MS/Art8/2018/D1-M/Portugal/NE Atlantic: Bay of Biscay & Iberian Coast

Member State report / Art8 / 2018 / D1-M / Portugal / NE Atlantic: Bay of Biscay & Iberian Coast

Report type	Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article	Art. 8 Initial assessment (and Art. 17 updates)
Report due	2018-10-15
GES Descriptor	D1 Mammals
Member State	Portugal
Region/subregion	NE Atlantic: Bay of Biscay & Iberian Coast
Reported by	DGRM
Report date	2021-03-03
Report access	ART8_GES_PT_setembro2020.xml

Portuguese Continent Subdivision (ABI-PT-SD-CONT)

Simplified table

GES component	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M	D1-M
Feature	Baleen whales	Baleen whales	Baleen whales	Baleen whales	Baleen whales	Baleen whales	Baleen whales	Baleen whales	Deep-diving toothed cetaceans	Deep-diving toothed cetaceans	Deep-diving toothed cetaceans	Deep-diving toothed cetaceans	Deep-diving toothed cetaceans	Deep-diving toothed cetaceans	Deep-diving toothed cetaceans	Deep-diving toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans	Small toothed cetaceans
Element	Balaenoptera acutorostrata	Balaenoptera acutorostrata	Balaenoptera acutorostrata	Balaenoptera acutorostrata	Balaenoptera physalus	Balaenoptera physalus	Balaenoptera physalus	Balaenoptera physalus	Kogia breviceps	Kogia breviceps	Kogia breviceps	Kogia breviceps	Ziphius cavirostris	Ziphius cavirostris	Ziphius cavirostris	Ziphius cavirostris	Delphinus delphis	Delphinus delphis	Delphinus delphis	Delphinus delphis	Globicephala melas	Globicephala melas	Globicephala melas	Globicephala melas	Grampus griseus	Grampus griseus	Grampus griseus	Grampus griseus	Phocoena phocoena	Phocoena phocoena	Phocoena phocoena	Phocoena phocoena	Stenella coeruleoalba	Stenella coeruleoalba	Stenella coeruleoalba	Stenella coeruleoalba	Tursiops truncatus	Tursiops truncatus	Tursiops truncatus	Tursiops truncatus
Element code	137087	137087	137087	137087	137091	137091	137091	137091	137113	137113	137113	137113	137127	137127	137127	137127	137094	137094	137094	137094	137097	137097	137097	137097	137098	137098	137098	137098	137117	137117	137117	137117	137107	137107	137107	137107	137111	137111	137111	137111
Element code source	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/	Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	EU	National	National	National	National	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	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5	D1C1	D1C2	D1C4	D1C5
Parameter	Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)	Abundance	Distribution (spatial)	Extent	Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)	Abundance	Distribution (spatial)	Extent	Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)				Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)				Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)	Abundance	Distribution (spatial)	Extent	Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)						Distribution (spatial)	Extent	Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)	Abundance	Distribution (spatial)	Extent	Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)	Abundance	Distribution (spatial)	Extent	Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)	Abundance	Distribution (spatial)	Extent
Parameter other
Threshold value upper	1.7				1.7				1.7				1.7				1.7				1.7								1.7				1.7				1.7
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative		Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive		Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive										Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive							Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive		Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive		Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive		Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive	Comparison census in the assessment period with values reported in Art. 17 of the Habitats Directive
Threshold value source	Other (specify)				Other (specify)				Other (specify)				Other (specify)				Other (specify)				Other (specify)												Other (specify)				Other (specify)
Threshold value source other	Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas				Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas				Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas				Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas				Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas				Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas												Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas				Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic, North East Atlantic, Irish and North Seas
Value achieved upper			28400.0	28400.0			25200.0	25200.0									7.34		64400.0	64400.0							6800.0	6800.0	13.24		23400.0	23400.0	0.44		31100.0		5.1		43600.0	43600.0
Value achieved lower
Value unit			square kilometre	square kilometre			square kilometre	square kilometre	Other				Other				Other		square kilometre	square kilometre	Other						square kilometre	square kilometre	Other		square kilometre		Other		square kilometre		Other		square kilometre	square kilometre
Value unit other									percentage				percentage				Percentage				Percentage								Percentage				Percentage				Percentage
Proportion threshold value	100.0				100.0				100.0				100.0				100.0				100.0								100.0				100.0				100.0
Proportion value achieved	100.0				100.0								100.0				100.0				100.0								100.0				100.0				100.0
Proportion threshold value unit	% of population achieving threshold value				% of population achieving threshold value				% of population achieving threshold value				% of population achieving threshold value				% of population achieving threshold value				% of population achieving threshold value								% of population achieving threshold value				% of population achieving threshold value				% of population achieving threshold value
Trend	Unknown	Deteriorating	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Stable	Stable	Stable	Unknown				Unknown				Unknown	Stable	Stable	Stable	Unknown						Unknown	Unknown	Unknown	Deteriorating	Stable	Deteriorating	Unknown	Stable	Stable	Unknown	Unknown	Deteriorating	Stable	Stable
Parameter achieved	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes				Yes				No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes						Yes	Not assessed	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Not assessed	No	No	Yes	Yes
