2016-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2014-06 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
2015-12 |
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c - Data update frequency | Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
| Q10d - Description of data access | Each year in December a basic MSFD-datafile will be made available via the website of the Informatiehuis Marien (http://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/) |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
For the fish stock and discards surveys all information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx. For the diadromous fish data is available via http://www.waterkwaliteitsportaal.nl/ and assessment products via the International River Commissions. |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
Each year in December a basic MSFD-datafile will be made available via the website of the Informatiehuis Marien (http://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/) |
TWSC: The number of counted seals in the Wadden Sea is published every year under the aegis of the Trilateral Seal Expert Group (TSEG) in close cooperation with the Common Wadden Sea Secretariat (CWSS), see http://www.waddensea-secretariat.org/monitoring-tmap/topics/marine-mammals (processed data sets and data products).
OSPAR: Both EcoQos will contribute to the OSPAR Intermediate Assessment in 2017, as well as the OSPAR QSR in 2021 (data products). The last assessment took place in 2010: http://www.ospar.org/v_publications/download.asp?v1=p00404.
Each year in December a basic MSFD-datafile will be made available via the website of the Informatiehuis Marien (http://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/). |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
Each year in December a basic MSFD-datafile will be made available via the website of the Informatiehuis Marien (http://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/). |
The website of the Informatiehuis Marien will periodically make available maps to visualise sand extraction and the intensity of fishing activities as a measure for seabed disturbance. Data on seabed disturbance by fishing activities will in the future probably be made available through ICES. |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
For the fish stock and discards surveys all information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx. For the diadromous fish data is available via http://www.waterkwaliteitsportaal.nl/ and assessment products via the International River Commissions. |
Monitoring data reported by Contracting Parties to OSPAR under the Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme (of which the Eutrophication Monitoring Programme is a part) are managed on behalf of OSPAR by ICES.
OSPAR Contracting Parties prefer to make data available via the use of existing data stream with a yearly data submissions mechanisms: through ICES http://ocean.ices.dk/HydChem/HydChem.aspx?plot=yes and WISE WFD http://water.europa.eu/. This has the benefit of additional QA checks. |
Monitoring data reported by Contracting Parties to OSPAR under the Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme (of which the Eutrophication Monitoring Programme is a part) are managed on behalf of OSPAR by ICES.
Each year in December a basic MSFD-datafile will be made available via the website of the Informatiehuis Marien (http://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/) |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
For the fish stock and discards surveys all information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx. For the diadromous fish data is available via http://www.waterkwaliteitsportaal.nl/ and assessment products via the International River Commissions. |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
For the fish stock and discards surveys all information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx. For the diadromous fish data is available via http://www.waterkwaliteitsportaal.nl/ and assessment products via the International River Commissions. |
All information collected by the member states, is transferred to ICES, which combines and assesses all the data. This information is available via the ICES website via the link: http://standardgraphs.ices.dk/stocklist.aspx |
|
Descriptor |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
D1.5 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
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 |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Indicators for the criteria D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 have to be defined not only for fish species, but also for cephalopods. This has not yet been done, primarily because so little information is available about these species. Research will be conducted into the possibility of formulating these indicators in 2020. |
Related targets |
||||||||||||||||||||
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 |
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 |
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 |
||||||||||||||||||||
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 |
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 |
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Programme code |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
Programme name |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - abundance and/or biomass |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Mobile species - population characteristics |
Update type |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Modified from 2014 |
Same programme as in 2014 |
Same programme as in 2014 |
Same programme as in 2014 |
Same programme as in 2014 |
Same programme as in 2014 |
Old programme codes |
||||||||||||||||||||
Programme description |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D3C2
The aim of the MSFD is to restore and conserve the populations of all commercially exploited fish and shellfish. The CFP constitutes the statutory framework for the fisheries sector and the Netherlands is therefore guided by it to achieve the MSFD objectives. To achieve GES, the fish mortality rate (D3C1) and the spawning stock biomass (D3C2) of all commercially exploited fish species must both comply with the international requirements.
The data for the mortality rate from fishing and spawning stock biomass are derived from monitoring carried out for the Statutory Research Tasks (WOT Fisheries) programme and the Data Collection Framework (DCF).
