Member State report / Art8 / 2018 / D1-M / 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 D1 Mammals
Member State Portugal
Region/subregion NE Atlantic: Macaronesia
Reported by DGRM
Report date 2021-03-03
Report access ART8_GES_PT_setembro2020.xml

Azores Subdivision (AMA-PT-SD-AZO)

GES component
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
Feature
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Baleen whales
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Element
Balaenoptera acutorostrata
Balaenoptera acutorostrata
Balaenoptera acutorostrata
Balaenoptera acutorostrata
Balaenoptera acutorostrata
Balaenoptera borealis
Balaenoptera borealis
Balaenoptera borealis
Balaenoptera borealis
Balaenoptera borealis
Balaenoptera edeni
Balaenoptera edeni
Balaenoptera edeni
Balaenoptera edeni
Balaenoptera edeni
Balaenoptera musculus
Balaenoptera musculus
Balaenoptera musculus
Balaenoptera musculus
Balaenoptera musculus
Balaenoptera physalus
Balaenoptera physalus
Balaenoptera physalus
Balaenoptera physalus
Balaenoptera physalus
Balaenoptera physalus
Megaptera novaeangliae
Megaptera novaeangliae
Megaptera novaeangliae
Megaptera novaeangliae
Megaptera novaeangliae
Globicephala melas
Globicephala melas
Globicephala melas
Globicephala melas
Globicephala melas
Grampus griseus
Grampus griseus
Grampus griseus
Grampus griseus
Grampus griseus
Grampus griseus
Hyperoodon ampullatus
Hyperoodon ampullatus
Hyperoodon ampullatus
Hyperoodon ampullatus
Hyperoodon ampullatus
Kogia breviceps
Kogia breviceps
Kogia breviceps
Kogia breviceps
Kogia breviceps
Mesoplodon bidens
Mesoplodon bidens
Mesoplodon bidens
Mesoplodon bidens
Mesoplodon bidens
Mesoplodon europaeus
Mesoplodon europaeus
Mesoplodon europaeus
Mesoplodon europaeus
Mesoplodon europaeus
Mesoplodon mirus
Mesoplodon mirus
Mesoplodon mirus
Mesoplodon mirus
Mesoplodon mirus
Physeter macrocephalus
Physeter macrocephalus
Physeter macrocephalus
Physeter macrocephalus
Physeter macrocephalus
Physeter macrocephalus
Ziphius cavirostris
Ziphius cavirostris
Ziphius cavirostris
Ziphius cavirostris
Ziphius cavirostris
Delphinus delphis
Delphinus delphis
Delphinus delphis
Delphinus delphis
Delphinus delphis
Globicephala macrorhynchus
Globicephala macrorhynchus
Globicephala macrorhynchus
Globicephala macrorhynchus
Globicephala macrorhynchus
Orcinus orca
Orcinus orca
Orcinus orca
Orcinus orca
Orcinus orca
Pseudorca crassidens
Pseudorca crassidens
Pseudorca crassidens
Pseudorca crassidens
Pseudorca crassidens
Stenella coeruleoalba
Stenella coeruleoalba
Stenella coeruleoalba
Stenella coeruleoalba
Stenella coeruleoalba
Stenella frontalis
Stenella frontalis
Stenella frontalis
Stenella frontalis
Stenella frontalis
Stenella frontalis
Steno bredanensis
Steno bredanensis
Steno bredanensis
Steno bredanensis
Steno bredanensis
Tursiops truncatus
Tursiops truncatus
Tursiops truncatus
Tursiops truncatus
Tursiops truncatus
Tursiops truncatus
Element code
137087
137087
137087
137087
137087
137088
137088
137088
137088
137088
137089
137089
137089
137089
137089
137090
137090
137090
137090
137090
137091
137091
137091
137091
137091
137091
137092
137092
137092
137092
137092
137097
137097
137097
137097
137097
137098
137098
137098
137098
137098
137098
343899
343899
343899
343899
343899
137113
137113
137113
137113
137113
137121
137121
137121
137121
137121
137123
137123
137123
137123
137123
137126
137126
137126
137126
137126
137119
137119
137119
137119
137119
137119
137127
137127
137127
137127
137127
137094
137094
137094
137094
137094
137096
137096
137096
137096
137096
137102
137102
137102
137102
137102
137104
137104
137104
137104
137104
137107
137107
137107
137107
137107
137108
137108
137108
137108
137108
137108
137110
137110
137110
137110
137110
137111
137111
137111
137111
137111
137111
Element code source
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
National
Criterion
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
D1C1
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
Parameter
Other
Other
Other
Other
Abundance
Survival rate
Other
Other
Abundance
Survival rate
Other
Other
Abundance
Other
Other
Abundance
Survival rate
Parameter other
Incidental capture (No individuals) ? Tuna fisheries
Incidental capture (No individuals) ? fishing longlining
Incidental capture (No individuals) ? Tuna fisheries
Incidental capture (No individuals) ? fishing longlining
Incidental capture (No individuals) ? Tuna fisheries
Incidental capture (No individuals) ? fishing longlining
Incidental capture (No individuals) ? Tuna fisheries
Incidental capture (No individuals) ? fishing longlining
Incidental capture (No individuals) ? Tuna fisheries
