As part of EEA's ongoing security and identity management improvements, we are currently migrating the system to Entra ID authentication.
We kindly ask all users to start using Entra ID credentials when logging in to the system. 

Please note that LDAP authentication will be phased out and disabled by the end of August 2026. We encourage you to verify that you can successfully access the system and that your account and permissions function as expected after Entra ID login. Should you encounter any issues or require assistance during this transition, please contact Laszlo Cseh at laszlo.cseh@eaudeweb.ro Thank you for your cooperation and support.
As part of EEA's ongoing security and identity management improvements, we are currently migrating the system to Entra ID authentication.
We kindly ask all users to start using Entra ID credentials when logging in to the system. 

Please note that LDAP authentication will be phased out and disabled by the end of August 2026. We encourage you to verify that you can successfully access the system and that your account and permissions function as expected after Entra ID login. Should you encounter any issues or require assistance during this transition, please contact Laszlo Cseh at laszlo.cseh@eaudeweb.ro Thank you for your cooperation and support.

Member State report / Art8-2024 / 2024 / D6 / Netherlands / NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea

Report type Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article Art8
Report due 2024-10-15
GES Descriptor D6 Sea-floor integrity/D1 Benthic habitats
Member State Netherlands
Region/subregion NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea
Report date 2026-04-10 12:40:24

Nederlands Continentaal Plat vanaf de basislijn (0 mijl) (ANS-NL-MS-1)

