Member State report / Art8 / 2018 / D6 / Malta / Mediterranean: Ionian Sea & Central Mediterranean Sea
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 | Malta |
Region/subregion | Mediterranean: Ionian Sea & Central Mediterranean Sea |
Reported by | Environment and Resources Authority |
Report date | 2020-04-16 |
Report access | ART8_GES.xml |
Area designated for hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation (MIC-MT-MS-02)
GES component |
D6
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feature |
Benthic broad habitats
|
Physical disturbance to seabed
|
Physical loss of the seabed
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Element |
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 |
Posidonia oceanica meadows |
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef |
Upper bathyal sediment |
||||||||||||||||
Element code |
HabBenCircalitCoarSed |
HabBenCircalitMxdSed |
HabBenCircalitMud |
HabBenCircalitRock |
HabBenCircalitSand |
HabBenInfralitCoarSed |
HabBenInfralitMxdSed |
HabBenInfralitMud |
HabBenInfralitRock |
HabBenInfralitSand |
HabBenLitRock |
HabBenLitSed |
HabBenBathyalLowRock |
HabBenBathyalLowSed |
HabBenOffshCoarSed |
HabBenOffshMxdSed |
HabBenOffshMud |
HabBenOffshRock |
HabBenOffshSand |
1120 |
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
|
Link to other vocabulary or code lists that may be relevant
|
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 |
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C3
|
D6C4
|
D6C5
|
D6C2
|
D6C1
|
|||||||||||||||
Parameter |
Extent
|
Extent
|
Habitat condition
|
Other
|
Extent
|
Other
|
Other
|
Extent
|
Habitat condition
|
Other
|
Extent
|
Habitat condition
|
Extent
|
Extent
|
Habitat condition
|
Extent
|
Extent
|
Habitat condition
|
Extent
|
Extent
|
Habitat condition
|
Extent
|
Extent
|
|||||||||||||||
Parameter other |
Extent achieving Threshold for Good/High Status
|
Extent achieving Threshold for Good/High Status
|
Extent achieving Threshold for Good/High Status
|
Extent achieving Threshold for Good/High Status
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Threshold value upper |
1.0 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Threshold value lower |
0.6 |
0.6 |
0.58 |
0.58 |
0.6 |
0.6 |
0.55 |
0.55 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Threshold qualitative |
Trend in undisturbed habitat extent is stable
|
Trend in habitat extent is stable
|
to be determined
|
Trend in habitat extent is stable
|
Trend in habitat extent is stable
|
Trend in habitat extent is stable
|
Trend in habitat extent is stable
|
to be determined
|
Trend in habitat extent is stable
|
to be determined
|
Trend in undisturbed habitat extent is stable
|
Trend in habitat extent is stable
|
to be determined
|
No threshold value – contributes to other assessments |
No threshold value – contributes to other assessments |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Threshold value source |
Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
|
Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
|
Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
|
Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
|
Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Threshold value source other |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Value achieved upper |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Value achieved lower |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Value unit |
square kilometre
|
square kilometre
|
Other
|
square kilometre
|
Other
|
Other
|
square kilometre
|
Other
|
Other
|
square kilometre
|
Other
|
Other
|
square kilometre
|
Other
|
square kilometre
|
square kilometre
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Value unit other |
EQR
|
EQR
|
EQR
|
EQR
|
EQR
|
EQR
|
EQR
|
EQR
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proportion threshold value |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proportion value achieved |
36.14 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
95.0 |
0.02 |
95.0 |
100.0 |
2.0 |
100.0 |
95.0 |
0.01 |
95.0 |
11119.0 |
0.08 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Proportion threshold value unit |
extent in km2 of pressure |
extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected |
% area of MRU achieving threshold value |
extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected |
% area of MRU achieving threshold value |
% area of habitat achieving threshold value |
extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected |
% area of habitat achieving threshold value |
% area of MRU achieving threshold value |
extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected |
% area of MRU achieving threshold value |
% area of habitat achieving threshold value |
extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected |
% area of habitat achieving threshold value |
extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected |
extent in km2 of habitat adversely affected |
extent in km2 of pressure |
extent in km2 of pressure |
||||||||||||||||||||
Trend |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Improving |
Unknown |
Improving |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Improving |
Stable |
Improving |
Stable |
Stable |
Stable |
Unknown |
Not relevant |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Stable |
|||||||||||||||
Parameter achieved |
Yes, based on low risk |
Yes |
Unknown |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Not assessed |
Yes |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Yes |
Unknown |
Unknown |
Yes, based on low risk |
|||||||||||||||
Description parameter |
The extent reported represents circalittoral sediments subject to a number of pressures, including trawling. However, when excluding trawling, only >10 % of the NE mearl bed is potentially subject to pressures leading to physical disturbance.