Incidental capture (No individuals) ? fishing longlining
Threshold value upper
9.0
1.0
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source
Other (specify)
Other (specify)
Other (specify)
Other (specify)
Other (specify)
Other (specify)
Other (specify)
Other (specify)
Other (specify)
Other (specify)
Threshold value source other
MISIC SEAS II
MISIC SEAS II
MISIC SEAS II
MISIC SEAS II
MISIC SEAS II
MISIC SEAS II
MISIC SEAS II
MISIC SEAS II
MISIC SEAS II
MISIC SEAS II
Value achieved upper
14.0
11.0
Value achieved lower
Value unit
Value unit other
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit
Trend
Stable
Stable
Stable
Stable
Unknown
Unknown
Stable
Stable
Unknown
Unknown
Stable
Stable
Unknown
Stable
Stable
Unknown
Unknown
Parameter achieved
Yes, based on low risk
Yes, based on low risk
Yes, based on low risk
Yes, based on low risk
Unknown
Unknown
Yes, based on low risk
Yes, based on low risk
Unknown
Unknown
Yes, based on low risk
Yes, based on low risk
Unknown
Yes, based on low risk
Yes, based on low risk
Unknown
Unknown
Description parameter
South of Pico (photo-ID van der STAP and Hartman, staff). Estimate based on experimental design
0,94 (IC 95% = 0.85-0.98) (2004-2007; http://www.nova-atlantis.org) - Sul do Pico e não total RAA
345 immature and immature female (AI 95 %
0,93 (IC 95% = 0,74-1; CV = 0,12) (julho-agosto 2011-2015; Boys et. al, 2019) Faial-Pico
Model-based estimate: 2.324 individuals (95 % CI
Management unit I: 431 individuals (95 % CI
UG-II: Adults: 0,97 (0.029 IF)
Related indicator
Criteria status
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Good
Good
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Good
Good
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Good
Good
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Good
Good
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Good
Good
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Description criteria
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine, Turtle, GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 141 pp.
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
D1C1 ? MM_BYC_BR: The evaluation of the incidental catch rates for ordinary whales shall be based on the same monitoring programmes as described above for the Azores. There were no incidental catches of ordinary whales in any of the fisheries monitored in the region, neither in the past nor in the present case, therefore, the management unit is in GES for this criterion (MISTIC EESE II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
D1C1 ? MM_BYC_BR: The evaluation of the incidental catch rates for ordinary whales shall be based on the same monitoring programmes as described above for the Azores. There were no incidental catches of ordinary whales in any of the fisheries monitored in the region, neither in the past nor in the present case, therefore, the management unit is in GES for this criterion (MISTIC EESE II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
D1C2 ? MM_ABU_DS: There is no reference value for the abundance of this species as there was no prior sampling by Distance Sampling in the Azores. The ocean industry of the MISTIC EM II project was carried out outside the period of occurrence of the species in the region and has not been able to estimate its abundance. Therefore, there are no estimates of the size of this management unit for the assessment of GES (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
D1C1 – MM_BYC_BR: Não houve captura acidental de golfinho-de-Risso em nenhuma das pescarias monitorizadas na região no passado nem no presente, pelo que a UG está em BEA para este critério. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
D1C1 – MM_BYC_BR: Não houve captura acidental de golfinho-de-Risso em nenhuma das pescarias monitorizadas na região no passado nem no presente, pelo que a UG está em BEA para este critério. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
D1C2 ? MM_ABU_CMR: The only abundance estimates available for risae were those of the ?island associated with the island? in the southern island of Pico, which was provided by the Fondation Nova Atlantis (http://www.nova-atlantis.org). 452 individuals have been estimated (95 % CI
D1C3 ? MM_ABU_SR: The only estimates of survival rates available for risae were those of the ?island associated with the island? in the southern island of Pico, which was provided by the Fondation Nova Atlantis (http://www.nova-atlantis.org). It was estimated at 0,94 (95 % CI
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine, Turtle, GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 141 pp.