Regional assessment area
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
OSPAR-Southern North Sea
Component MRUs
GES component
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
D6
Feature
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Physical disturbance to seabed
Physical disturbance to seabed
Physical loss of the seabed
Element
Circalittoral coarse sediment
Circalittoral coarse sediment
Circalittoral coarse sediment
Circalittoral coarse sediment
Circalittoral mixed sediment
Circalittoral mixed sediment
Circalittoral mixed sediment
Circalittoral mixed sediment
Circalittoral mud
Circalittoral mud
Circalittoral mud
Circalittoral mud
Circalittoral sand
Circalittoral sand
Circalittoral sand
Circalittoral sand
Infralittoral coarse sediment
Infralittoral coarse sediment
Infralittoral coarse sediment
Infralittoral coarse sediment
Infralittoral mud
Infralittoral mud
Infralittoral mud
Infralittoral mud
Infralittoral sand
Infralittoral sand
Infralittoral sand
Infralittoral sand
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment
Offshore circalittoral mud
Offshore circalittoral mud
Offshore circalittoral mud
Offshore circalittoral mud
Offshore circalittoral sand
Offshore circalittoral sand
Offshore circalittoral sand
Offshore circalittoral sand
Element extent
Trend element
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Element 2
Element source
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
EU
Criterion
D6C3
D6C4
D6C5
D6C5
D6C3
D6C4
D6C5
D6C5
D6C3
D6C4
D6C5
D6C5
D6C3
D6C4
D6C5
D6C5
D6C3
D6C4
D6C5
D6C5
D6C3
D6C4
D6C5
D6C5
D6C3
D6C4
D6C5
D6C5
D6C3
D6C4
D6C5
D6C5
D6C3
D6C4
D6C5
D6C5
D6C3
D6C4
D6C5
D6C5
D6C3
D6C4
D6C5
D6C5
D6C2
D6C2
D6C1
Parameter
Extent
Extent
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Extent
Extent
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Extent
Extent
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Extent
Extent
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Extent
Extent
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Extent
Extent
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Extent
Extent
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Extent
Extent
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Extent
Extent
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Extent
Extent
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Extent
Extent
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Extent
Extent
Extent
Threshold value upper
Threshold value lower
Threshold value operator
Threshold qualitative
The BISI index gives a score between 0 and 1, with 1 being the reference state
The BISI index gives a score between 0 and 1, with 1 being the reference state
The BISI index gives a score between 0 and 1, with 1 being the reference state
The BISI index gives a score between 0 and 1, with 1 being the reference state
The BISI index gives a score between 0 and 1, with 1 being the reference state
The BISI index gives a score between 0 and 1, with 1 being the reference state
The BISI index gives a score between 0 and 1, with 1 being the reference state
The BISI index gives a score between 0 and 1, with 1 being the reference state
The BISI index gives a score between 0 and 1, with 1 being the reference state
The BISI index gives a score between 0 and 1, with 1 being the reference state
The BISI index gives a score between 0 and 1, with 1 being the reference state
Threshold value source
OSPAR Convention
OSPAR Convention
National
OSPAR Convention
OSPAR Convention
National
OSPAR Convention
OSPAR Convention
National
OSPAR Convention
OSPAR Convention
National
OSPAR Convention
OSPAR Convention
National
OSPAR Convention
OSPAR Convention
National
OSPAR Convention
OSPAR Convention
National
OSPAR Convention
OSPAR Convention
National
OSPAR Convention
OSPAR Convention
National
OSPAR Convention
OSPAR Convention
National
OSPAR Convention
OSPAR Convention
National
Value achieved upper
39.0
0.52
0.07
38.0
0.84
0.07
56.0
0.87
0.08
57.0
0.47
0.09
8.0
0.62
0.07
16.0
0.24
0.08
56.0
0.45
0.09
5.0
0.58
0.07
26.0
0.91
0.07
97.0
0.85
0.16
69.0
0.61
0.21
Value achieved lower
Value unit
percentage
percentage
ratio
ratio
percentage
percentage
ratio
ratio
percentage
percentage
ratio
ratio
percentage
percentage
ratio
ratio
percentage
percentage
ratio
ratio
percentage
percentage
ratio
ratio
percentage
percentage
ratio
ratio
percentage
percentage
ratio
ratio
percentage
percentage
ratio
ratio
percentage
percentage
ratio
ratio
percentage
percentage
ratio
ratio
Proportion threshold value
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
Proportion value achieved
0.2
0.6
0.1
0.1
1.5
0.2
66.0
136420.0
283.0
Proportion threshold value unit
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
extent in km2 of pressure
extent in km2 of pressure
extent in km2 of pressure
Trend parameter
Unknown
Unknown
Stable
Stable
Unknown
Unknown
Stable
Stable
Unknown
Unknown
Stable
Stable
Unknown
Unknown
Stable
Improving
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Stable
Unknown
Unknown
Stable
Stable
Unknown
Unknown
Stable
Improving
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Stable
Deteriorating
Unknown
Unknown
Improving
Deteriorating
Stable
Improving
Stable
Parameter achieved
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
No
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
No
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
No
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
No
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
No
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
No
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
No
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
No
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
No
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
No
Unknown
Yes
Unknown
No
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Description parameter
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
The BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. No thresholds have yet been agreed upon for the BISI indicator. Therefore, the reported results are only indicative.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
The BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. No thresholds have yet been agreed upon for the BISI indicator. Therefore, the reported results are only indicative.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
The BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. No thresholds have yet been agreed upon for the BISI indicator. Therefore, the reported results are only indicative.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
The BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. No thresholds have yet been agreed upon for the BISI indicator. Therefore, the reported results are only indicative.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
The BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. No thresholds have yet been agreed upon for the BISI indicator. Therefore, the reported results are only indicative.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
The BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. No thresholds have yet been agreed upon for the BISI indicator. Therefore, the reported results are only indicative.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
The BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. No thresholds have yet been agreed upon for the BISI indicator. Therefore, the reported results are only indicative.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
The BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. No thresholds have yet been agreed upon for the BISI indicator. Therefore, the reported results are only indicative.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
The BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. No thresholds have yet been agreed upon for the BISI indicator. Therefore, the reported results are only indicative.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
The BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. No thresholds have yet been agreed upon for the BISI indicator. Therefore, the reported results are only indicative.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
The BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. No thresholds have yet been agreed upon for the BISI indicator. Therefore, the reported results are only indicative.
Disruption of the seabed due to sand extraction covers 0.1 percent of the Dutch part of the North Sea.
