Member State report / Art9 / 2018 / D4 / Baltic
| Report type | Member State report to Commission |
| MSFD Article | Art. 9 Determination of GES (and Art. 17 updates) |
| Report due | 2018-10-15 |
| GES Descriptor | D4 Food webs/D1 Ecosystems |
| Region/subregion | Baltic |
| Reported by | Member state |
| Member state | Finland |
Estonia |
Latvia |
Lithuania |
Poland |
Germany |
Denmark |
Sweden |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Member state report | |||||||||
| Marine reporting units | MRUs used |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Structure, functions and processes of marine ecosystems: Species | All birds |
|
|||||||
| Benthic-feeding birds |
|
||||||||
| Grazing birds |
|
||||||||
| Pelagic-feeding birds |
|
||||||||
| Surface-feeding birds |
|
||||||||
| Wading birds |
|
||||||||
| All fish |
|
||||||||
| Coastal fish |
|
||||||||
| All mammals |
|
||||||||
| Seals |
|
||||||||
| Structure, functions and processes of marine ecosystems: Habitats | Benthic habitats |
|
|||||||
| Pelagic habitats |
|
||||||||
| Structure, functions and processes of marine ecosystems: Ecosystems, including food webs | Coastal ecosystem |
|
|
||||||
| Shelf ecosystem |
|
|
|||||||
| Ecosystems, including food webs |
|
||||||||
| Deposit-feeders |
|
||||||||
| Filter-feeders |
|
||||||||
| Planktivores |
|
||||||||
| Sub-apex demersal predators |
|
||||||||
| Primary producers |
|
||||||||
| Secondary producers |
|
||||||||
| Structure, functions and processes of marine ecosystems: No theme | All marine ecosystem elements |
|
|||||||
| GES description | D4 Food webs/D1 Ecosystems | All elements of the marine food webs, to the extent that they are known, occur at normal abundance and diversity and levels capable of ensuring the long-term abundance of the species and the retention of their full reproductive capacity. |
The good environmental status for D1 is defined, inter alia, by: "... the coastal waters are in good ecological status under the WFD and the chemical status of the entire seaside area is good ... those for the marine area of the Baltic Sea the relevant habitat types of Annex I (LRT 11xx) of the...
|
All known elements of marine food webs are present and occur with normal density and diversity as well as at levels which ensure a stable species density and maintain the full reproductive ability of the species.
|
|||||
| D4C1 Trophic guild species diversity (1.7, 1.7.1) |
Cyanobacterial blooms and biomass below HELCOM index thresholds: 0.90 in the Gulf of Finland; 0.77 in the Northern Baltic; and 0.58 in the Bothnian Sea. The status of food webs is assessed descriptively for the Finnish marine area using data from all indicators.
Number of Chlorophyll o... |
GES is determined via fish community trophic index. GES is achieved if the index value is >0,6. |
Anthropogenic pressures do not adversely affect the diversity (species composition and relative abundance of species) of the trophic guild. The condition is assessed according to the indicator “Seasonal change of dominant phytoplankton groups”.
|
The diversity (species composition and their relative abundance) of the trophic guild is not adversely affected due to anthropogenic pressures. Threshold values established on national and regional level (HELCOM). |
The diversity (species composition and their relative density) of the individual trophic levels is not negatively affected by man-made pressures.
|
D4C1 Den trofiska gruppens mångfald (artsammansättning och arternas relativa abundans) är inte negativt påverkad till följd av mänskliga belastningar. God miljöstatus: Metod för sammanvägning för kvantitativ bedömning per kriterium saknas. D4C1 The diversity of the trophic guild (species composition and their relative abundance) is not adversely affected due to anthropogenic pressures. GES:Definition of GES at criteria level is not yet available. |
|||
| D4C2 Abundance across trophic guilds (1.7, 1.7.1, 4.3, 4.3.1) |
COD: MSY Btrigger (not specified in 2018) recommended by ICES.
The condition of the food webs is used to describe in a descriptive way the Finnish sea area using the data of all the indicators. Herring: MSY Btrigger, recommended by ICES (in 2018 in the Gulf of Bothnia 283 180&... |
GES is determined via abundance of coastal Fish key functional groups: abundance of cyprinids in monitoring catches and abundance of piscivores in monitoring catches. GES is achieved if both of the indicator values are >0,6. In addition, GES is determined via balance of lower guilds. GES threshold value is two times of the long term standard deviation. If the indicator value differs more than two times the long term standard deviation the GES is not achieved. GES = > 0,3 ja < 0,7. |
Anthropogenic pressures do not adversely affect the overall abundance balance in all trophic guilds. The indicator “Abundance of meso-predatory fish” is used to assess the condition.