The DCF in its current form has been in operation since 2008. Every member state draws up a national programme enumerating the elements and parameters to be measured for the DCF. The Dutch Centre for Fisheries Research (CFR) conducts the biological research for the DCF as part of the WOT. The tasks performed by the CFR are incorporated in a continuous programme that encompasses a variety of studies into herring, blue whiting and mackerel, but also research into the impact of bottom trawling on demersal fish. The research provides an insight into the number of fish, fish larvae or fish eggs of a specific species in a particular year. The spatial coverage, density and measurement frequency are different for each survey. For example, the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) covers almost the entire North Sea every year by fishing each ICES area (roughly 56x56 km) twice with different ships with a bottom trawl.
The spawning stock biomass, expressed in tonnes per species, is derived partly from data generated by independent monitoring and partly from data supplied by fisheries. These data concern: 1) the age distribution of the fish that are caught, 2) the numbers by age, 3) the average weight per age and sex, and 4) information about the sex ratio and sexual maturity.
The monitoring surveys are adequate and have not changed compared with the previous monitoring programme (2014). The monitoring programme coordinated and prescribed by ICES guarantees the collection of the basic data required for the assessment of commercially caught fish species. This internationally coordinated monitoring and the annual recommendations made by ICES give an indication of the extent to which GES has been achieved.
D1C4
The distribution of migratory fish species has to comply with the Favourable Reference Range (FRR) in the |
D1C3:
To determine the ‘demographic characteristics´ (D1C3) of the fish population, the distribution by size of the fish community is assessed using OSPAR’s Large Fish Indicator (LFI). The necessary data are collected for the assessment of fish stocks in accordance with the CFP.
Most of the data for the OSPAR Large Fish Indicator (LFI) are derived from the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS). This survey falls under the monitoring for the Common Fisheries Policy and has been operational since the end of the 1960s. For the MSFD reporting, data since 1983 are used because the monitoring survey is guaranteed to have the necessary consistency from that year. One way that consistency is ensured is through the use of the standard bottom trawl, the Grand Ouverture Verticale (GOV), which involves multiple trawls according to the principles of ‘stratified random sampling’ in the relevant ICES blocks, in principle by different member states. Every year the trawls are aggregated to calculate the indices (ICES, 2012). The IBTS monitoring survey registers at least the species and size of every fish that is caught.
The Dutch contribution to the IBTS falls under the Statutory Research Task (WOT) for Fisheries and the Data Collection Framework (DCF). This monitoring is conducted annually, in cooperation/coordination? with other countries, at the Greater North Sea level. ICES coordinates the monitoring and is responsible for the necessary quality assurance and quality control. An additional quality assurance and quality control process has been incorporated for calculations for this indicator (Moriarty, 2017, Greenstreet, 2017).
There are no changes in the monitoring compared with the MSFD monitoring programme in 2014.
D4C3:
The size structure in trophic guilds is measured in relation to the fish community and is expressed in terms of ‘typical length’.
The size structure of fish is monitored with the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) as part of the monitoring for the CFP. This monitoring survey has been operational since the end of the 1960s, however, only data that have been collected since 1983 are used for MSFD reporting, since the necessary consistency in the monitoring can only be guaranteed from that year. The survey employs the stratified random sampling method, with multiple trawls in each relevant ICES area, in principle carried out by different member states. At least the species and size of each fish caught is registered. The Netherlands contrib |
D1C3:
To determine the ‘demographic characteristics´ (D1C3) of the fish population, the distribution by size of the fish community is assessed using OSPAR’s Large Fish Indicator (LFI). The necessary data are collected for the assessment of fish stocks in accordance with the CFP.
Most of the data for the OSPAR Large Fish Indicator (LFI) are derived from the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS). This survey falls under the monitoring for the Common Fisheries Policy and has been operational since the end of the 1960s. For the MSFD reporting, data since 1983 are used because the monitoring survey is guaranteed to have the necessary consistency from that year. One way that consistency is ensured is through the use of the standard bottom trawl, the Grand Ouverture Verticale (GOV), which involves multiple trawls according to the principles of ‘stratified random sampling’ in the relevant ICES blocks, in principle by different member states. Every year the trawls are aggregated to calculate the indices (ICES, 2012). The IBTS monitoring survey registers at least the species and size of every fish that is caught.
The Dutch contribution to the IBTS falls under the Statutory Research Task (WOT) for Fisheries and the Data Collection Framework (DCF). This monitoring is conducted annually, in cooperation/coordination? with other countries, at the Greater North Sea level. ICES coordinates the monitoring and is responsible for the necessary quality assurance and quality control. An additional quality assurance and quality control process has been incorporated for calculations for this indicator (Moriarty, 2017, Greenstreet, 2017).
