Member State report / Art11 / 2014-2020 / D3 / 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 | D3 Commercial fish and shellfish |
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_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_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-D146FISH |
ANSNL-D146FISH |
ANSNL-D146FISH |
ANSNL-D146FISH |
ANSNL-D146FISH |
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 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 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 |
Q5d - Adequacy for assessment of GES | Q5d - Established methods | 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 |
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 |
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 9.2.2 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.
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 |
|
Q5h - Plans to implement monitoring for GES assessment | 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. |
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 | 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 |
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 | 1b 1e 1i 1k |
1b 1e 1i 1k |
1b 1e 1i 1k |
1b 1e 1i 1k |
1b 1e 1i 1k |
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 |
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 |
Q6b - Adequacy for assessment of targets | Q6d_AdequateCapacity | 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 |
|
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 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 |
|
Q6f - Plans to implement monitoring for targets assessment |
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. |
|
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 |
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 |
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 |
Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Addresses activities and pressures | 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 |
Q7d - Description of monitoring for 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 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 |
|
Q8a - Links to existing Monitoring Programmes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reference sub-programme | Sub-programme ID | ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub4-SharkRays |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards |
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 - 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) |
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-Sub1-FishingMortality |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub2-Biomass |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub3-SizeDistr |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub4-SharkRays |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub5-Discards |
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 - 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) |
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 Measures |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact Measures |
StateImpact |
StateImpact Measures |
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 | 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 |
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 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 |
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 | 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. |
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 | 1969-9999 |
1969-9999 |
2014-9999 |
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 | 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 |
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 |
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 |
|
Q9g - Spatial resolution of sampling | Q9g - No. of samples | 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 |
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 | 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 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 |
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 | LocationInternationalDC |
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 |
Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c - INSPIRE standard | SpeciesDistribution |
SpeciesDistribution |
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 |
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 |
Q10d - Description of data access | 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 |
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 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
D3 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
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 |
Coverage of GES criteria |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Gaps and plans |
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
There are no gaps in the monitoring programme.
|
Related targets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coverage of targets |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Related measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coverage of measures |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Related monitoring programmes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Programme code |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality |
ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality |
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 |
Programme name |
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 - 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 |
Update type |
Same programme as in 2014 |
Same programme as in 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 |
Modified from 2014 |
Old programme codes |
|||||||||||||||||
Programme description |
D3C1
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.
D1C1
The necessary monitoring of incidental bycatch corresponds with the existing European rules laid down in R |
D3C1
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.
D1C1
The necessary monitoring of incidental bycatch corresponds with the existing European rules laid down in R |
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 |
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 |
Monitoring details |
The monitoring for D1C1 is operational, but optimizations will be necessary in the coming years |
The monitoring for D1C1 is operational, but optimizations will be necessary in the coming years |
|||||||||||||||
Features |
Species affected by incidental by-catch
|
Commercially exploited fish and shellfish
|
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
|
Species affected by incidental by-catch
|
Commercially exploited fish and shellfish
|
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
|
|
Species affected by incidental by-catch
|
Commercially exploited fish and shellfish
|
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
|
|
Species affected by incidental by-catch
|
Commercially exploited fish and shellfish
|
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
|
|
Elements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GES criteria |
D1C1 |
D3C1 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C2 |
D1C4 |
D1C4 |
D1C4 |
D1C5 |
D1C5 |
D1C5 |
D1C5 |
D3C2 |
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 |
1960-9999 |
1960-9999 |
Monitoring frequency |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Monitoring type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring method |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monitoring method other |
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]. |
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]. |
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]. |
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. 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. |
Data management |
EA
|
EA
|
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 |
Related indicator/name |
|||||||||||||||||
Contact |
|||||||||||||||||
References |