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
There is no reference value for the abundance of this species that would allow an assessment of GES, as there were no prior withdrawals with the methodologies applied by the MISIS SEAS II project. A stock size estimate was obtained for sampling per sampling sampling of 333 individuals (20 % CV) on the basis of the oceanic programme of the MISIC SEAS II project, for a 32.804 km² survey area. MISIC SEAS II consortium (2019) Technical Report 2 Sub-program A (A-MBT2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP1 ? Monitoring Programs and Data gathering, Task 1.2. Pilot Monitoring Projects Marine Mammals
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not appear to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores (for example, marine turtles reproduce outside the Macaronesian biogeographical region and EU waters) and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an appropriate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
D1C1 ? MM_BYC_BR: The evaluation of the fee for the accidental capture of sperm is based on the same monitoring programmes and follows the same methods as those described for the Atlantic dolphin. There is no record of accidental catches in any of the monitored fisheries in the region in the past, nor in the present one, so that the management unit is in GES for this criterion (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). It has been proposed to monitor the mortality resulting from collisions by vessels. However, the current figures are not sufficient to assess the environmental status in respect of this criterion. JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
D1C1 ? MM_BYC_BR: The evaluation of the fee for the accidental capture of sperm is based on the same monitoring programmes and follows the same methods as those described for the Atlantic dolphin. There is no record of accidental catches in any of the monitored fisheries in the region in the past, nor in the present one, so that the management unit is in GES for this criterion (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). It has been proposed to monitor the mortality resulting from collisions by vessels. However, the current figures are not sufficient to assess the environmental status in respect of this criterion. JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
D1C2 ? MM_ABU_CMR: The only reliable estimates of the absolute abundance for the cachalote population in the Azores are those indicated by Boys et al. (2019). These authors used the photo-identification of adult male and female immature female, collected in the coastal waters around Faial and Pico during the summer months (July-August) between 2011 and 2015, and applied a robust open model (MSORD ? Multi-State Open Robust Model) to estimate population population and population movements. These estimates do not therefore correspond to the sperm management unit using the coastal waters of the Azores, but only to the part of the management unit using the waters around Faial and Pico. Abundance estimates varied between years since 367 (95 % CI
D1C3 ? MM_DE_SR: The only reliable estimates of survival rates available for the cachalote population in the Azores are also reported by Boys et al. (2019). The probability of cachalote annual survival varied during the study period and an average survival rate for the period 2011-2015 is proposed as the initial benchmark for the parameter (i.e. 0,93 survival rate
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine, Turtle, GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 141 pp.
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not appear to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores (for example, marine turtles reproduce outside the Macaronesian biogeographical region and EU waters) and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an appropriate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
There is no reference value for the abundance of this species that would allow an assessment of GES, as there were no prior withdrawals with the methodologies applied by the MISIS SEAS II project. An estimate of stock abundance was obtained by transesterfies online of 205 individuals (60 % CV) on the basis of the oceanic programme of the MISIC SEAS II project, for a 32.804 km² survey area. MISIC SEAS II consortium (2019) Technical Report 2 Sub-program A (A-MBT2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP1 ? Monitoring Programs and Data gathering, Task 1.2. Pilot Monitoring Projects Marine Mammals
Long term data ranges from standardised and comparable methodologies are required to meet this criterion.
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
There is no reference value for the abundance of this species that would allow an assessment of GES, as there were no prior withdrawals with the methodologies applied by the MISIS SEAS II project. An estimate of stock abundance was obtained by transesterfies online of 150 individuals (73 % CV) on the basis of the oceanic programme of the MISIC SEAS II project, for a 32.804 km² survey area. MISIC SEAS II consortium (2019) Technical Report 2 Sub-program A (A-MBT2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP1 ? Monitoring Programs and Data gathering, Task 1.2. Pilot Monitoring Projects Marine Mammals
Long term data ranges from standardised and comparable methodologies are required to meet this criterion.
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine, Turtle, GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 141 pp.
Long term data ranges from standardised and comparable methodologies are required to meet this criterion.
