Member State report / Art8 / 2018 / D6 / Portugal / NE Atlantic: Macaronesia
Report type | Member State report to Commission |
MSFD Article | Art. 8 Initial assessment (and Art. 17 updates) |
Report due | 2018-10-15 |
GES Descriptor | D6 Sea-floor integrity/D1 Benthic habitats |
Member State | Portugal |
Region/subregion | NE Atlantic: Macaronesia |
Reported by | DGRM |
Report date | 2021-03-03 |
Report access | ART8_GES_PT_setembro2020.xml |
Part of Extended continental shelf (AMA-PT-AA-PCE_Antialtair)
GES component |
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feature |
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Element |
Abyssal |
Abyssal |
Abyssal |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Upper bathyal sediment |
Upper bathyal sediment |
Upper bathyal sediment |
Element code |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenBathyalUpSed |
HabBenBathyalUpSed |
HabBenBathyalUpSed |
Element code source |
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Element 2 |
|||||||||
Element 2 code |
|||||||||
Element 2 code source |
|||||||||
Element source |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
Criterion |
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
Parameter |
Extent
|
Extent
|
Extent
|
||||||
Parameter other |
|||||||||
Threshold value upper |
|||||||||
Threshold value lower |
|||||||||
Threshold qualitative |
N\ a
|
N\ a
|
N\ a
|
||||||
Threshold value source |
|||||||||
Threshold value source other |
|||||||||
Value achieved upper |
|||||||||
Value achieved lower |
|||||||||
Value unit |
|||||||||
Value unit other |
|||||||||
Proportion threshold value |
|||||||||
Proportion value achieved |
|||||||||
Proportion threshold value unit |
|||||||||
Trend |
Stable |
Stable |
Stable |
||||||
Parameter achieved |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes, based on low risk |
||||||
Description parameter |
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
||||||
Related indicator |
|||||||||
Criteria status |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Description criteria |
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Element status |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Description element |
|||||||||
Integration rule type parameter |
|||||||||
Integration rule description parameter |
|||||||||
Integration rule type criteria |
|||||||||
Integration rule description criteria |
|||||||||
GES extent threshold |
|||||||||
GES extent achieved |
|||||||||
GES extent unit |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
Description overall status |
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Assessments period |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
Related pressures |
|||||||||
Related targets |
Part of Extended continental shelf (AMA-PT-AA-PCE_Josephine)
GES component |
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feature |
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Element |
Abyssal |
Abyssal |
Abyssal |
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Upper bathyal sediment |
Upper bathyal sediment |
Upper bathyal sediment |
Element code |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenBathyalLowRock |
HabBenBathyalLowRock |
HabBenBathyalLowRock |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenBathyalUpReef |
HabBenBathyalUpReef |
HabBenBathyalUpReef |
HabBenBathyalUpSed |
HabBenBathyalUpSed |
HabBenBathyalUpSed |
Element code source |
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Element 2 |
|||||||||||||||
Element 2 code |
|||||||||||||||
Element 2 code source |
|||||||||||||||
Element source |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
Criterion |
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
Parameter |
Extent
|
Extent
|
Extent
|
Extent
|
Extent
|
||||||||||
Parameter other |
|||||||||||||||
Threshold value upper |
|||||||||||||||
Threshold value lower |
|||||||||||||||
Threshold qualitative |
N/a
|
N/a
|
N/a
|
N/a
|
N/a
|
||||||||||
Threshold value source |
|||||||||||||||
Threshold value source other |
|||||||||||||||
Value achieved upper |
|||||||||||||||
Value achieved lower |
|||||||||||||||
Value unit |
|||||||||||||||
Value unit other |
|||||||||||||||
Proportion threshold value |
|||||||||||||||
Proportion value achieved |
|||||||||||||||
Proportion threshold value unit |
|||||||||||||||
Trend |
Stable |
Stable |
Stable |
Stable |
Stable |
||||||||||
Parameter achieved |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes, based on low risk |
||||||||||
Description parameter |
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
||||||||||
Related indicator |
|||||||||||||||
Criteria status |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Description criteria |
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Element status |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Description element |
|||||||||||||||
Integration rule type parameter |
|||||||||||||||
Integration rule description parameter |
|||||||||||||||
Integration rule type criteria |
|||||||||||||||
Integration rule description criteria |
|||||||||||||||
GES extent threshold |
|||||||||||||||
GES extent achieved |
|||||||||||||||
GES extent unit |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
Description overall status |
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
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 |