Considering extrapolations in terms of both habitat cover and extent of pressure, it may be difficult to ascertain the exact degree of physical disturbance, although a level of physical disturbance of low significance may be safely deduced |
Activities related with physical loss of the seabed are not relevant to this habitat type. Therefore ‘coastal detritic bottoms with rhodoliths’ (MC3.52) as the representative habitat for circalittoral coarse sediments is considered to be in good status in terms of criterion D6C4. |
Overall habitat condition for algal dominated infralittorral rock and reefs (MB2.51) was deduced to range from high to good as extrapolated from CARLIT results for adjacent coastlines. |
When considering the total area of algal dominated infralitorral rock (3.73km2), and the extent of anthropogenic activities associated with physical loss overlapping with this habitat type, only 0.002% of MB2.51 may have been affected by physical loss throughout the reporting period. This area is not considered significant, implying good status for broad habitat MB1 in terms MSFD criterion D6C4. |
Overall habitat condition for algal dominated infralittorral rock and reefs (MB2.51) was deduced to range from high to good as extrapolated from CARLIT results for adjacent coastlines. |
As per BENTIX index, benthic communities in infralittoral sediments reflect an overall high or good status: 13 stations in high status, 8 stations in good status and 1 station in moderate status.
The achievement of GES is assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good-moderate boundary (0.58), reported as
the lower Threshold Value; and taking the assessed stations as representative of the total extent of the habitat. Whilst a maximum allowable extent of adverse effects as a proportion of the total natural extent of this habitat in Maltese waters, is yet to be determined, the predominance of stations classifying in high and good status indicates the overall achievement of GES for infralittoral sediments under D6C5.
The condition at the waterbody level (representing the mean value for stations in each waterbody) is also at a high/good status. |
The extent of loss of infralittoral sediments, mainly resulting from interventions to quays and jetties in harbour areas is minor (0.02km2 = 0.05% of the total extent of the broad habitat type) and hence insignificant, resulting in good status under this criterion. |
As per BENTIX index, benthic communities in infralittoral sediments reflect an overall high or good status: 13 stations in high status, 8 stations in good status and 1 station in moderate status.
The achievement of GES is assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good-moderate boundary (0.58), reported as the lower Threshold Value; and taking the assessed stations as representative of the total extent of the habitat.
Whilst a maximum allowable extent of adverse effects as a proportion of the total natural extent of this habitat in Maltese waters, is yet to be determined, the predominance of stations classifying in high and good status indicates the overall achievement of GES for infralittoral sediments under D6C5.
The condition at the waterbody level (representing the mean value for stations in each waterbody) is also at a high/good status. |
Assessment of this criterion is based on habitat in good/high status on the basis of results when applying the CARLIT index.
The achievement of GES is hence assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good-moderate boundary (0.6), reported as the lower Threshold Value.
The CARLIT index shows that the majority of the Littoral Rock along the Maltese coastline is in good/high status with localized stretches of moderate status.
In comparison with the status assessment presented in previous years, Littoral Rock shows a general improvement in status.
Such index is indicative of status along the on length of coastline rather than the area of this habitat type, which is in turn indicative of the status of the adjacent WFD coastal water bodies. For this, status is reported as % Area of MRU achieving threshold. |
Loss of habitat types belonging to the MSFD Broad habitat type - Littoral Rock’and biogenic reef- is considered to be insignificant (0.7% of length of coastline), implying good status for this habitat under D6C4. |
Assessment of this criterion is based on habitat in good/high status on the basis of results when applying the CARLIT index.
The achievement of GES is hence assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good-moderate boundary (0.6), reported as the lower Threshold Value.
The CARLIT index shows that the majority of the Littoral Rock along the Maltese coastline is in good/high status with localized stretches of moderate status.
In comparison with the status assessment presented in previous years, Littoral Rock shows a general improvement in status.
Such index is indicative of status along the on length of coastline rather than the area of this habitat type, which is in turn indicative of the status of the adjacent WFD coastal water bodies. For this, status is reported as % Area of MRU achieving threshold. |
The achievement of GES is assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good/moderate boundary (0.55), reported as the lower Threshold Value; and taking the assessed stations as representative of the total extent of the habitat.
Whilst a maximum allowable extent of adverse effects as a proportion of the total natural extent of this habitat in Maltese waters, is yet to be determined, the predominance
of stations (21/22) classifying in high or good status indicates the overall achievement of GES for Posidonia oceanica under D6C5. The condition at the waterbody level (representing the mean value for stations in each waterbody) is also at a high/good status.