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
MM-BY-BR indicator: Information on the rate of incidental catch of this species is available for the fishing of pole-and-line tuna, purse seine fishing for small pelagics, demersal fishing (using line and longlines) and surface longline fisheries (Cruz et al., 2018, Silva et al., 2011). Between 1998 and 2012, 9 Atlantic dolphins were incidentally caught (Cruz et al., 2018), reaching an average catch rate of 0,00048 (SD
MM-BY-BR indicator: Information on the rate of incidental catch of this species is available for the fishing of pole-and-line tuna, purse seine fishing for small pelagics, demersal fishing (using line and longlines) and surface longline fisheries (Cruz et al., 2018, Silva et al., 2011). Between 1998 and 2012, 9 Atlantic dolphins were incidentally caught (Cruz et al., 2018), reaching an average catch rate of 0,00048 (SD
The population estimates were obtained on the basis of sampling through the deep-sea programme of the MISTIC SEAS II project for a 32.804 km² survey area in the central group of islands in the Azores. D1C2 ? MM_ABU_DS: Sampling has not been carried out using the sampling method sampling in the past, so there are no previous abundance estimates for the species. The abundance values obtained during the pilot sampling of the SEAS II mixture in July-August 2018 are proposed as reference values for the assessment of GES in the future. These values differ slightly depending on the method used: Based on random sampling (2.328 individuals
Long term data ranges from standardised and comparable methodologies are required to meet this criterion.
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
For the purposes of Directive 2008/56/EC (2008), the term habitat addresses both the abiotic characteristics and the associated biological community by treating both elements together in the direction of the term biotope. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for the assessment of the habitat level, also taking into account variations over the gradient of distance to coast and depth (e.g. coast, platform and deep sea). The three criteria for the assessment of habitats are their distribution, extent and condition (for the latter, in particular the condition of the typical species and communities), together with the related indicators for each of them. The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The same reason as for the previous criterion (i.e. D1C5) applies also to this criterion for cetaceans. JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
AMA-MM-BYR-BR-indicator: The evaluation of the incidental catch rates for dolphins is based on the same monitoring programmes and follows the same methods as those described for the Atlantic dolphin. Between 1998 and 2012, a troaz was incidentally caught in tuna fisheries (Cruz et al., 2018), and 11 individuals were caught from 2013 to 2017, an increase of almost 100 times the rate of accidental catch between the two periods. It should be noted, however, that these estimates represent incidental catch rates rather than mortality rates because all the animals were released alive by cutting the fishing line and cannot be determined if they died or not as a result of the interaction. There were no incidental catches of roach in purse seine fisheries, demersal or surface longline fisheries. The current accidental catch figures are higher than 1 % of the best estimate of abundance for the area. However, dolphins are often released alive, so the mortality rate can be lower (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
AMA-MM-BYR-BR-indicator: The evaluation of the incidental catch rates for dolphins is based on the same monitoring programmes and follows the same methods as those described for the Atlantic dolphin. Between 1998 and 2012, a troaz was incidentally caught in tuna fisheries (Cruz et al., 2018), and 11 individuals were caught from 2013 to 2017, an increase of almost 100 times the rate of accidental catch between the two periods. It should be noted, however, that these estimates represent incidental catch rates rather than mortality rates because all the animals were released alive by cutting the fishing line and cannot be determined if they died or not as a result of the interaction. There were no incidental catches of roach in purse seine fisheries, demersal or surface longline fisheries. The current accidental catch figures are higher than 1 % of the best estimate of abundance for the area. However, dolphins are often released alive, so the mortality rate can be lower (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
D1C2 ? MM_ABU_DS: The abundance of the ocean management unit will be assessed using the distance sampling method. No sampling with this technique has been performed in the past and there is therefore no previous abundance estimates for the species. The abundance values obtained during the pilot sampling of SEAS II are proposed as a reference for assessing this parameter and criterion in the future. The number of sightings on sampling by Distance Sampling did not allow spatial analysis for the calculation of abundance in the Azores and only the projected size was able to be estimated at 431 individuals (95 % CI
D1C3 ? MM_DE_SR: The survival rate of the coastal management unit shall be assessed using recapture methods. Estimates of baseline survival rates have been calculated between 1999 and 2004 for coastal waters around Faial and Pico using a Cormyo-Seber model applied to photo-identification data (Silva et al., 2009). The survival rate was calculated in 0,97 for adults and 0,82 for subadults for the period 1999-2004. The pilot sampling of SESAS II lasted only a few months and did not make it possible to estimate the annual survival rates. The estimates are insufficient to calculate a trend and assess GES (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Marine mammals are highly migratory and their ecological range and distribution are much broader than the biogeographical region (at the river basin scale). It was estimated as equivalent to the total area of the marine territory of the Azores (as calculated by the reporting grids to the Habitats Directive)
The extent and quality of the Azores Sea habitat do not seem to limit the animal species of megafauna to GES, but there are several species whose life cycle does not entirely follow in the sub-division of the Azores and an assessment of the habitat condition requires an adequate mapping, either in distance to the coast or in depth, and an integrated understanding of the state of the associated communities and species. Additional efforts for a coherent classification of marine habitats, supported by an appropriate mapping, are essential for a habitat assessment, taking into account variations over the gradient of coast and depth (coastal, platform and deep-sea habitat). The assessment of the habitat condition requires an integrated understanding of the status of the associated communities and species, consistent with the requirements laid down in Directive 92/43/EEC (1992) and in Council Directive 2009/147/EC (2009), including, where appropriate, an assessment of their functional characteristics. The explanation given for the unsuitability of criterion D1C4 also applies to D1C5 (MISIC SEAS II Consortium, 2018). JCC II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) ? Applying a sub-regional close and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 ? Towards a co-beneficiary update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp
Element status
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Description element
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Preliminary results...