Related pressures |
|||||||||||||||
Related targets |
Part of Extended continental shelf (AMA-PT-AA-PCE_MARNA)
GES component |
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feature |
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Element |
Abyssal |
Abyssal |
Abyssal |
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Upper bathyal sediment |
Upper bathyal sediment |
Upper bathyal sediment |
Element code |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenBathyalLowRock |
HabBenBathyalLowRock |
HabBenBathyalLowRock |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenBathyalUpReef |
HabBenBathyalUpReef |
HabBenBathyalUpReef |
HabBenBathyalUpSed |
HabBenBathyalUpSed |
HabBenBathyalUpSed |
Element code source |
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Element 2 |
|||||||||||||||
Element 2 code |
|||||||||||||||
Element 2 code source |
|||||||||||||||
Element source |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
Criterion |
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
Parameter |
Extent
|
Extent
|
Extent
|
Extent
|
Extent
|
||||||||||
Parameter other |
|||||||||||||||
Threshold value upper |
|||||||||||||||
Threshold value lower |
|||||||||||||||
Threshold qualitative |
N\ a
|
N\ a
|
N\ a
|
N\ a
|
N\ a
|
||||||||||
Threshold value source |
|||||||||||||||
Threshold value source other |
|||||||||||||||
Value achieved upper |
|||||||||||||||
Value achieved lower |
|||||||||||||||
Value unit |
|||||||||||||||
Value unit other |
|||||||||||||||
Proportion threshold value |
|||||||||||||||
Proportion value achieved |
|||||||||||||||
Proportion threshold value unit |
|||||||||||||||
Trend |
Stable |
Stable |
Stable |
Stable |
Stable |
||||||||||
Parameter achieved |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes, based on low risk |
||||||||||
Description parameter |
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
||||||||||
Related indicator |
|||||||||||||||
Criteria status |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Description criteria |
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Element status |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Description element |
|||||||||||||||
Integration rule type parameter |
|||||||||||||||
Integration rule description parameter |
|||||||||||||||
Integration rule type criteria |
|||||||||||||||
Integration rule description criteria |
|||||||||||||||
GES extent threshold |
|||||||||||||||
GES extent achieved |
|||||||||||||||
GES extent unit |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
Description overall status |
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
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 |
Related pressures |
|||||||||||||||
Related targets |
Part of Extended continental shelf (AMA-PT-AA-PCE_Rainbow)
GES component |
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feature |
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Element |
Abyssal |
Abyssal |
Abyssal |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Element code |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
Element code source |
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Element 2 |
||||||
Element 2 code |
||||||
Element 2 code source |
||||||
Element source |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
Criterion |
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
Parameter |
Extent
|
Extent
|
||||
Parameter other |
||||||
Threshold value upper |
||||||
Threshold value lower |
||||||
Threshold qualitative |
N\ a
|
N\ a
|
||||
Threshold value source |
||||||
Threshold value source other |
||||||
Value achieved upper |
||||||
Value achieved lower |
||||||
Value unit |
||||||
Value unit other |
||||||
Proportion threshold value |
||||||
Proportion value achieved |
||||||
Proportion threshold value unit |
||||||
Trend |
Stable |
Stable |
||||
Parameter achieved |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes, based on low risk |
||||
Description parameter |
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
There are no activities that affect or affect the integrity of the seabed, such as bottom trawling which is prohibited in these areas.
|
||||
Related indicator |
||||||
Criteria status |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good, based on low risk |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Description criteria |
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Information available on habitat types is insufficient to assess this criterion.
|
Element status |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Description element |
||||||
Integration rule type parameter |
||||||
Integration rule description parameter |
||||||
Integration rule type criteria |
||||||
Integration rule description criteria |
||||||
GES extent threshold |
||||||
GES extent achieved |
||||||
GES extent unit |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
Proportion of habitats in good status |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
GES achieved |
Description overall status |
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Despite the information gaps mentioned in the initial assessment report, it was considered that the Good Environmental Status was achieved, since activities that condition or alter the integrity of the seabed are unknown, such as bottom trawling that is prohibited in these areas.