There are no changes in the monitoring compared with the MSFD monitoring programme in 2014.
D4C3:
The size structure in trophic guilds is measured in relation to the fish community and is expressed in terms of ‘typical length’.
The size structure of fish is monitored with the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) as part of the monitoring for the CFP. This monitoring survey has been operational since the end of the 1960s, however, only data that have been collected since 1983 are used for MSFD reporting, since the necessary consistency in the monitoring can only be guaranteed from that year. The survey employs the stratified random sampling method, with multiple trawls in each relevant ICES area, in principle carried out by different member states. At least the species and size of each fish caught is registered. The Netherlands contrib |
D1C3:
To determine the ‘demographic characteristics´ (D1C3) of the fish population, the distribution by size of the fish community is assessed using OSPAR’s Large Fish Indicator (LFI). The necessary data are collected for the assessment of fish stocks in accordance with the CFP.
Most of the data for the OSPAR Large Fish Indicator (LFI) are derived from the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS). This survey falls under the monitoring for the Common Fisheries Policy and has been operational since the end of the 1960s. For the MSFD reporting, data since 1983 are used because the monitoring survey is guaranteed to have the necessary consistency from that year. One way that consistency is ensured is through the use of the standard bottom trawl, the Grand Ouverture Verticale (GOV), which involves multiple trawls according to the principles of ‘stratified random sampling’ in the relevant ICES blocks, in principle by different member states. Every year the trawls are aggregated to calculate the indices (ICES, 2012). The IBTS monitoring survey registers at least the species and size of every fish that is caught.
The Dutch contribution to the IBTS falls under the Statutory Research Task (WOT) for Fisheries and the Data Collection Framework (DCF). This monitoring is conducted annually, in cooperation/coordination? with other countries, at the Greater North Sea level. ICES coordinates the monitoring and is responsible for the necessary quality assurance and quality control. An additional quality assurance and quality control process has been incorporated for calculations for this indicator (Moriarty, 2017, Greenstreet, 2017).
There are no changes in the monitoring compared with the MSFD monitoring programme in 2014.
D4C3:
The size structure in trophic guilds is measured in relation to the fish community and is expressed in terms of ‘typical length’.
The size structure of fish is monitored with the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) as part of the monitoring for the CFP. This monitoring survey has been operational since the end of the 1960s, however, only data that have been collected since 1983 are used for MSFD reporting, since the necessary consistency in the monitoring can only be guaranteed from that year. The survey employs the stratified random sampling method, with multiple trawls in each relevant ICES area, in principle carried out by different member states. At least the species and size of each fish caught is registered. The Netherlands contrib |
D1C3:
To determine the ‘demographic characteristics´ (D1C3) of the fish population, the distribution by size of the fish community is assessed using OSPAR’s Large Fish Indicator (LFI). The necessary data are collected for the assessment of fish stocks in accordance with the CFP.
Most of the data for the OSPAR Large Fish Indicator (LFI) are derived from the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS). This survey falls under the monitoring for the Common Fisheries Policy and has been operational since the end of the 1960s. For the MSFD reporting, data since 1983 are used because the monitoring survey is guaranteed to have the necessary consistency from that year. One way that consistency is ensured is through the use of the standard bottom trawl, the Grand Ouverture Verticale (GOV), which involves multiple trawls according to the principles of ‘stratified random sampling’ in the relevant ICES blocks, in principle by different member states. Every year the trawls are aggregated to calculate the indices (ICES, 2012). The IBTS monitoring survey registers at least the species and size of every fish that is caught.
The Dutch contribution to the IBTS falls under the Statutory Research Task (WOT) for Fisheries and the Data Collection Framework (DCF). This monitoring is conducted annually, in cooperation/coordination? with other countries, at the Greater North Sea level. ICES coordinates the monitoring and is responsible for the necessary quality assurance and quality control. An additional quality assurance and quality control process has been incorporated for calculations for this indicator (Moriarty, 2017, Greenstreet, 2017).
There are no changes in the monitoring compared with the MSFD monitoring programme in 2014.
D4C3:
The size structure in trophic guilds is measured in relation to the fish community and is expressed in terms of ‘typical length’.