Preliminary results...
Preliminary results...
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Preliminary results...
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Preliminary results...
Preliminary results...
Preliminary results...
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Preliminary results...
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Preliminary results...
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
There is insufficient information to assess D1C1, D1C2 and D1C3 (unknown) criteria, while D1C4 and D1C5 were found to be inadequate and were not assessed, so the GES of the species is unknown.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Preliminary results...
Os resultados preliminares do projeto MISTIC SEAS revelam que esta espécie se encontra em BEA nos Açores para o critério D1C1. Para os restantes critérios não existe informação suficiente ou foram considerados inadequados e por isso não foram avaliados, pelo que o BEA da espécie foi considerado desconhecido. MISTIC SEAS II consortium (2018) Macaronesian Roof Report (TRWP2) - Applying a sub-regional coherent and coordinated approach to the monitoring and assessment of marine biodiversity in Macaronesia for the second cycle of the MSFD. WP2 - Towards a coherent update of initial assessment, GES and targets, Task 2.1. Update of the Initial Assessment and Task 2.2. Finding common GES definition and Environmental Targets for the Macaronesia GA No 11.0661/2017/750679/SUB/ENV.C2., Brussels, 132pp.
Preliminary results...
Preliminary results...
Integration rule type parameter
Integration rule description parameter
Integration rule type criteria
Integration rule description criteria
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
For assessment and integration of environmental status it is essential to collect a wider/diverse set of data, filling gaps for a precision assessment. the suggested integration rule OOAO (WG BEA, 2017) could offer a reliable and robust integration method if the status of each element, criterion, indicator could be assessed with a very high degree of confidence, this is rarely the case.
GES extent threshold
GES extent achieved
GES extent unit
GES achieved
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Description overall status
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Only D1C1 was assessed for the different species, whereas the information was found insufficient to characterise and assess D1C2 and D1C3 in this cycle and in those cases GES was classified as ?Unknown?. Criteria D1C4 and D1C5 considered to be unsuitable, taking into account the characteristics of this group of megafauna, have not been assessed.
Assessments period
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
2012-2018
Related pressures
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Input of litter (solid waste matter, including micro-sized litter)
Related targets

Madeira subdivision (AMA-PT-SD-MAD)

GES component
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
D1-M
Feature
Baleen whales
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Deep-diving toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Small toothed cetaceans
Seals
Seals
Seals
Seals
Seals
Element
Balaenoptera edeni
Globicephala macrorhynchus
Globicephala macrorhynchus
Globicephala macrorhynchus
Physeter macrocephalus
Delphinus delphis
Stenella frontalis
Tursiops truncatus
Tursiops truncatus
Tursiops truncatus
Monachus monachus
Monachus monachus
Monachus monachus
Monachus monachus
Monachus monachus
Element code
137089
137096
137096
137096
137119
137094
137108
137111
137111
137111
137081
137081
137081
137081
137081
Element code source
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Species (D1) http://www.marinespecies.org/
Element 2
Element 2 code
Element 2 code source
Element source
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
MS in (sub)region
Criterion
D1C2
D1C2
D1C2
D1C3
D1C1
D1C2
D1C2
D1C2
D1C2
D1C3
D1C1
D1C2
D1C3
D1C4
D1C5
Parameter
Abundance
Abundance
Other
Survival rate
Other
Abundance
Abundance
Abundance
Other
Survival rate
Mortality rate / Mortality rate from fishing (F)
Abundance
Survival rate
Distribution (range)
Extent
Parameter other
The CMR
Gambling rate by ship strke
The CMR
Threshold value upper
Threshold value lower
Threshold qualitative
Threshold value source
Threshold value source other
Value achieved upper
Value achieved lower
Value unit
(number of) individuals
(number of) individuals
(number of) individuals
(number of) individuals
(number of) individuals
(number of) individuals
(number of) individuals
(number of) individuals
Other
Other
Value unit other
Decimal
Square Kilometers
Proportion threshold value
Proportion value achieved
Proportion threshold value unit
Trend
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Unknown
Improving
Unknown
Unknown
Stable
Parameter achieved
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Unknown
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Not assessed
Description parameter
Estimation based on the experimental design: 37 individuals (95 % CI
Estimation based on the experimental method distance sampling: UG-I: 95 individuals (95 % CI
MISTIC SENASII] UG-II: Animals associated with the island and transient: 662 (AI 95 %
MISTIC SENASII]
Estimation based on the experimental method Capture Mark Recapture UG-II South: 103 individuals (95 % CI
Results obtained in 2019 through the LIFE marine Madeira lobo-marine project, with the value of D1C4 resulting from the area around the Desertas and Madeira to the 200 m bathymetric measure.