No data is available for the Grand Harbour area since Posidonia does not occur in this water body. |
The extent of loss of Posidonia oceanica meadows, mainly resulting from interventions to quays and jetties in harbour areas is negligible (0.01km2 = 0.02% of the total extent of the broad habitat types) and may be attributed to overestimations resulting from coarse mapping. The status of this habitat in terms of criterion D6C4 can thus be considered to be good. |
The achievement of GES is assessed on the basis of the EQR for the good-moderate boundary (0.55), reported as the lower Threshold Value; and taking the assessed stations as representative of the total extent of the habitat.
Whilst a maximum allowable extent of adverse effects as a proportion of the total natural extent of this habitat in Maltese waters, is yet to be determined, the predominance of stations (21/22) classifying in high or good status indicates
the overall achievement of GES for Posidonia oceanica under D6C5.
The condition at the waterbody level (representing the mean value for stations in each waterbody) is also at a high/good status.
No data is available for the Grand Harbour area since Posidonia does not occur in this water body. |
The only activity that results in physical loss within this zone may be ‘Extraction of oil and gas’. Four exploratory wells have been drilled in the upper bathyal zone, of which one during the reporting period. However, as explained in the chapter on ‘physical loss and physical damage’ the area of loss is minimal – approximately 0.65 m2 per well. It is thus concluded that status of the habitat is not affected by physical loss, and good environmental status is achieved in terms of criterion D6C4. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Related indicator |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Criteria status |
Good |
Good |
Not assessed |
Good |
Good |
Good |
Not assessed |
Good |
Good |
Good |
Good |
Good |
Good |
Good |
Good |
Not assessed |
Good |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good |
Not assessed |
Unknown |
Good, based on low risk |
|||||||||||||||
Description criteria |
More data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. |
Overall habitat condition for algal dominated infralittorral rock and reefs (MB2.51) was deduced to range from high to good as extrapolated from CARLIT results for adjacent coastline. |
Qualitative assessment for Littoral rock (macroalgae) is based on results for the CARLIT index. Physical disturbance not deemed relevant for biogenic reef (L.bissoides) |
Result for this criterion is based on the extent of loss of macroalgal communities and Lithophyllum bissoides reef habitats. |
Habitat condition for Littoral rock based on quantitative assessment as based on CARLIT index. Assessment of Lithophyllum bissoides under this criterion is pending further investigation. |
Based on exclusive consideration of bathyal areas surveyed in greater detail through LIFE BaHar for N2K, disturbance on these benthic habitats is highly unlikely. However, no conclusion on status under D6C3 is being drawn at this stage |
More data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5. |
The extent of natural seabed within the assessment area that has been physically disturbed is 11,119 km2, with such disturbance occurring primarily as a result of otter board trawling, which activity takes place within 99.8% of all area considered to be disturbed. Other key activities leading to disturbance of the seabed are anchoring linked to transport, tourism and leisure activities, and aquaculture farms; these activities take place within 12 nautical miles from shore, within 0.8% and 0.2% of all area considered to be disturbed.
The indicated extent of disturbed area is considered to be an over-estimation: disturbance from trawling is based on the spatial distribution of fishing effort (VMS hours > 0) over four years in each grid cell of an area of approximately 25 km2 and does not take into consideration activity variations within each grid cell or the variation in intensity within these disturbed areas, noting that the total fishing hours over the period range from 0.17 hours to 1452.3 hours in individual grid cells. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Element status |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good |
Good |
Good |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
Good |
Not assessed |
Not assessed |
||||||||||||||||
Description element |
This BHT is represented and assessed by reefs in algal-dominated habitat (MB2.51). |
The assessment of Infralittoral sediments is here being reported under 'infralittoral sands' noting that most of the sampled areas resulted in high proportions of sand. Nevertheless further surveys are necessary to corroborate the reported extent for infralittoral sediments according to the benthic habitat classification of the Commission Decision 2017/848/EU. |
Although it is highly unlikely that these benthic habitats are impacted through physical disturbance, no conclusion on status under D6C3 is being drawn at this stage. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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 relevant |
Not relevant |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Description overall status |
4/7 habitats in MRU achieving good status under D6C4 and D6C5.
For the other 3, GES considered to be achieved for D6C4; more data with respect to the structure and function of the habitat type is required to enable adequate assessment of the status of this habitat type in terms of criterion D6C5.
Overall GES not assessed in view of knowledge gaps impeding assessment of certain criteria for a number of habitats. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Assessments period |
2012-2018 |
2012-2018 |
2012-2018 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Related pressures |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Related targets |
|
|