Member State report / Art11 / 2014-2020 / D9 / Netherlands / NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea
| Report type | Member State report to Commission |
| MSFD Article | Art. 11 Monitoring programmes (and Art. 17 updates) |
| Report due | 2014-10-15; 2020-10-15 |
| GES Descriptor | D9 Contaminants in seafood |
| Member State | Netherlands |
| Region/subregion | NE Atlantic: Greater North Sea |
| Reported by | Rijkswaterstaat |
| Report date | 2014-10-16; 2020-11-17 |
| Report access |
http://cdr.eionet.europa.eu/nl/eu/msfd_mp/ansnl/envvd6rvq/ANSNL-D1346-Sub1-FishingMortality-16102014
http://cdr.eionet.europa.eu/nl/eu/msfd_mp/ansnl/envvd6rqw/ANSNL-D05-Sub5-OSPAR-InputAtm-15102014.xml
|
2014 data
2020 data
| Monitoring programme | Monitoring programme name |
|---|---|
| Monitoring programme | Reference existing programme |
| Monitoring programme | Marine Unit ID |
| Q4e - Programme ID | |
| Q4f - Programme description | |
| Q5e - Natural variability | |
| Q5d - Adequacy for assessment of GES | Q5d - Adequate data |
| Q5d - Adequacy for assessment of GES | Q5d - Established methods |
| Q5d - Adequacy for assessment of GES | Q5d - Adequate understanding of GES |
| Q5d - Adequacy for assessment of GES | Q5d - Adequate capacity |
| Q5f - Description of programme for GES assessment | |
| Q5g - Gap-filling date for GES assessment | |
| Q5h - Plans to implement monitoring for GES assessment | |
| Q6a -Relevant targets | Q6a - Environmental target |
| Q6a -Relevant targets | Q6a - Associated indicator |
| Q6b - Adequacy for assessment of targets | Q6b_SuitableData |
| Q6b - Adequacy for assessment of targets | Q6b_EstablishedMethods |
| Q6b - Adequacy for assessment of targets | Q6d_AdequateCapacity |
| Q6c - Target updating | |
| Q6d - Description of programme for targets assessment | |
| Q6e - Gap-filling date for targets assessment | |
| Q6f - Plans to implement monitoring for targets assessment | |
| Q7a - Relevant activities | |
| Q7b - Description of monitoring of activities | |
| Q7c - Relevant measures | |
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Adequate data |
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Established methods |
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Adequate understanding of GES |
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Adequate capacity |
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Addresses activities and pressures |
| Q7e - Adequacy for assessment of measures | Q7d - Addresses effectiveness of measures |
| Q7d - Description of monitoring for measures | |
| Q7f - Gap-filling date for activities and measures | |
| Q8a - Links to existing Monitoring Programmes | |
| Reference sub-programme | Sub-programme ID |
| Reference sub-programme | Sub-programme name |
| Q4g - Sub-programmes | Sub-programme ID |
| Q4g - Sub-programmes | Sub-programme name |
| Q4k - Monitoring purpose | |
| Q4l - Links of monitoring programmes of other Directives and Conventions | |
| Q5c - Features | Q5c - Habitats |
| Q5c - Features | Q5c - Species list |
| Q5c - Features | Q5c - Physical/Chemical features |
| Q5c - Features | Q5c - Pressures |
| Q9a - Elements | |
| Q5a - GES criteria | Relevant GES criteria |
| Q5b - GES indicators | Relevant GES indicators |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Species distribution |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Species population size |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Species population characteristics |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Species impacts |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Habitat distribution |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Habitat extent |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Habitat condition (physical-chemical) |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Habitat condition (biological) |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (state/impact) | Habitat impacts |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (pressures) | Pressure input |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (pressures) | Pressure output |
| Q9b - Parameters monitored (activity) | Activity |
| Q9b Parameters monitored (other) | Other |
| Q41 Spatial scope | |
| Q4j - Description of spatial scope | |
| Marine Unit IDs | |
| Q4h - Temporal scope | Start date- End date |
| Q9h - Temporal resolution of sampling | |
| Q9c - Monitoring method | |
| Q9d - Description of alteration to method | |
| Q9e - Quality assurance | |
| Q9f - Quality control | |
| Q9g - Spatial resolution of sampling | Q9g - Proportion of area covered % |
| Q9g - Spatial resolution of sampling | Q9g - No. of samples |
| Q9i - Description of sample representivity | |
| Q10a - Scale for aggregation of data | |
| Q10b - Other scale for aggregation of data | |
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c - Data type |
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c - Data access mechanism |
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c - Data access rights |
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c - INSPIRE standard |
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c Date data are available |
| Q10c - Access to monitoring data | Q10c - Data update frequency |
| Q10d - Description of data access | |
Descriptor |
D9 |
D9 |
D9 |
D9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Monitoring strategy description |
The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures.