Bottom-disturbing fishing is widespread and by far the most important cause of disturbance: 66 percent (136420 km2) of the bottom of the Southern North Sea is subject to moderate to high fishing pressure.
Construction of wind turbines, platforms and pipelines leads to physical loss of the seabed through capping (sealed loss). Land reclamation also leads to sealed loss, but there were no initiatives in the last plan period. Bottom-fishing and resource extraction can also lead to loss of habitat (unsealed loss). This happens when intensive use substantially changes the sediment composition, causing the existing broad habitat type to change to another broad habitat type (BHT). According to OSPAR, physical loss of the seabed (criterion D6C1) in the Dutch part of the North Sea amounts to 201 km2 (out of 58,807 km2 ), or 0.34 per cent, which is almost entirely due to bottom trawling. An additional, more detailed national analysis shows that on top of this, 82 km2 (0.14 per cent) was lost due to other activities, such as the construction of navigation channels, which mainly took place in previous planning periods of the MSFD. In the last planning period, the loss barely increased.
Related indicator
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
  • condition-benthic-hab-margalef-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-BISI-2024
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
  • condition-benthic-hab-margalef-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-BISI-2024
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
  • condition-benthic-hab-margalef-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-BISI-2024
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
  • condition-benthic-hab-margalef-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-BISI-2024
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
  • condition-benthic-hab-margalef-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-BISI-2024
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
  • condition-benthic-hab-margalef-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-BISI-2024
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
  • condition-benthic-hab-margalef-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-BISI-2024
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
  • condition-benthic-hab-margalef-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-BISI-2024
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
  • condition-benthic-hab-margalef-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-BISI-2024
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
  • condition-benthic-hab-margalef-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-BISI-2024
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
  • condition-benthic-hab-margalef-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-BISI-2024
  • ANSNL-D6C2_NCP_zandwinning
  • physical-disturb-fisheries-bottom-contact-qsr23-ospar
  • ANS-NL-D6C1-D6C4 verlies per habitat
Criteria status
Unknown
Good
Not good
Not good
Unknown
Good
Not good
Not good
Unknown
Good
Not good
Not good
Unknown
Good
Not good
Not good
Unknown
Good
Not good
Not good
Unknown
Good
Not good
Not good
Unknown
Good
Not good
Not good
Unknown
Good
Not good
Not good
Unknown
Good
Not good
Not good
Unknown
Good
Not good
Not good
Unknown
Good
Not good
Not good
Not relevant
Not relevant
Not relevant
Description criteria
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
It is estimated that a large portion (58 percent) of the seabed in the Southern North Sea is medium to heavily affected by physical disturbance caused by bottom-disturbing fishing. The impact varies by habitat, but most habitat types are estimated to be at least 30 percent medium affected. In the Dutch North Sea, the impact from sand extraction is limited (a maximum of 0.3 percent of sandy habitat types). This assessment is qualitative, as no threshold has yet been established for the impacted status. Therefore, the status is unknown.
Criterion D6C4 considers loss by habitat type. The EU threshold value entails a maximum acceptable loss of 2 per cent per BHT. According to the OSPAR analysis, in the Dutch part of the North Sea there is surface loss of off-shore circalittoral silty habitat only. This loss due to bottom trawling amounts to 1.5 per cent. The habitat type occurs on and around the Central Oyster Grounds, Friese Front and Cleaver Bank. An additional national analysis shows that the area of loss due to the presence of structures (pipelines, platforms and wind turbines) and loss due to sand extraction (including deepened unloading docks) and deepening of shipping channels has been limited to a maximum of 0.56 per cent per broad habitat type. The loss of broad habitat types in the Dutch part of the North Sea thus remains below the threshold value of 2 percent and meets the standard for good environmental status for this criterion.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
For criterion D6C5, an EU threshold value has been set indicating the maximum proportion of a habitat type in an assessment area that may be substantially physically disturbed. As it is unclear what exactly is meant by 'substantially physically disturbed', the Netherlands has not yet adopted this threshold value. Under criterion D6C5, three indicators were used to determine the condition of the habitat types. Because the indicators react to different aspects, the combination gives a more complete picture of the condition than each of the three separately. The so-called BISI indicator shows that several typical, sensitive and key species are widely absent or occur in lower densities than would be expected under good conditions. This is observed in almost all broad habitat types. Relative species diversity in coastal areas is also low. However, despite the lack of specific sensitive species, several offshore habitat types are relatively species-rich.
Element status
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Not good
Description element
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
In the assessment of D6, all criteria are considered together. Despite residual methodological limitations, it was concluded that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is based on field measurements and specifically on the BISI indicator. The results of the other indicators support this conclusion, especially the OSPAR indicator BH3 that calculates the extent to which habitat type are adversely affected (criterion D6C3). Habitat loss does remain below the European threshold, however (D6C4).
Source assessment feature
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
  • National
Reporting method feature
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Type D
Trend feature
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Integration rule type parameter
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
Integration rule description parameter
Integration rule type criteria
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
OOAO
Integration rule description criteria
GES extent threshold
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
Proportion of habitats in good status
GES achieved
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
GES later than 2024, Art14ExceptionNotReported
Description overall status
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Habitat loss remains below the threshold value (D6C4). Despite the lack of threshold values for the other criteria, it can be said that good environmental status has not been achieved in the Dutch part of the North Sea. This assessment is mainly based on the moderate to poor condition of different habitat types (D6C5). Despite a slight decrease in fishing pressure (D6C2), the status is virtually unchanged compared to the previous planning period.
Assessments period
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
2016-2021
Related pressures
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
  • Physical disturbance to seabed
  • Physical loss of the seabed
Related targets
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.1
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.2
  • ANSNL-D1M-D1B-D1F-D6/D1-T1.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.1
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.2
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.3
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.4
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.5
  • ANSNL-D6-T6.6
Test TV
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Test results
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
False
Correct
Correct
Correct

