Member State report / Art10 / 2012 / D1-B / Poland / Baltic Sea

Report type Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article Art. 10 Environmental targets (and Art. 17 updates)
Report due 2012-10-15
GES Descriptor D1 Birds
Member State Poland
Region/subregion Baltic Sea
Reported by National Water Management Authority
Report date 2015-11-20
Report access MSFD10TI_20160226_150132.xml

BAL-PL-AA-27, BAL-PL-AA-33, BAL-PL-AA-35, BAL-PL-AA-35A, BAL-PL-AA-36, BAL-PL-AA-38, BAL-PL-AA-38A, BAL-PL-AA-62, BAL-PL-MS-001

Feature [Target or Indicator code]
D1.1
1.1
1.2.1
1.3.1
GES descriptor, criterion or indicator [GEScomponent]
D1-B
D1C4
D1C2
D1C3
MarineUnitID
  • BAL-PL-AA-27
  • BAL-PL-AA-33
  • BAL-PL-AA-35
  • BAL-PL-AA-35A
  • BAL-PL-AA-36
  • BAL-PL-AA-38
  • BAL-PL-AA-38A
  • BAL-PL-AA-62
  • BAL-PL-MS-001
  • BAL-PL-AA-27
  • BAL-PL-AA-33
  • BAL-PL-AA-35
  • BAL-PL-AA-35A
  • BAL-PL-AA-36
  • BAL-PL-AA-38
  • BAL-PL-AA-38A
  • BAL-PL-AA-62
  • BAL-PL-MS-001
  • BAL-PL-AA-27
  • BAL-PL-AA-33
  • BAL-PL-AA-35
  • BAL-PL-AA-35A
  • BAL-PL-AA-36
  • BAL-PL-AA-38
  • BAL-PL-AA-38A
  • BAL-PL-AA-62
  • BAL-PL-MS-001
  • BAL-PL-AA-27
  • BAL-PL-AA-33
  • BAL-PL-AA-35
  • BAL-PL-AA-35A
  • BAL-PL-AA-36
  • BAL-PL-AA-38
  • BAL-PL-AA-38A
  • BAL-PL-AA-62
  • BAL-PL-MS-001
Method used
In all sub-basins the same approach for setting targets was applied. For all indicators 5-class classification scales were developed, similarly to FWD approach of high, good, moderate, poor and bad status. The target=GES border was set at the border between Good and Moderate status. Indicators are set in Commission Decision.
In all sub-basins the same approach for setting targets was applied. For all indicators 5-class classification scales were developed, similarly to FWD approach of high, good, moderate, poor and bad status. The target=GES border was set at the border between Good and Moderate status. Indicators are set in Commission Decision.
In all sub-basins the same approach for setting targets was applied. For all indicators 5-class classification scales were developed, similarly to FWD approach of high, good, moderate, poor and bad status. The target=GES border was set at the border between Good and Moderate status. Indicators are set in Commission Decision.
In all sub-basins the same approach for setting targets was applied. For all indicators 5-class classification scales were developed, similarly to FWD approach of high, good, moderate, poor and bad status. The target=GES border was set at the border between Good and Moderate status. Indicators are set in Commission Decision.
Description [Targets]
D1- Reducing or maintaining the level of anthropogenic pressure to assure the maintenance of natural habitats where natural diversity of biological components is preserved and the habitats are protected within the Nature 2000 framework.
Threshold value [TargetValue]
Reference point type
TargetReferencePoint
TargetReferencePoint
TargetReferencePoint
TargetReferencePoint
Baseline
Method of determining the value depends on the nature of the criteria and corresponding indicators and may vary from trend based to expert judgment.
Background levels
Background levels
Background levels
Proportion
100
100
100
100
Assessment method
Current level of indicator is compared with reference value and the result is classified in a 2-class scale – GES – subGES
Current level of indicator is compared with reference value and the result is classified in a 2-class scale – GES – subGES
Current level of indicator is compared with reference value and the result is classified in a 2-class scale – GES – subGES
Current level of indicator is compared with reference value and the result is classified in a 2-class scale – GES – subGES
Development status
Further development needed (expected to be operational by 2018 if adopted)
Further development needed (expected to be operational by 2018 if adopted)
Further development needed (expected to be operational by 2018 if adopted)
Further development needed (expected to be operational by 2018 if adopted)
Type of target/indicator
State
State
State
State
Timescale
2020-12
Interim or GES target
GES
Compatibility with existing targets/indicators
Targets are compatible with all objectives to which Poland is committed in the frame of national, regional and international agreements
Targets are compatible with all objectives to which Poland is committed in the frame of national, regional and international agreements
Targets are compatible with all objectives to which Poland is committed in the frame of national, regional and international agreements
Targets are compatible with all objectives to which Poland is committed in the frame of national, regional and international agreements
Physical/chemical features
Predominant habitats
Functional group
Pressures