|
Assessments period |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
Related pressures |
||||||
Related targets |
Azores Subdivision (AMA-PT-SD-AZO)
GES component |
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
---|---|---|---|---|
Feature |
Other benthic habitats
|
Other benthic habitats
|
Other benthic habitats
|
Physical loss of the seabed
|
Element |
Reefs |
Reefs |
Reefs |
Benthic habitats |
Element code |
1170 |
1170 |
1170 |
HabBenAll |
Element code source |
HabitatsDirective
|
HabitatsDirective
|
HabitatsDirective
|
Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant
|
Element 2 |
||||
Element 2 code |
||||
Element 2 code source |
||||
Element source |
Other |
Other |
Other |
National |
Criterion |
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C1
|
Parameter |
Extent
|
Extent
|
Habitat condition
|
Extent
|
Parameter other |
||||
Threshold value upper |
||||
Threshold value lower |
||||
Threshold qualitative |
||||
Threshold value source |
||||
Threshold value source other |
||||
Value achieved upper |
||||
Value achieved lower |
||||
Value unit |
||||
Value unit other |
||||
Proportion threshold value |
||||
Proportion value achieved |
||||
Proportion threshold value unit |
||||
Trend |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Parameter achieved |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Description parameter |
The habitats identified in the region are distributed by a variety of ecological contexts and in the depth range ranging from 3 to 4 metres above the coast to the depths of more than 4.000 m (offshore at abissal, Schmoning et al., 2015).
|
According to the Red List of Habitats in Europe, there are six threatened habitats in the Azores subdivision, four classified as Vulnerable and two as In Danger.
Natura 2000 Habitats Directive aims to conserve threatened habitats and species, particularin three marine habitats for the region of conservation concern: Sheltered, submerged or semi-submerged and reefs (including deep sea rock formations, seamounts and deep water hydrothermal camps. The Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR) refers to a number of habitats that are considered to be at risk and/or in decline, such as gardens and coral reefs and sponge aggregations, in the deep field, coastal fields of maerl in coastal areas and shallow and deep water hydrothermal camps.
|
||
Related indicator |
|
|||
Criteria status |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Description criteria |
Sampaio et al., 2012). These estimates do not take into account the bodies affected but not presented in the fishing gear, the fishing mortality rate should therefore be higher than in the literature (Pham et al., 2014). In contrast to array areas where large epbenthic organisms are absent (Hall-Spencer et al., 2002) in the case of bottom longlining these organisms (at least two species) are present suggesting that the majority of cold-water corals are in good condition and only a small proportion is affected (Pham et al., 2014). Local fishermen have recognised that the places where more coral has been taken off by fishing was the seamounts of the Princesa Alice, Azores, Baixa de S. Mateus, Alcatraz of the North, Ferura, Voador and Gigante
|
|||
Element status |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Description element |
The European project has published a list of EUNIS habitats identified for the Azores region, which includes proposals for new classes (tempera et al., 2013). Identifies 90 benthic habitats previously listed in EUNIS and 81 not included in the list. The authors therefore propose to include them, and indicate 18 previously identified habitats requiring amendment, making a total of 196 EUNIS habitats in the AAR (tempera et al., 2013). The exposure of coastal margins to intense oceanographic conditions is significant, given the small size of island platforms and the sharp drop of the slopes, which are adjacent to the islands of the Azores. In this context, marine habitats in this part of the North-East Atlantic support characteristic habitats of highly exposed waves and ocean currents (Gubbay et al., 2016).
|
The European project has published a list of EUNIS habitats identified for the Azores region, which includes proposals for new classes (tempera et al., 2013). Identifies 90 benthic habitats previously listed in EUNIS and 81 not included in the list. The authors therefore propose to include them, and indicate 18 previously identified habitats requiring amendment, making a total of 196 EUNIS habitats in the AAR (tempera et al., 2013). The exposure of coastal margins to intense oceanographic conditions is significant, given the small size of island platforms and the sharp drop of the slopes, which are adjacent to the islands of the Azores. In this context, marine habitats in this part of the North-East Atlantic support characteristic habitats of highly exposed waves and ocean currents (Gubbay et al., 2016).
|
The European project has published a list of EUNIS habitats identified for the Azores region, which includes proposals for new classes (tempera et al., 2013). Identifies 90 benthic habitats previously listed in EUNIS and 81 not included in the list. The authors therefore propose to include them, and indicate 18 previously identified habitats requiring amendment, making a total of 196 EUNIS habitats in the AAR (tempera et al., 2013). The exposure of coastal margins to intense oceanographic conditions is significant, given the small size of island platforms and the sharp drop of the slopes, which are adjacent to the islands of the Azores. In this context, marine habitats in this part of the North-East Atlantic support characteristic habitats of highly exposed waves and ocean currents (Gubbay et al., 2016).