Related indicator
Criteria status
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 criteria
There are no previous reference values for this species in the subdivision of Madeira. The current data are not sufficient to assess the GES of this indicator species in the subdivision of Madeira.
An abundance of UG-I is proposed to be evaluated using sampling methods for sampling sampling. An abundance of UG-II is proposed to be evaluated using marking and recapture methods.
An abundance of UG-I is proposed to be evaluated using sampling methods for sampling sampling. An abundance of UG-II is proposed to be evaluated using marking and recapture methods.
It is proposed to assess UG-II?s survival rate using marking and recapture methods. It is not possible to assess GES of this UG-II as regards the survival rate in the Madeira subdivision
In the course of the SESAS II, the follow-up to collisions with vessels has been proposed. Current data are not sufficient to assess GES in relation to this criterion in the subdivision of Madeira.
A prior abundance estimate exists that could be used as a benchmark for such UG ? 741 (CV
Currently, it is not possible to determine trends and evaluate BES for this species in the subdivision of Madeira.
An abundance of UG-I is proposed to be evaluated using sampling methods by means of sampling sampling. The size of UG-II is proposed to be assessed using marking and recapture methods.
An abundance of UG-I is proposed to be evaluated using sampling methods by means of sampling sampling. The size of UG-II is proposed to be assessed using marking and recapture methods.
UG-II survival is proposed to be evaluated using marking and recapture methods. Currently, it is not possible to determine trends and assess GES for this species in the sub division of Madeira.
It is proposed to continue to assess the estimation of the mortality rate through intensive on the spot monitoring, of animals stranded on fishing gear, Image of caves and GPS system devices
It is proposed to continue to evaluate the abundance of the marine wolf population through the technique of capturing images collected systematically through automatic cameras placed in the caves used by the animals.
It is proposed to continue the survival rate of the marine wolf by the technique of capturing images collected systematically through automatic cameras placed in the caves used by the animals.
It is proposed to assess the habitat for feeding using marking methods using devices with GPS systems.
It is proposed to continue to assess the estimation of the current habitat through observations from the community in general, given the sensitivity of the population to communicate the observation of this species.
Element status
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 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
Description overall status
The pilot monitoring programmes carried out as part of the MISIC SEAS II project obtained reference values for the abundance of some stocks of marine mammals. However, it should be noted that these values resulted from planned sampling to test the feasibility of the proposed methodology and as such, caution is advised when comparing these reference values with past or future estimates. No formal assessment has yet been carried out to validate the appropriateness and efficiency of the sampling strategy, but results point to that, at least for some species and/or UGIs, there is a need for more sampling (extending the annual sampling period and several years) to reduce the CV of abundance estimates and to increase the detection power for the MSFD. In the case of population estimates of sampling by photo-identification, the previous ones covered a longer period (7 years in the case of Madeira) and sampling was carried out during the whole year and not only during a given season, and in the monitoring sampling of the SEAS II mixture. With a longer dataset, more individuals associated with the islands would be considered and, possibly, increase population abundance estimates. Therefore, the estimates presented here should not be used to deduct any trend, but should be considered as a minimum estimate. For the pilot?s online sample testing, also prior estimates included a longer period and, in addition, during the design of the online transcript studies using the distance sampling methodology, it was decided to concentrate the effort on high-density areas of the Madeira archipelago. Thus, the estimates given are for these areas and not for all the coastal waters of the Madeira archipelago. For the reasons explained, again no direct comparison should be made with the initial reference values, and therefore no trends should be obtained from the values obtained from the pilot monitoring pilot projects of the SEAS II project. The sampling projects carried out during MISTIC SEAS II have tested sampling strategies (area to be sampled, period to be sampled and effort required) following the methodologies proposed in the SEAS project to monitor the Macaronesian oceanic species in Madeira, the Azores and the Canary Islands. Despite esf