The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3.
The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem.
Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to |
The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures.
The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3.
The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem.
Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to |
The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures.
The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3.
The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem.
Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to |
The principal purpose of the MSFD monitoring programme is to review the progress that has been made towards achieving good environmental status prescribed for each criterion in the Marine Strategy Part I (2018). This review is based on established indicators. The monitoring can also be used to evaluate the environmental targets defined for each descriptor. The environmental targets are operational in nature and are linked to specific actions and/or measures in the Marine Strategy Part 3. The effects of individual measures cannot generally be linked directly to environmental status or the criteria. Monitoring data can, however, indirectly give an indication of the effectiveness of measures.
The monitoring (methods, spatial and temporal coverage) aims to achieve sufficient statistical confidence in the assessment. The risk of not achieving GES or deterioration from GES is addressed in the Marine Strategy, Parts 1 and 3.
The European Commission requests that the electronic reports explain how the DPSIR cycle is monitored and to which part of the cycle the monitoring surveys are linked. The MSFD monitoring programme helps to generate better insight into the relationships between the use of the sea and the marine ecosystem. This can be accomplished by monitoring pressures and the underlying activities (D1C1: incidental bycatch, D2: non-indigenous species, D3C1: fish mortality, D5: eutrophication, D6C1/D6C4: physical loss of seabed/habitats and D6C2: fisheries intensity and sand extraction, D8 and D9: pollutants, D10: litter, D11: underwater noise), and by monitoring species and habitats (D1: biodiversity (with the exception of D1C1), D3C2: spawning stock biomass, D4: food web, D6C3/D6C5: habitats ) and hydrographical characteristics (D7). The numerous relationships between the various elements of the marine ecosystem are complex, and many are still not known. Consequently, it is often only possible to give an indication of the impact of specific activities on the marine ecosystem.
Experts generally derive DPSIR relationships from the monitoring of pressures/activities and of species and habitats (from the MSFD monitoring programme), in combination with data derived from permits and research programmes. However, some surveys have been established to measure pressures and their effects and/or to learn more about the effectiveness of measures. In designing the monitoring survey for benthic animals (habitats), the Netherlands explicitly took account of the need to |
Coverage of GES criteria |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Gaps and plans |
There are no monitoring gaps for D9.
|
There are no monitoring gaps for D9.
|
There are no monitoring gaps for D9.
|
There are no monitoring gaps for D9.
|
Related targets |
|
|
|
|
Coverage of targets |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Related measures |
|
|
|
|
Coverage of measures |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Adequate monitoring was in place in 2014 |
Related monitoring programmes |
|
|
|
|
Programme code |
ANSNL-D09-Sub1 |
ANSNL-D09-Sub1 |
ANSNL-D09-Sub1 |
ANSNL-D09-Sub1 |
Programme name |
Contaminant levels - in species, including seafood |
Contaminant levels - in species, including seafood |
Contaminant levels - in species, including seafood |
Contaminant levels - in species, including seafood |
Update type |
Same programme as in 2014 |
Same programme as in 2014 |
Same programme as in 2014 |
Same programme as in 2014 |
Old programme codes |
||||
Programme description |
Monitoring is necessary to establish whether the concentrations of contaminants in fish and other seafood comply with the agreed national and international standards. These standards are laid down in EU Regulation 1881/2006 for dioxins, PCBs, PAHs and metals. Monitoring must also show whether concentrations are increasing or declining.
