Member State report / Art11 / 2020 / D11 / Netherlands / NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea
| Report type | Member State report to Commission |
| MSFD Article | Art. 11 Monitoring programmes (and Art. 17 updates) |
| Report due | 2020-10-15 |
| GES Descriptor | D11 Energy, incl. underwater noise |
| Member State | Netherlands |
| Region/subregion | NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea |
| Reported by | Rijkswaterstaat Water, Verkeer en Leefomgeving Zuiderwagenplein 2 8224 AD Lelystad Postbus 2232 3500 |
| Report date | 2020-11-17 |
| Report access |
Descriptor |
D11 |
D11 |
|---|---|---|
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 |
Coverage of GES criteria |
Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024 |
Adequate monitoring will be in place by 2024 |
Gaps and plans |
Underwater noise is a relatively new topic and there is therefore no history of its monitoring. In the last ten years, a lot of knowledge has been developed in relation to the design of a monitoring and assessment system for underwater noise. Monitoring is in place for D11C1 and is sufficient to assess GES. For D11C2 an operational monitoring programme is expected to be in place in 2021. However, although a lot of progress has been made, there are still gaps. It is not yet possible to link underwater noise to effects on sensitive animal species through monitoring. For the time being, data collected from monitoring for D1 are used to assess the effects of underwater noise, and the results of specific studies can also be used.
In addition to underwater sound, other forms of energy, such as electromagnetic fields, also fall under the descriptor D11. Because there are still no criteria for these forms of energy, no good environmental status or environmental objectives have been formulated for them yet. However, measurements are already being taken in licensing procedures and/or in research and other projects. For example, the Wozep programme also investigates the effects of electromagnetic radiation from transport cables from wind turbines on the marine environment. |
Underwater noise is a relatively new topic and there is therefore no history of its monitoring. In the last ten years, a lot of knowledge has been developed in relation to the design of a monitoring and assessment system for underwater noise. Monitoring is in place for D11C1 and is sufficient to assess GES. For D11C2 an operational monitoring programme is expected to be in place in 2021. However, although a lot of progress has been made, there are still gaps. It is not yet possible to link underwater noise to effects on sensitive animal species through monitoring. For the time being, data collected from monitoring for D1 are used to assess the effects of underwater noise, and the results of specific studies can also be used.
In addition to underwater sound, other forms of energy, such as electromagnetic fields, also fall under the descriptor D11. Because there are still no criteria for these forms of energy, no good environmental status or environmental objectives have been formulated for them yet. However, measurements are already being taken in licensing procedures and/or in research and other projects. For example, the Wozep programme also investigates the effects of electromagnetic radiation from transport cables from wind turbines on the marine environment. |
Related targets |
|
|
Coverage of targets |
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 |
Related monitoring programmes |
|
|
Programme code |
ANSNL-D11-Sub1-Impulsive |
ANSNL-D11-Sub2-AmbientNoise |
Programme name |
Impulsive underwater noise - distribution, frequency and levels |
Continuous underwater noise - distribution, frequency and levels |
Update type |
New programme |
New programme |
Old programme codes |
||
Programme description |
Underwater noise is a relatively new topic and there is therefore no history of its monitoring. The Netherlands has heavily promoted the development of an international, EU-wide strategy for monitoring underwater sound.
The aim of the monitoring programme is to map the distribution, duration and level of disturbance due to impulsive noise. There is international agreement that disturbance will be expressed in terms of pulse block days (PBDs), i.e., the number of days that an activity causing impulsive noise takes place within an ICES block. The Netherlands expands on that definition by also investigating the spatial distribution of noise and by determining the number of days that the noise level is above the disturbance threshold for harbour porpoises, the harbour porpoise disturbance days. The assessment is based on the harbour porpoise because it is regarded as the species that is most sensitive to impulsive noise.
The monitoring strategy described in OSPAR’s CEMP Guidelines (2017) is based on registration of human activities that cause impulsive sound. In other words, there are no direct measurements of impulsive sound.
The major monitoring activities are data collection and analysis of the Impulsive Noise Registry, an international register jointly created by OSPAR and HELCOM to store data relating to human activities in the OSPAR and HELCOM regions. ICES manages the register.
The following parameters are registered: 1) type of activity, 2) duration (starting date and end date) with a resolution of one day, 3) location (at least the relevant block, but preferably the precise location of the activity), 4) number of peaks in impulsive sound, 5) category of the level of impulsive sound, 6) possible mitigation, and 7) spectral information, if available.
The number of PBDs can be downloaded directly from the register and their spatial distribution can be mapped. The data can be broken down by type of source (pile driving, seismic, explosions, sonar) and by the strength of the source (low, medium, high).