The size structure of fish is monitored with the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) as part of the monitoring for the CFP. This monitoring survey has been operational since the end of the 1960s, however, only data that have been collected since 1983 are used for MSFD reporting, since the necessary consistency in the monitoring can only be guaranteed from that year. The survey employs the stratified random sampling method, with multiple trawls in each relevant ICES area, in principle carried out by different member states. At least the species and size of each fish caught is registered. The Netherlands contrib |
D1C3:
To determine the ‘demographic characteristics´ (D1C3) of the fish population, the distribution by size of the fish community is assessed using OSPAR’s Large Fish Indicator (LFI). The necessary data are collected for the assessment of fish stocks in accordance with the CFP.
Most of the data for the OSPAR Large Fish Indicator (LFI) are derived from the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS). This survey falls under the monitoring for the Common Fisheries Policy and has been operational since the end of the 1960s. For the MSFD reporting, data since 1983 are used because the monitoring survey is guaranteed to have the necessary consistency from that year. One way that consistency is ensured is through the use of the standard bottom trawl, the Grand Ouverture Verticale (GOV), which involves multiple trawls according to the principles of ‘stratified random sampling’ in the relevant ICES blocks, in principle by different member states. Every year the trawls are aggregated to calculate the indices (ICES, 2012). The IBTS monitoring survey registers at least the species and size of every fish that is caught.
The Dutch contribution to the IBTS falls under the Statutory Research Task (WOT) for Fisheries and the Data Collection Framework (DCF). This monitoring is conducted annually, in cooperation/coordination? with other countries, at the Greater North Sea level. ICES coordinates the monitoring and is responsible for the necessary quality assurance and quality control. An additional quality assurance and quality control process has been incorporated for calculations for this indicator (Moriarty, 2017, Greenstreet, 2017).
There are no changes in the monitoring compared with the MSFD monitoring programme in 2014.
D4C3:
The size structure in trophic guilds is measured in relation to the fish community and is expressed in terms of ‘typical length’.
The size structure of fish is monitored with the International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) as part of the monitoring for the CFP. This monitoring survey has been operational since the end of the 1960s, however, only data that have been collected since 1983 are used for MSFD reporting, since the necessary consistency in the monitoring can only be guaranteed from that year. The survey employs the stratified random sampling method, with multiple trawls in each relevant ICES area, in principle carried out by different member states. At least the species and size of each fish caught is registered. The Netherlands contrib |
Monitoring purpose |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other policies and conventions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regional cooperation - coordinating body |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Regional cooperation - countries involved |
||||||||||||||||||||
Regional cooperation - implementation level |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Monitoring details |
||||||||||||||||||||
Features |
Coastal fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Commercially exploited fish and shellfish
|
Coastal fish
|
Deep-sea fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Shelf ecosystems
|
Coastal fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Commercially exploited fish and shellfish
|
Coastal fish
|
Deep-sea fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Shelf ecosystems
|
|
Coastal fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Commercially exploited fish and shellfish
|
Coastal fish
|
Deep-sea fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Shelf ecosystems
|
|
Coastal fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Coastal fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Commercially exploited fish and shellfish
|
Coastal fish
|
Deep-sea fish
|
Demersal shelf fish
|
Pelagic shelf fish
|
Shelf ecosystems
|
|
Elements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GES criteria |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C4 |
D1C4 |
D1C4 |
D1C5 |
D1C5 |
D1C5 |
D1C5 |
D3C2 |
D1C3 |
D1C3 |
D1C3 |
D1C3 |
D4C3 |
Parameters |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parameter Other |
Proportion Failing to Spawn (PFS) |
Proportion Failing to Spawn (PFS) |
Proportion Failing to Spawn (PFS) |
Proportion Failing to Spawn (PFS) |
Proportion Failing to Spawn (PFS) |
Habitat condition
Suitability |
Habitat condition
Suitability |
Habitat condition
Suitability |
Habitat condition
Suitability |
|||||||||||
Spatial scope |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marine reporting units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Temporal scope (start date - end date) |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
1983-9999 |
1983-9999 |
1983-9999 |
1983-9999 |
1983-9999 |
Monitoring frequency |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Monitoring type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring method |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring method other |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Spawning Stock Biomass has been fully incorporated into the existing monitoring programmes relating to the Statutory Research Tasks for Fisheries (WOT) and the Data Collection Framework (DCF, coordinated by ICES).