For measurements in fish and other organisms for human consumption, including crabs, shrimps and shellfish, random samples are taken from different landed species originating from various geographical locations. The monitoring is carried out for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. The sampling occurs once a year. Catches from surveys on board research vessels are also used. Fish from both the Dutch section of the North Sea and elsewhere are used. An important criterion is that the collection is representative of the pattern of human consumption.
The Netherlands has two programmes to monitor contaminants in fish and seafood for human consumption. Both are carried out by Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR):
1. Monitoring Dutch seafood: Since 2006, concentrations of contaminants have been measured in approximately twenty seafood products. The contaminants are: organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs, non-dioxin-like PCBs, cadmium, lead, mercury and arsenic, PAH, PBDEs and PFAS.
2. Cod liver and hake liver programme: Since 1977, every year samples of cod have been taken at three locations, and of hake at a fourth location, for the cod liver and hake liver programme. The contaminants that are measured in the livers are PCBs, OCPs, PFAS, tributyltin and toxaphene. The purpose of this programme is to identify trends in the level of bioaccumulating compounds in fish, such as persistent organic pollutants (POPs).
The analyses are carried out according to validated and ISO17025-accredited monitoring methods (for heavy metals, dioxins and PCBs) and validated monitoring methods (for other contaminants). The fitness for purpose of the monitoring methods is tested several times a year. WFSR is the national reference laboratory for dioxins, PCBs and metals in food.
The monitoring has remained largely unchanged since 2014. PFASs, PBDEs and OCP are now also analysed, but no standards have been established for these compounds yet.
Chlorinated paraffins (CPs) have recently attracted the attention of various European organisations, including the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the European Com |
Monitoring is necessary to establish whether the concentrations of contaminants in fish and other seafood comply with the agreed national and international standards. These standards are laid down in EU Regulation 1881/2006 for dioxins, PCBs, PAHs and metals. Monitoring must also show whether concentrations are increasing or declining.
For measurements in fish and other organisms for human consumption, including crabs, shrimps and shellfish, random samples are taken from different landed species originating from various geographical locations. The monitoring is carried out for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. The sampling occurs once a year. Catches from surveys on board research vessels are also used. Fish from both the Dutch section of the North Sea and elsewhere are used. An important criterion is that the collection is representative of the pattern of human consumption.
The Netherlands has two programmes to monitor contaminants in fish and seafood for human consumption. Both are carried out by Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR):
1. Monitoring Dutch seafood: Since 2006, concentrations of contaminants have been measured in approximately twenty seafood products. The contaminants are: organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs, non-dioxin-like PCBs, cadmium, lead, mercury and arsenic, PAH, PBDEs and PFAS.
2. Cod liver and hake liver programme: Since 1977, every year samples of cod have been taken at three locations, and of hake at a fourth location, for the cod liver and hake liver programme. The contaminants that are measured in the livers are PCBs, OCPs, PFAS, tributyltin and toxaphene. The purpose of this programme is to identify trends in the level of bioaccumulating compounds in fish, such as persistent organic pollutants (POPs).
The analyses are carried out according to validated and ISO17025-accredited monitoring methods (for heavy metals, dioxins and PCBs) and validated monitoring methods (for other contaminants). The fitness for purpose of the monitoring methods is tested several times a year. WFSR is the national reference laboratory for dioxins, PCBs and metals in food.