The register has been operational since 2016; the first data entered in it were from 2015. All of the relevant activities are regulated in the Netherlands, either through licensing or because they fall under specific laws, such as the Mining Act. The data are collected annually from the licensing bodies.
The Netherlands also uses the concept of harbour porpoise disturbance days, which is the number of days that the impulsive noise within a block is such t |
Knowledge about continuous sound is still limited; it is not possible yet to formulate a quantitative description of GES. In terms of monitoring, the main focus will be on launching an international monitoring programme for continuous sound, in order to map the level and spatial distribution of continuous sound. The programme is based on the monitoring strategy devised by TG Noise (Dekeling et al., 2014), which has been elaborated at OSPAR level (Snoek et al., 2015). The key to that strategy is a combination of measurements and numeric modelling.
The Netherlands has taken the initiative to establish a joint monitoring programme with the other countries around the North Sea. The JOMOPANS project (Joint Monitoring Programme of Ambient Noise North Sea) started in January 2018, and will continue until the end of 2020, after which an operational monitoring programme for continuous sound is expected to be in place.
A total of fourteen monitoring stations are being installed throughout the entire North Sea during the project, one of them in Dutch waters. The stations continuously register underwater sound over long periods. See Snoek et al. (2015) for a description of the methodology.
In addition, sound maps of the entire North Sea are being produced with the help of numerical modelling, with a resolution of at least the ICES blocks, but possibly also higher. The input for the numerical modelling are physical features such as the bathymetry and seabed composition (from EMODNET) and the conditions, such as meteorology and oceanographic parameters (waves, current, water temperature). The sources of noise from human activities form the most important input for the modelling. These are derived from AIS and VMS for shipping and fisheries and from the international register for impulsive sound (see D11C1). In the sound maps of the North Sea, the 5th 10th, 25th, 50th, 75th, 90th, and 95th percentiles of the sound pressure level are calculated for each season (Merchant et al., 2018). The measurements are used to validate the numerical calculations and to produce a confidence map of the results.
The development towards a monitoring programme for continuous sound is progressing well, while in 2014 there was no programme to report. The expectation is that an operational monitoring programme along the lines described above will be implemented in 2021.
The design of the monitoring and assessment system for underwater sound is based mainly on the Baltic Sea Information on th |
Monitoring purpose |
|
|
Other policies and conventions |
|
|
Regional cooperation - coordinating body |
|
|
Regional cooperation - countries involved |
||
Regional cooperation - implementation level |
Joint data collection |
Joint data collection |
Monitoring details |
||
Features |
Impulsive sound in water
|
Continuous low frequency sound
|
Elements |
|
|
GES criteria |
D11C1 |
D11C2 |
Parameters |
|
|
Parameter Other |
Pulse-Block-Days |
|
Spatial scope |
|
|
Marine reporting units |
|
|
Temporal scope (start date - end date) |
2015-9999 |
2021-9999 |
Monitoring frequency |
Daily |
Continually |
Monitoring type |
|
|
Monitoring method |
|
|
Monitoring method other |
Merchant, N. D., Farcas, A., Powell, C. F. (2018) Acoustic metric specification. Report of the EU INTERREG Joint Monitoring Programme for Ambient Noise North Sea (JOMOPANS).
Fischer, J-G., Kühnel, D., Basan, F. (2020) WP5 final report. Report of the EU INTERREG Joint Monitoring Programme for Ambient Noise North Sea (JOMOPANS). |
|
Quality control |
OSPAR CEMP
|
An operational monitoring program for D11 is expected to be implemented from 2021. Organizing the quality control of this monitoring is part of this implementation process. |
Data management |
||
Data access |
www.ICES.dk nog invullen |
|
Related indicator/name |
||
Contact |
||
References |
Dekeling, R.P.A., Tasker, M.L., Van der Graaf, A.J., Ainslie, M.A, Andersson, M.H., André, M., Borsani, J.F., Brensing, K., Castellote, M., Cronin, D., Dalen, J., Folegot, T., Leaper, R., Pajala, J., Redman, P., Robinson, S.P., Sigray, P., Sutton, G., Thomsen, F., Werner, S., Wittekind, D. & Young, J.V. (2014) Monitoring Guidance for Underwater Noise in European Seas, Part I: Executive Summary, Part II: Monitoring Guidance Specifications, Part III: Background Information and Annexes, JRC ScientiSnoek R.C., Ainslie M.A., Prior M.K. & Van Onselen E. (2015) Ambient noise monitoring strategy and joint monitoring programme for the North Sea – Part I: Monitoring Strategy Ambient Noise, Arcadis in opdracht van Rijkswaterstaat WVL, maart 2015. |