Description parameter	Based on sales data (evidence of incidental capture), it is estimated that anthropogenic mortality is higher than 1.7 % of the best estimate of abundance at the level of mainland Portugal.		There is no evidence that the distribution area has decreased.	Species with more coastal distribution, with more frequent occurrence between the continental slope and the coastal zone. With the increase of some pressure factors, a decrease in the habitat currently used by this species is expected to occur.			There is no evidence of a decrease in the range of the species.	There is no evidence of a decrease in the habitat of the species.									Values obtained for the polyvalent fleet, more precisely gillnets and trammel nets. Other fleets below 1.7 %.	There is a large variability in the size of the population from year to year, which may be related to very high levels of incidental capture.	There is no evidence of significant changes in the distribution area for this species.		No accidental catch events were recorded in the sampled trips of the different fleets (purse, trawl and polyvalent).						The clamp is distributed throughout the Portuguese coast by displaying some concentrations in the northern and southern parts of Portugal, with a lower use of deep sea areas. Based on available data it is assumed that its distribution area will be stable.	Due to coastal use and biology of the species, it is assumed that the habitat will fall mainly due to increased pressure factors such as maritime traffic. However, the available data are not sufficient to assess this criterion for the reporting period.	Value obtained for the polyvalent fleet, more precisely gillnets and trammel nets. Other fleets below 1.7 %.			The current adequate habitat area is much smaller than the potential distribution area and is therefore considered to be ?inappropriate?.	Estimated values for the deep-sea longline fleet. No accidental catch events were recorded during the sampled trips from the other fleets.			More recent estimates suggest a decrease in the frequency of use of deep-sea and coastal areas. However, the available data are not sufficient to assess D1C5 for the reporting period.	Values obtained for the polyvalent fleet, more precisely gillnets and trammel nets. Other fleets below 1.7 %.
Related indicator	Marine Mammals Bycatch	Marine Mammals Abundance	Marine Mammals Distribution	Marine Mammals Habitat	Marine Mammals Bycatch	Marine Mammals Abundance	Marine Mammals Distribution	Marine Mammals Habitat	Marine Mammals Bycatch				Marine Mammals Bycatch				Marine Mammals Bycatch	Marine Mammals Abundance	Marine Mammals Distribution	Marine Mammals Habitat	Marine Mammals Bycatch						Marine Mammals Distribution	Marine Mammals Habitat	Marine Mammals Bycatch	Marine Mammals Abundance	Marine Mammals Distribution	Marine Mammals Habitat	Marine Mammals Bycatch	Marine Mammals Abundance	Marine Mammals Distribution	Marine Mammals Habitat	Marine Mammals Bycatch	Marine Mammals Abundance	Marine Mammals Distribution	Marine Mammals Habitat
Criteria status	Not good	Not good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Good	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not good	Not good	Good	Good	Good	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Good	Not assessed	Not good	Not good	Good	Not good	Good	Good	Good	Not assessed	Not good	Not good	Good	Good
Description criteria										Insufficient information is available to assess this criterion. Sightings during dedicated census campaigns are low and have not made it possible to estimate abundance values.	The available information is insufficient to assess this criterion.	The available information is insufficient to assess this criterion.		Insufficient information is available to assess this criterion. Sightings during dedicated census campaigns are low and have not made it possible to estimate abundance values.	The available information is insufficient to assess this criterion.	The available information is insufficient to assess this criterion.						Insufficient information is available to assess this criterion. Sightings during dedicated census campaigns are low and have not made it possible to estimate abundance values.	The available information is insufficient to assess this criterion.	The available information is insufficient to assess this criterion.	The available information is insufficient to assess this criterion.	Insufficient information is available to assess this criterion. Sightings during dedicated census campaigns are low and have not made it possible to estimate abundance values.
Element status	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Good	Good	Good	Good	Not good	Not good	Not good	Not good
Description element	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	The item was not assessed because the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria or because no threshold was defined which would allow the assessment of the criterion (s). Element source	The item was not assessed because the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria or because no threshold was defined which would allow the assessment of the criterion (s). Element source	The item was not assessed because the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria or because no threshold was defined which would allow the assessment of the criterion (s). Element source	The item was not assessed because the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria or because no threshold was defined which would allow the assessment of the criterion (s). Element source	The item was not assessed because the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria or because no threshold was defined which would allow the assessment of the criterion (s). Element source	The item was not assessed because the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria or because no threshold was defined which would allow the assessment of the criterion (s). Element source	The item was not assessed because the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria or because no threshold was defined which would allow the assessment of the criterion (s). Element source	The item was not assessed because the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria or because no threshold was defined which would allow the assessment of the criterion (s). Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Species considered in the group ?small toothed cetaceans? since, in continental national waters, it does not have the characteristics of ?relaxing species?. The element was not assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria. Element source	Species considered in the group ?small toothed cetaceans? since, in continental national waters, it does not have the characteristics of ?relaxing species?. The element was not assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria. Element source	Species considered in the group ?small toothed cetaceans? since, in continental national waters, it does not have the characteristics of ?relaxing species?. The element was not assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria. Element source	Species considered in the group ?small toothed cetaceans? since, in continental national waters, it does not have the characteristics of ?relaxing species?. The element was not assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria. Element source	Species considered in the group ?small toothed cetaceans? on the basis of observations made in the area of assessment. The element was not assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria. Element source	Species considered in the group ?small toothed cetaceans? on the basis of observations made in the area of assessment. The element was not assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria. Element source	Species considered in the group ?small toothed cetaceans? on the basis of observations made in the area of assessment. The element was not assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria. Element source	Species considered in the group ?small toothed cetaceans? on the basis of observations made in the area of assessment. The element was not assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria. Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source	Element source
Integration rule type parameter
Integration rule description parameter
Integration rule type criteria	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other	Other
Integration rule description criteria	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?.	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?.	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?.	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?.	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?.	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?.	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?.	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?.	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?	The integration of the assessments of the different criteria for determining the status of the element followed the methodology proposed by the Habitats Directive, ensuring consistency between the results of the two Directives. The overall assessment of the conservation status of the species under that Directive when ?favourable? requires that none of the criteria is in ?unfavourable? status and only one criterion is ?unknown?
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed	Not assessed
Description overall status	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	The GES of this group has not been assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria at the level of the species. In addition, it was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitats used), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	The GES of this group has not been assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria at the level of the species. In addition, it was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitats used), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	The GES of this group has not been assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria at the level of the species. In addition, it was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitats used), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	The GES of this group has not been assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria at the level of the species. In addition, it was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitats used), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	The GES of this group has not been assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria at the level of the species. In addition, it was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitats used), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	The GES of this group has not been assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria at the level of the species. In addition, it was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitats used), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	The GES of this group has not been assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria at the level of the species. In addition, it was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitats used), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	The GES of this group has not been assessed because the information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess the different criteria at the level of the species. In addition, it was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitats used), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.	It was found that the groups of species proposed in Decision (EU) 2017/848 group together species with different ecological characteristics (particularly diet and habitat), and the evaluation at this level was not considered appropriate. For this reason, despite the status of the different species being assessed, the information has not been integrated in order to assess GES at group level. The assessment of the elements and GES has been carried out for all ABI_PT_ACONF_CONTAC_ACON_AG_CONT_AG_CONT_AG_CONTAC_ACONF_CONTIN_C areas, since it is considered that this is the environmentally relevant scale for this species group as proposed in Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848. In this case, and for all species, the assessment area coincides with its distribution area in national waters.
Assessments period	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017	2012-2017
Related pressures	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Impulsive sound in water	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Impulsive sound in water	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Impulsive sound in water	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Impulsive sound in water	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Impulsive sound in water	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Impulsive sound in water	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Impulsive sound in water	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Impulsive sound in water	Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed	Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities) Litter in the environment Physical disturbance to seabed
Related targets	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont	ABIPT-T1-D1Cont ABIPT-T2-D1Cont ABIPT-T3-D1Cont