The monitoring has remained largely unchanged since 2014. PFASs, PBDEs and OCP are now also analysed, but no standards have been established for these compounds yet.
Chlorinated paraffins (CPs) have recently attracted the attention of various European organisations, including the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the European Com |
Monitoring is necessary to establish whether the concentrations of contaminants in fish and other seafood comply with the agreed national and international standards. These standards are laid down in EU Regulation 1881/2006 for dioxins, PCBs, PAHs and metals. Monitoring must also show whether concentrations are increasing or declining.
For measurements in fish and other organisms for human consumption, including crabs, shrimps and shellfish, random samples are taken from different landed species originating from various geographical locations. The monitoring is carried out for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. The sampling occurs once a year. Catches from surveys on board research vessels are also used. Fish from both the Dutch section of the North Sea and elsewhere are used. An important criterion is that the collection is representative of the pattern of human consumption.
The Netherlands has two programmes to monitor contaminants in fish and seafood for human consumption. Both are carried out by Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR):
1. Monitoring Dutch seafood: Since 2006, concentrations of contaminants have been measured in approximately twenty seafood products. The contaminants are: organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs, non-dioxin-like PCBs, cadmium, lead, mercury and arsenic, PAH, PBDEs and PFAS.
2. Cod liver and hake liver programme: Since 1977, every year samples of cod have been taken at three locations, and of hake at a fourth location, for the cod liver and hake liver programme. The contaminants that are measured in the livers are PCBs, OCPs, PFAS, tributyltin and toxaphene. The purpose of this programme is to identify trends in the level of bioaccumulating compounds in fish, such as persistent organic pollutants (POPs).
The analyses are carried out according to validated and ISO17025-accredited monitoring methods (for heavy metals, dioxins and PCBs) and validated monitoring methods (for other contaminants). The fitness for purpose of the monitoring methods is tested several times a year. WFSR is the national reference laboratory for dioxins, PCBs and metals in food.
The monitoring has remained largely unchanged since 2014. PFASs, PBDEs and OCP are now also analysed, but no standards have been established for these compounds yet.
Chlorinated paraffins (CPs) have recently attracted the attention of various European organisations, including the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the European Com |
Monitoring is necessary to establish whether the concentrations of contaminants in fish and other seafood comply with the agreed national and international standards. These standards are laid down in EU Regulation 1881/2006 for dioxins, PCBs, PAHs and metals. Monitoring must also show whether concentrations are increasing or declining.
For measurements in fish and other organisms for human consumption, including crabs, shrimps and shellfish, random samples are taken from different landed species originating from various geographical locations. The monitoring is carried out for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality. The sampling occurs once a year. Catches from surveys on board research vessels are also used. Fish from both the Dutch section of the North Sea and elsewhere are used. An important criterion is that the collection is representative of the pattern of human consumption.
The Netherlands has two programmes to monitor contaminants in fish and seafood for human consumption. Both are carried out by Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR):
1. Monitoring Dutch seafood: Since 2006, concentrations of contaminants have been measured in approximately twenty seafood products. The contaminants are: organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), dioxins and dioxin-like PCBs, non-dioxin-like PCBs, cadmium, lead, mercury and arsenic, PAH, PBDEs and PFAS.
2. Cod liver and hake liver programme: Since 1977, every year samples of cod have been taken at three locations, and of hake at a fourth location, for the cod liver and hake liver programme. The contaminants that are measured in the livers are PCBs, OCPs, PFAS, tributyltin and toxaphene. The purpose of this programme is to identify trends in the level of bioaccumulating compounds in fish, such as persistent organic pollutants (POPs).
The analyses are carried out according to validated and ISO17025-accredited monitoring methods (for heavy metals, dioxins and PCBs) and validated monitoring methods (for other contaminants). The fitness for purpose of the monitoring methods is tested several times a year. WFSR is the national reference laboratory for dioxins, PCBs and metals in food.
