All marine bird species appear to be in GES for D1C1, for the assessed fisheries (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). However, it is necessary to assess the fishing gear not covered by the current monitoring programmes, so the confidence level of this assessment is low. D1C2 and D1C4: There is no updated stock census of Procellariformes since the work of Monteiro et al. (1999) at regional level (all AAR) to measure the actual distribution area of the various species and total population and to assess GES. It is therefore necessary and urgent to update the population estimates through regional census for all Procellariformes. Only with long data series will it be possible to understand whether the observed changes between the different sampling periods are natural variability or whether other factors, such as anthropogenic pressures, affect the status of seabird populations in the Azores. There are no demographic parameters with regional coverage and sufficiently long standardised methodology to assess D1C3 with confidence in this cycle. The habitat for species D1C5 is a secondary criterion for seabirds (Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848). Due to insufficient knowledge of the distribution at sea of the populations (only anecdotal satellite telemetry data for some species) extending well beyond the subdivision of the Azores and the Macaronesian biogeographical region, this criterion has been considered ?Unknown? (MISTIC EESE II Consortium, 2018). The information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess most of the criteria for the different species (elements). It was therefore considered that GES is ?Unknown? at group level. JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets.

All marine bird species appear to be in GES for D1C1, for the assessed fisheries (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). However, it is necessary to assess the fishing gear not covered by the current monitoring programmes, so the confidence level of this assessment is low. D1C2 and D1C4: There is no updated stock census of Procellariformes since the work of Monteiro et al. (1999) at regional level (all AAR) to measure the actual distribution area of the various species and total population and to assess GES. It is therefore necessary and urgent to update the population estimates through regional census for all Procellariformes. Only with long data series will it be possible to understand whether the observed changes between the different sampling periods are natural variability or whether other factors, such as anthropogenic pressures, affect the status of seabird populations in the Azores. There are no demographic parameters with regional coverage and sufficiently long standardised methodology to assess D1C3 with confidence in this cycle. The habitat for species D1C5 is a secondary criterion for seabirds (Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848). Due to insufficient knowledge of the distribution at sea of the populations (only anecdotal satellite telemetry data for some species) extending well beyond the subdivision of the Azores and the Macaronesian biogeographical region, this criterion has been considered ?Unknown? (MISTIC EESE II Consortium, 2018). The information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess most of the criteria for the different species (elements). It was therefore considered that GES is ?Unknown? at group level. JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets.

All marine bird species appear to be in GES for D1C1, for the assessed fisheries (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). However, it is necessary to assess the fishing gear not covered by the current monitoring programmes, so the confidence level of this assessment is low. D1C2 and D1C4: There is no updated stock census of Procellariformes since the work of Monteiro et al. (1999) at regional level (all AAR) to measure the actual distribution area of the various species and total population and to assess GES. It is therefore necessary and urgent to update the population estimates through regional census for all Procellariformes. Only with long data series will it be possible to understand whether the observed changes between the different sampling periods are natural variability or whether other factors, such as anthropogenic pressures, affect the status of seabird populations in the Azores. There are no demographic parameters with regional coverage and sufficiently long standardised methodology to assess D1C3 with confidence in this cycle. The habitat for species D1C5 is a secondary criterion for seabirds (Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848). Due to insufficient knowledge of the distribution at sea of the populations (only anecdotal satellite telemetry data for some species) extending well beyond the subdivision of the Azores and the Macaronesian biogeographical region, this criterion has been considered ?Unknown? (MISTIC EESE II Consortium, 2018). The information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess most of the criteria for the different species (elements). It was therefore considered that GES is ?Unknown? at group level. JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets.

All marine bird species appear to be in GES for D1C1, for the assessed fisheries (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). However, it is necessary to assess the fishing gear not covered by the current monitoring programmes, so the confidence level of this assessment is low. D1C2 and D1C4: There is no updated stock census of Procellariformes since the work of Monteiro et al. (1999) at regional level (all AAR) to measure the actual distribution area of the various species and total population and to assess GES. It is therefore necessary and urgent to update the population estimates through regional census for all Procellariformes. The population estimates of the Garajaus (Charadriiformes) show noticeable inter-annual fluctuations observed in the annual censuses that make it difficult to assess their status. Only with long data series will it be possible to understand whether the observed changes between the different sampling periods are natural variability or whether other factors, such as anthropogenic pressures, affect the status of seabird populations in the Azores. There are no demographic parameters with regional coverage and sufficiently long standardised methodology to assess D1C3 with confidence in this cycle. Habitat for the species is a secondary criterion for seabirds (Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848). There is no information or monitoring scheme on the marine habitat of these birds. Seabirds, large migratory birds, may experience pressures in their feeding and/or wintering areas not covered by the current monitoring programmes due to lack of knowledge on distribution at sea, their demographic parameters and remote monitoring challenges (Ledison et al., 2012, MISTIC SET-II Consortium, 2018). The information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess most of the criteria for the different species (elements). It was therefore considered that GES is ?Unknown? at group level integration. JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets.