|
To estimate loss of seabed habitats, impacts were considered to be the main impacts caused by artificial coastal works, submarine cables and pipelines, and submarine scientific observatories. The pressure on port infrastructure, defence and bathing infrastructures analysed by level and degree of coastal artificalisation is considered to be relatively low (10 % of the artificial coastal strip). There are currently 14 submarine communication cables installed in the Azores and the most recent in 2013 (Faial-Flores-CorvoGraciosa) have been completed, with a total length in the EEZ of ca. 3 350 km. For the submarine pipelines, there are 3 in the Azores region located on the island of São Miguel (Ponta Delgada, Lagoa and Vila Franca do Campo), the total length of these structures is 2.6 km. In the Azores Islands, 8 scientific observatories are identified, however, there is no information on their impacts on the seabed.
|
Integration rule type parameter |
||||
Integration rule description parameter |
||||
Integration rule type criteria |
||||
Integration rule description criteria |
||||
GES extent threshold |
||||
GES extent achieved |
||||
GES extent unit |
||||
GES achieved |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Description overall status |
||||
Assessments period |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
2012-2017 |
Related pressures |
|
|
|
|
Related targets |
|
|
|
|
Madeira subdivision (AMA-PT-SD-MAD)
GES component |
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
D6
|
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feature |
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Benthic broad habitats
|
Physical disturbance to seabed
|
Physical loss of the seabed
|
Element |
Abyssal |
Circalittoral coarse sediment |
Circalittoral mixed sediment |
Circalittoral mud |
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef |
Circalittoral sand |
Infralittoral coarse sediment |
Infralittoral mixed sediment |
Infralittoral mud |
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef |
Infralittoral sand |
Littoral rock and biogenic reef |
Littoral sediment |
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Lower bathyal sediment |
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment |
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment |
Offshore circalittoral mud |
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic |
Offshore circalittoral sand |
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Upper bathyal sediment |
||
Element code |
HabBenAbyssal |
HabBenCircalitCoarSed |
HabBenCircalitMxdSed |
HabBenCircalitMud |
HabBenCircalitRock |
HabBenCircalitSand |
HabBenInfralitCoarSed |
HabBenInfralitMxdSed |
HabBenInfralitMud |
HabBenInfralitRock |
HabBenInfralitSand |
HabBenLitRock |
HabBenLitSed |
HabBenBathyalLowRock |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenOffshCoarSed |
HabBenOffshMxdSed |
HabBenOffshMud |
HabBenOffshRock |
HabBenOffshSand |
HabBenBathyalUpReef |
HabBenBathyalUpSed |
||
Element code source |
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
Habitats (D1-D6) http://dd.eionet.europa.eu/vocabulary/msfd/broadHabitatTypes/view
|
||
Element 2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Element 2 code |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Element 2 code source |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Element source |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
EU |
||
Criterion |
D6C2
|
D6C1
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Parameter |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parameter other |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Threshold value upper |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Threshold value lower |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Threshold qualitative |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Threshold value source |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Threshold value source other |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Value achieved upper |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Value achieved lower |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Value unit |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Value unit other |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proportion threshold value |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proportion value achieved |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proportion threshold value unit |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trend |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Parameter achieved |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description parameter |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Related indicator |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Criteria status |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
||||||||||||||||||||||
Description criteria |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Element status |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
||
Description element |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Integration rule type parameter |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Integration rule description parameter |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Integration rule type criteria |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Integration rule description criteria |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
GES extent threshold |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
GES extent achieved |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
GES extent unit |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
GES achieved |
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 |
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU established the objective of good environmental status for Descriptor 6 (D6) that ?human pressures on the seabed should not prevent ecosystem components from conserving their natural diversity, productivity and dynamic ecological processes, taking into account ecosystem resilience?. The assessment scale for this descriptor could be particularly problematic due to the diversity of characteristics of certain benthic ecosystems and several human pressures. For that reason, it indicated that after an initial examination of the impacts and threats to the specificities of biodiversity and human pressures, an assessment and monitoring would be necessary and to integrate the results of the more stringent assessments into the larger scale assessments covering, where appropriate, a subdivision, sub-region or region.
The results obtained in the subdivision of Madeira concluded that GES was achieved for all assessment areas, with varying degrees of confidence (low, medium and high) for the benthic stands of the mobile and fixed sub-tidal substrates.
There are a number of ongoing work on seabed integrity and associated marine communities in the coastal waters of the island of Madeira and the island of Porto Santo, but which are not yet available in publications, in particular those resulting from the MarSP16 project. In this project, a state of the art was established on the subdivision of Madeira and a methodology was implemented following international standards, but still lacks coordination and coherence between Member States.
|
Assessments period |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
2014-2018 |
Related pressures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related targets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|