The pilot monitoring programmes carried out as part of the MISIC SEAS II project obtained reference values for the abundance of some stocks of marine mammals. However, it should be noted that these values resulted from planned sampling to test the feasibility of the proposed methodology and as such, caution is advised when comparing these reference values with past or future estimates. No formal assessment has yet been carried out to validate the appropriateness and efficiency of the sampling strategy, but results point to that, at least for some species and/or UGIs, there is a need for more sampling (extending the annual sampling period and several years) to reduce the CV of abundance estimates and to increase the detection power for the MSFD. In the case of population estimates of sampling by photo-identification, the previous ones covered a longer period (7 years in the case of Madeira) and sampling was carried out during the whole year and not only during a given season, and in the monitoring sampling of the SEAS II mixture. With a longer dataset, more individuals associated with the islands would be considered and, possibly, increase population abundance estimates. Therefore, the estimates presented here should not be used to deduct any trend, but should be considered as a minimum estimate. For the pilot?s online sample testing, also prior estimates included a longer period and, in addition, during the design of the online transcript studies using the distance sampling methodology, it was decided to concentrate the effort on high-density areas of the Madeira archipelago. Thus, the estimates given are for these areas and not for all the coastal waters of the Madeira archipelago. For the reasons explained, again no direct comparison should be made with the initial reference values, and therefore no trends should be obtained from the values obtained from the pilot monitoring pilot projects of the SEAS II project. The sampling projects carried out during MISTIC SEAS II have tested sampling strategies (area to be sampled, period to be sampled and effort required) following the methodologies proposed in the SEAS project to monitor the Macaronesian oceanic species in Madeira, the Azores and the Canary Islands.
The pilot monitoring programmes carried out as part of the MISIC SEAS II project obtained reference values for the abundance of some stocks of marine mammals. However, it should be noted that these values resulted from planned sampling to test the feasibility of the proposed methodology and as such, caution is advised when comparing these reference values with past or future estimates. No formal assessment has yet been carried out to validate the appropriateness and efficiency of the sampling strategy, but results point to that, at least for some species and/or UGIs, there is a need for more sampling (extending the annual sampling period and several years) to reduce the CV of abundance estimates and to increase the detection power for the MSFD. In the case of population estimates of sampling by photo-identification, the previous ones covered a longer period (7 years in the case of Madeira) and sampling was carried out during the whole year and not only during a given season, and in the monitoring sampling of the SEAS II mixture. With a longer dataset, more individuals associated with the islands would be considered and, possibly, increase population abundance estimates. Therefore, the estimates presented here should not be used to deduct any trend, but should be considered as a minimum estimate. For the pilot?s online sample testing, also prior estimates included a longer period and, in addition, during the design of the online transcript studies using the distance sampling methodology, it was decided to concentrate the effort on high-density areas of the Madeira archipelago. Thus, the estimates given are for these areas and not for all the coastal waters of the Madeira archipelago. For the reasons explained, again no direct comparison should be made with the initial reference values, and therefore no trends should be obtained from the values obtained from the pilot monitoring pilot projects of the SEAS II project. The sampling projects carried out during MISTIC SEAS II have tested sampling strategies (area to be sampled, period to be sampled and effort required) following the methodologies proposed in the SEAS project to monitor the Macaronesian oceanic species in Madeira, the Azores and the Canary Islands.
The pilot monitoring programmes carried out as part of the MISIC SEAS II project obtained reference values for the abundance of some stocks of marine mammals. However, it should be noted that these values resulted from planned sampling to test the feasibility of the proposed methodology and as such, caution is advised when comparing these reference values with past or future estimates. No formal assessment has yet been carried out to validate the appropriateness and efficiency of the sampling strategy, but results point to that, at least for some species and/or UGIs, there is a need for more sampling (extending the annual sampling period and several years) to reduce the CV of abundance estimates and to increase the detection power for the MSFD. In the case of population estimates of sampling by photo-identification, the previous ones covered a longer period (7 years in the case of Madeira) and sampling was carried out during the whole year and not only during a given season, and in the monitoring sampling of the SEAS II mixture. With a longer dataset, more individuals associated with the islands would be considered and, possibly, increase population abundance estimates. Therefore, the estimates presented here should not be used to deduct any trend, but should be considered as a minimum estimate. For the pilot?s online sample testing, also prior estimates included a longer period and, in addition, during the design of the online transcript studies using the distance sampling methodology, it was decided to concentrate the effort on high-density areas of the Madeira archipelago. Thus, the estimates given are for these areas and not for all the coastal waters of the Madeira archipelago. For the reasons explained, again no direct comparison should be made with the initial reference values, and therefore no trends should be obtained from the values obtained from the pilot monitoring pilot projects of the SEAS II project. The sampling projects carried out during MISTIC SEAS II have tested sampling strategies (area to be sampled, period to be sampled and effort required) following the methodologies proposed in the SEAS project to monitor the Macaronesian oceanic species in Madeira, the Azores and the Canary Islands.