ANS-NL-MS-CW-1-NL

Regional assessment area
Component MRUs
GES component
D6
D6
Feature
Benthic broad habitats
Benthic broad habitats
Element
Circalittoral sand
Infralittoral sand
Element extent
Trend element
Element 2
Element source
Criterion
D6C5
D6C5
Parameter
Habitat condition
Habitat condition
Threshold value upper
0.6
0.6
Threshold value lower
Threshold value operator
>=
>=
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source
Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
Value achieved upper
0.6
0.6
Value achieved lower
Value unit
ratio
ratio
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit
% area of habitat adversely affected
% area of habitat adversely affected
Trend parameter
Improving
Improving
Parameter achieved
Yes
Yes
Description parameter
The 2021 WFD assessment of all coastal water bodies is good, indicating an improvement for four of the five water bodies. These five coastal waters together form the coastal strip extending up to 1 nautical mile from the coast and therefore represent only a very small portion (2.4 percent) of the Dutch part of the North Sea. Translated into broad habitat types, this primarily concerns circalittoral sand and, to a lesser extent, infralittoral sand.
The 2021 WFD assessment of all coastal water bodies is good, indicating an improvement for four of the five water bodies. These five coastal waters together form the coastal strip extending up to 1 nautical mile from the coast and therefore represent only a very small portion (2.4 percent) of the Dutch part of the North Sea. Translated into broad habitat types, this primarily concerns circalittoral sand and, to a lesser extent, infralittoral sand.
Related indicator
  • ANS-NL-KRW- D6C5
  • ANS-NL-KRW- D6C5
Criteria status
Good
Good
Description criteria
The 2021 WFD assessment of all coastal water bodies is good, indicating an improvement for four of the five water bodies. These five coastal waters together form the coastal strip extending up to 1 nautical mile from the coast and therefore represent only a very small portion (2.4 percent) of the Dutch part of the North Sea. Translated into broad habitat types, this primarily concerns circalittoral sand and, to a lesser extent, infralittoral sand.
The 2021 WFD assessment of all coastal water bodies is good, indicating an improvement for four of the five water bodies. These five coastal waters together form the coastal strip extending up to 1 nautical mile from the coast and therefore represent only a very small portion (2.4 percent) of the Dutch part of the North Sea. Translated into broad habitat types, this primarily concerns circalittoral sand and, to a lesser extent, infralittoral sand.
Element status
Description element
Source assessment feature
Reporting method feature
Trend feature
Integration rule type parameter
Integration rule description parameter
Integration rule type criteria
Integration rule description criteria
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved
Description overall status
Assessments period
Related pressures
Related targets
Test TV
Yes
Yes
Test results
Correct
Correct