The monitoring has remained largely unchanged since 2014. PFASs, PBDEs and OCP are now also analysed, but no standards have been established for these compounds yet.
Chlorinated paraffins (CPs) have recently attracted the attention of various European organisations, including the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the European Com |
Monitoring purpose |
|
|
|
|
Other policies and conventions |
|
|
|
|
Regional cooperation - coordinating body |
|
|
|
|
Regional cooperation - countries involved |
||||
Regional cooperation - implementation level |
Agreed data collection methods |
Agreed data collection methods |
Agreed data collection methods |
Agreed data collection methods |
Monitoring details |
||||
Features |
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
Contaminants – in seafood
|
|
Elements |
|
|
|
|
GES criteria |
D9C1 |
D9C1 |
D9C1 |
D9C1 |
Parameters |
|
|
|
|
Parameter Other |
||||
Spatial scope |
|
|
|
|
Marine reporting units |
|
|
|
|
Temporal scope (start date - end date) |
2006-9999 |
2006-9999 |
2006-9999 |
2006-9999 |
Monitoring frequency |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Yearly |
Monitoring type |
|
|
|
|
Monitoring method |
|
|
|
|
Monitoring method other |
For the WOT programme, each year 15-20 samples of North Sea fish and shellfish are taken and analysed on a wide range of contaminants. Every fish-sample is a mixed sample consisting of the edible parts of 25 individual fishes. http://edepot.wur.nl/274433 |
For the WOT programme, each year 15-20 samples of North Sea fish and shellfish are taken and analysed on a wide range of contaminants. Every fish-sample is a mixed sample consisting of the edible parts of 25 individual fishes. http://edepot.wur.nl/274433 |
For the WOT programme, each year 15-20 samples of North Sea fish and shellfish are taken and analysed on a wide range of contaminants. Every fish-sample is a mixed sample consisting of the edible parts of 25 individual fishes. http://edepot.wur.nl/274433 |
For the WOT programme, each year 15-20 samples of North Sea fish and shellfish are taken and analysed on a wide range of contaminants. Every fish-sample is a mixed sample consisting of the edible parts of 25 individual fishes. http://edepot.wur.nl/274433 |
Quality control |
Aanalysis are carried out according to validated and ISO17025 accredited methods (heavy metals, dioxins and PCBs) and validated measurement methods (other contaminants). Measurement methods are tested several times a year for their suitability for the purpose. Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR) is the national reference laboratory for dioxins, PCBs and metals in food. |
Aanalysis are carried out according to validated and ISO17025 accredited methods (heavy metals, dioxins and PCBs) and validated measurement methods (other contaminants). Measurement methods are tested several times a year for their suitability for the purpose. Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR) is the national reference laboratory for dioxins, PCBs and metals in food. |
Aanalysis are carried out according to validated and ISO17025 accredited methods (heavy metals, dioxins and PCBs) and validated measurement methods (other contaminants). Measurement methods are tested several times a year for their suitability for the purpose. Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR) is the national reference laboratory for dioxins, PCBs and metals in food. |
Aanalysis are carried out according to validated and ISO17025 accredited methods (heavy metals, dioxins and PCBs) and validated measurement methods (other contaminants). Measurement methods are tested several times a year for their suitability for the purpose. Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR) is the national reference laboratory for dioxins, PCBs and metals in food. |
Data management |
Marine Information and Data Centre
Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR) |
Marine Information and Data Centre
Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR) |
Marine Information and Data Centre
Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR) |
Marine Information and Data Centre
Wageningen Food Safety Research (WFSR) |
Data access |
||||
Related indicator/name |
|
|
|
|
Contact |
https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/uk/secundaire-navigatie/contact/ |
https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/uk/secundaire-navigatie/contact/ |
https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/uk/secundaire-navigatie/contact/ |
https://www.informatiehuismarien.nl/uk/secundaire-navigatie/contact/ |
References |