Anthropogenic pressures do not adversely affect the overall abundance balance in all trophic guilds. Th... |
The balance of total abundance between the trophic guilds is not adversely affected due to anthropogenic pressures. Threshold values established on national and regional level (HELCOM). |
The balance between the trophic levels is not adversely affected by man-made pressures.
|
D4C2 Balansen i total abundans mellan de trofiska grupperna är inte negativt påverkad till följd av mänskliga belastningar. God miljöstatus: Se under D4C1 D4C2 The balance of total abundance between the trophic guilds is not adversely affected due to anthropogenic pressures. GES:See under D4C1 |
|||
| D4C3 Trophic guild size distribution (4.2, 4.2.1) |
The regional species abundance index of the high seas exceeds 3,91 in the Gulf of Finland, 3,0 in Northern Baltic Sea, 2,3 in the Bothnian Sea and 1,37 in the Bothnian Sea.
The condition of the food webs is used to describe in a descriptive way the Finnish sea area using the data of all the i... |
GES is determined via mean maximum length across all fish species found in monitoring catches (MMLI). GES is achieved if indicator value is >0,6. In addition, GES is determined via abundance index of large (TL>250 mm) perch (Perca fluviatilis) in monitoring catches. GES is achieved if index value is >0,6. |
Anthropogenic pressures do not adversely affect the size distribution of individuals across the trophic guild. The indicator "Fish Community Size Index" (also used for criterion D1C3) is used to assess the status.
Anthropogenic pressures do not adversely affect the size distribution of... |
The size distribution of individuals across the trophic guild is not adversely affected due to anthropogenic pressures. Threshold values established on national and regional level (HELCOM). |
The size distribution of individuals across the trophic levels is not negatively affected by man-made pressures.
|
D4C3 Individernas storleksfördelning inom den trofiska gruppen är inte negativt påverkad till följd av mänskliga belastningar. God miljöstatus:Se under D4C1 D4C3 The size distribution of individuals across the trophic guild is not adversely affected due to anthropogenic pressures. GES:See under D4C1 |
|||
| D4C4 Trophic guild productivity (4.1, 4.1.1) | Productivity of the trophic guild is not adversely affected due to anthropogenic pressures. Threshold values established on national and regional level (HELCOM). |
The productivity of individual trophic levels is not adversely affected by man-made pressures.
|
D4C4 Produktiviteten inom den trofiska gruppen är inte negativt påverkad till följd av mänskliga belastningar God mljöstatus:Se under D4C1 D4C4:Productivity of the trophic guild is not adversely affected due to anthropogenic pressures. GES:See under D4C1 |
||||||
| Determination date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
| Update type |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
| Justification for non-use of criterion | D4C4: Criteria D3C4 has not been used for determination of GES because there is not enough data. D3C4 is secondary and therefore not mandatory criteria. |
||||||||
| Justification for delay in setting EU/regional requirements |
D4/D1: None
|
D4/D1: During the reporting period, regional cooperation focused on the development of methodological standards to assess the various aspects of stress and resilience on the basis of Commission Decision 2010/477/EU. The indicators vary in their level of maturity and require further development or...
|
D4/D1: At present, it is not possible to assess whether the food network as a whole will be in good environmental condition by 2020. However, the balance of marine food is expected to improve as the environmental targets for pressure factors and condition under the other descriptors are achieved....
|
D4C1: Under this criterion, we have used proxies from other descriptors (D1) for the assessement. Both coastal and offshore part of the basins are covered. The reason for using proxies is that the concept of trophic guilds is new, and it has not been possible to establish indicators following the trophic guilds yet. More research and development of indicators is needed. We do not have a definition of GES at criteria level yet. The assessments under article 8 are thus semi-quantitative and descriptive for the different species groups and habitats. D4C2: Under this criterion, we have only one fish-indicator for coastal fish and only for The Baltic Sea. The reason is that the concept of trophic guilds is new, and it has not yet been possible to establish indicators following the trophic guilds. More research and development of indicators is needed. We do not have a definition of GES at criteria level yet. The assessments under article 8 are mostly qualitative. D4C3: Under this criterion, we have used proxies from other descriptors (D1) for the assessement. In the North Sea only coastal parts of basins are covered and in The Baltic Sea only the offshore parts. The reason for using proxies is that the concept of trophic guilds is new, and it has not been possible to establish indicators following the trophic guilds yet. More research and development of indicators is needed. We do not have a definition of GES at criteria level yet. The assessments under article 8 are thus semi-quantitative and descriptive for the different species groups and habitats. D4C4: Under this criterion, we have used proxies from other descriptors (D1) for the assessement. Both coastal and offshore part of the basins are covered. The reason for using proxies is that the concept of trophic guilds is new, and it has not been possible to establish indicators following the trophic guilds yet. More research and development of indicators is needed. We do not have a definition of GES at criteria level yet. The assessments under article 8 are thus semi-quantitative and descriptive only for Mammals. |