Information from, among others, the following monitoring programmes is used: Sole Net Survey (SNS) [A], Demersal Young Fish Survey (DYFS) [B], International Bottom Trawl Survey (IBTS) [C], International Herring Larvae Surveys (IHLS)[D], Mackerel and horse mackerel eggs [E], Beam trawl Survey (BTS)[B]. |
Size distribution is not a standard parameter yet, however, the required data for the assessment is available through the regular surveys that are done for the DCF. Additional analyses of the data are necessary. The required data can be derived from the current database and based on this information the size distribution can be determined. |
Size distribution is not a standard parameter yet, however, the required data for the assessment is available through the regular surveys that are done for the DCF. Additional analyses of the data are necessary. The required data can be derived from the current database and based on this information the size distribution can be determined. |
Size distribution is not a standard parameter yet, however, the required data for the assessment is available through the regular surveys that are done for the DCF. Additional analyses of the data are necessary. The required data can be derived from the current database and based on this information the size distribution can be determined. |
Size distribution is not a standard parameter yet, however, the required data for the assessment is available through the regular surveys that are done for the DCF. Additional analyses of the data are necessary. The required data can be derived from the current database and based on this information the size distribution can be determined. |
Size distribution is not a standard parameter yet, however, the required data for the assessment is available through the regular surveys that are done for the DCF. Additional analyses of the data are necessary. The required data can be derived from the current database and based on this information the size distribution can be determined. |
Quality control |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. The data collected at national level undergoes quality control at ICES. |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. . ICES coordinates the monitoring and the quality assurance and quality control. An additional Quality Assurance/Quality Control procedure is incorporated for the calculation of this indicator (D4C3). |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. . ICES coordinates the monitoring and the quality assurance and quality control. An additional Quality Assurance/Quality Control procedure is incorporated for the calculation of this indicator (D4C3). |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. . ICES coordinates the monitoring and the quality assurance and quality control. An additional Quality Assurance/Quality Control procedure is incorporated for the calculation of this indicator (D4C3). |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. . ICES coordinates the monitoring and the quality assurance and quality control. An additional Quality Assurance/Quality Control procedure is incorporated for the calculation of this indicator (D4C3). |
Fish stocks are monitored by experienced researchers in accordance with internationally agreed working methods. . ICES coordinates the monitoring and the quality assurance and quality control. An additional Quality Assurance/Quality Control procedure is incorporated for the calculation of this indicator (D4C3). |
Data management |
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
www.ICES.dk
|
|||||
Data access |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
www.ices.dk |
Related indicator/name |
||||||||||||||||||||
Contact |
||||||||||||||||||||
References |
Greenstreet S.P.R. & Moriarty M. (2017) Manual for Version 3 of the Groundfish Survey Monitoring and Assessment Data Product. Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Vol 8 No 18.Greenstreet S.P.R. & Moriarty M. (2017) OSPAR Interim Assessment 2017 Fish Indicator Manual (Relating to 587 Version 2 of the Groundfish Survey Monitoring and Assessment Data Product). |
Greenstreet S.P.R. & Moriarty M. (2017) Manual for Version 3 of the Groundfish Survey Monitoring and Assessment Data Product. Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Vol 8 No 18.Greenstreet S.P.R. & Moriarty M. (2017) OSPAR Interim Assessment 2017 Fish Indicator Manual (Relating to 587 Version 2 of the Groundfish Survey Monitoring and Assessment Data Product). |
Greenstreet S.P.R. & Moriarty M. (2017) Manual for Version 3 of the Groundfish Survey Monitoring and Assessment Data Product. Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Vol 8 No 18.Greenstreet S.P.R. & Moriarty M. (2017) OSPAR Interim Assessment 2017 Fish Indicator Manual (Relating to 587 Version 2 of the Groundfish Survey Monitoring and Assessment Data Product). |
Greenstreet S.P.R. & Moriarty M. (2017) Manual for Version 3 of the Groundfish Survey Monitoring and Assessment Data Product. Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Vol 8 No 18.Greenstreet S.P.R. & Moriarty M. (2017) OSPAR Interim Assessment 2017 Fish Indicator Manual (Relating to 587 Version 2 of the Groundfish Survey Monitoring and Assessment Data Product). |
Greenstreet S.P.R. & Moriarty M. (2017) Manual for Version 3 of the Groundfish Survey Monitoring and Assessment Data Product. Scottish Marine and Freshwater Science Vol 8 No 18.Greenstreet S.P.R. & Moriarty M. (2017) OSPAR Interim Assessment 2017 Fish Indicator Manual (Relating to 587 Version 2 of the Groundfish Survey Monitoring and Assessment Data Product). |