All marine bird species appear to be in GES for D1C1, for the assessed fisheries (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). However, it is necessary to assess the fishing gear not covered by the current monitoring programmes, so the confidence level of this assessment is low. D1C2 and D1C4: There is no updated stock census of Procellariformes since the work of Monteiro et al. (1999) at regional level (all AAR) to measure the actual distribution area of the various species and total population and to assess GES. It is therefore necessary and urgent to update the population estimates through regional census for all Procellariformes. The population estimates of the Garajaus (Charadriiformes) show noticeable inter-annual fluctuations observed in the annual censuses that make it difficult to assess their status. Only with long data series will it be possible to understand whether the observed changes between the different sampling periods are natural variability or whether other factors, such as anthropogenic pressures, affect the status of seabird populations in the Azores. There are no demographic parameters with regional coverage and sufficiently long standardised methodology to assess D1C3 with confidence in this cycle. Habitat for the species is a secondary criterion for seabirds (Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848). There is no information or monitoring scheme on the marine habitat of these birds. Seabirds, large migratory birds, may experience pressures in their feeding and/or wintering areas not covered by the current monitoring programmes due to lack of knowledge on distribution at sea, their demographic parameters and remote monitoring challenges (Ledison et al., 2012, MISTIC SET-II Consortium, 2018). The information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess most of the criteria for the different species (elements). It was therefore considered that GES is ?Unknown? at group level integration. JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets.

All marine bird species appear to be in GES for D1C1, for the assessed fisheries (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). However, it is necessary to assess the fishing gear not covered by the current monitoring programmes, so the confidence level of this assessment is low. D1C2 and D1C4: There is no updated stock census of Procellariformes since the work of Monteiro et al. (1999) at regional level (all AAR) to measure the actual distribution area of the various species and total population and to assess GES. It is therefore necessary and urgent to update the population estimates through regional census for all Procellariformes. The population estimates of the Garajaus (Charadriiformes) show noticeable inter-annual fluctuations observed in the annual censuses that make it difficult to assess their status. Only with long data series will it be possible to understand whether the observed changes between the different sampling periods are natural variability or whether other factors, such as anthropogenic pressures, affect the status of seabird populations in the Azores. There are no demographic parameters with regional coverage and sufficiently long standardised methodology to assess D1C3 with confidence in this cycle. Habitat for the species is a secondary criterion for seabirds (Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848). There is no information or monitoring scheme on the marine habitat of these birds. Seabirds, large migratory birds, may experience pressures in their feeding and/or wintering areas not covered by the current monitoring programmes due to lack of knowledge on distribution at sea, their demographic parameters and remote monitoring challenges (Ledison et al., 2012, MISTIC SET-II Consortium, 2018). The information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess most of the criteria for the different species (elements). It was therefore considered that GES is ?Unknown? at group level integration. JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets.

All marine bird species appear to be in GES for D1C1, for the assessed fisheries (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). However, it is necessary to assess the fishing gear not covered by the current monitoring programmes, so the confidence level of this assessment is low. D1C2 and D1C4: There is no updated stock census of Procellariformes since the work of Monteiro et al. (1999) at regional level (all AAR) to measure the actual distribution area of the various species and total population and to assess GES. It is therefore necessary and urgent to update the population estimates through regional census for all Procellariformes. The population estimates of the Garajaus (Charadriiformes) show noticeable inter-annual fluctuations observed in the annual censuses that make it difficult to assess their status. Only with long data series will it be possible to understand whether the observed changes between the different sampling periods are natural variability or whether other factors, such as anthropogenic pressures, affect the status of seabird populations in the Azores. There are no demographic parameters with regional coverage and sufficiently long standardised methodology to assess D1C3 with confidence in this cycle. Habitat for the species is a secondary criterion for seabirds (Commission Decision (EU) 2017/848). There is no information or monitoring scheme on the marine habitat of these birds. Seabirds, large migratory birds, may experience pressures in their feeding and/or wintering areas not covered by the current monitoring programmes due to lack of knowledge on distribution at sea, their demographic parameters and remote monitoring challenges (Ledison et al., 2012, MISTIC SET-II Consortium, 2018). The information was considered insufficient to characterise and assess most of the criteria for the different species (elements). It was therefore considered that GES is ?Unknown? at group level integration. JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets.

À data da presente avaliação, não existe informação que permita avaliar o BEA das espécies de aves marinhas.

À data da presente avaliação, não existe informação que permita avaliar o BEA das espécies de aves marinhas.

À data da presente avaliação, não existe informação que permita avaliar o BEA das espécies de aves marinhas.

À data da presente avaliação, não existe informação que permita avaliar o BEA das espécies de aves marinhas.

À data da presente avaliação, não existe informação que permita avaliar o BEA das espécies de aves marinhas.

À data da presente avaliação, não existe informação que permita avaliar o BEA das espécies de aves marinhas.

À data da presente avaliação, não existe informação que permita avaliar o BEA das espécies de aves marinhas.