The pilot monitoring programmes carried out as part of the MISIC SEAS II project obtained reference values for the abundance of some stocks of marine mammals. However, it should be noted that these values resulted from planned sampling to test the feasibility of the proposed methodology and as such, caution is advised when comparing these reference values with past or future estimates. No formal assessment has yet been carried out to validate the appropriateness and efficiency of the sampling strategy, but results point to that, at least for some species and/or UGIs, there is a need for more sampling (extending the annual sampling period and several years) to reduce the CV of abundance estimates and to increase the detection power for the MSFD. In the case of population estimates of sampling by photo-identification, the previous ones covered a longer period (7 years in the case of Madeira) and sampling was carried out during the whole year and not only during a given season, and in the monitoring sampling of the SEAS II mixture. With a longer dataset, more individuals associated with the islands would be considered and, possibly, increase population abundance estimates. Therefore, the estimates presented here should not be used to deduct any trend, but should be considered as a minimum estimate. For the pilot?s online sample testing, also prior estimates included a longer period and, in addition, during the design of the online transcript studies using the distance sampling methodology, it was decided to concentrate the effort on high-density areas of the Madeira archipelago. Thus, the estimates given are for these areas and not for all the coastal waters of the Madeira archipelago. For the reasons explained, again no direct comparison should be made with the initial reference values, and therefore no trends should be obtained from the values obtained from the pilot monitoring pilot projects of the SEAS II project. The sampling projects carried out during MISTIC SEAS II have tested sampling strategies (area to be sampled, period to be sampled and effort required) following the methodologies proposed in the SEAS project to monitor the Macaronesian oceanic species in Madeira, the Azores and the Canary Islands.
The pilot monitoring programmes carried out as part of the MISIC SEAS II project obtained reference values for the abundance of some stocks of marine mammals. However, it should be noted that these values resulted from planned sampling to test the feasibility of the proposed methodology and as such, caution is advised when comparing these reference values with past or future estimates. No formal assessment has yet been carried out to validate the appropriateness and efficiency of the sampling strategy, but results point to that, at least for some species and/or UGIs, there is a need for more sampling (extending the annual sampling period and several years) to reduce the CV of abundance estimates and to increase the detection power for the MSFD. In the case of population estimates of sampling by photo-identification, the previous ones covered a longer period (7 years in the case of Madeira) and sampling was carried out during the whole year and not only during a given season, and in the monitoring sampling of the SEAS II mixture. With a longer dataset, more individuals associated with the islands would be considered and, possibly, increase population abundance estimates. Therefore, the estimates presented here should not be used to deduct any trend, but should be considered as a minimum estimate. For the pilot?s online sample testing, also prior estimates included a longer period and, in addition, during the design of the online transcript studies using the distance sampling methodology, it was decided to concentrate the effort on high-density areas of the Madeira archipelago. Thus, the estimates given are for these areas and not for all the coastal waters of the Madeira archipelago. For the reasons explained, again no direct comparison should be made with the initial reference values, and therefore no trends should be obtained from the values obtained from the pilot monitoring pilot projects of the SEAS II project. The sampling projects carried out during MISTIC SEAS II have tested sampling strategies (area to be sampled, period to be sampled and effort required) following the methodologies proposed in the SEAS project to monitor the Macaronesian oceanic species in Madeira, the Azores and the Canary Islands. Despite esf
The pilot monitoring programmes carried out as part of the MISIC SEAS II project obtained reference values for the abundance of some stocks of marine mammals. However, it should be noted that these values resulted from planned sampling to test the feasibility of the proposed methodology and as such, caution is advised when comparing these reference values with past or future estimates. No formal assessment has yet been carried out to validate the appropriateness and efficiency of the sampling strategy, but results point to that, at least for some species and/or UGIs, there is a need for more sampling (extending the annual sampling period and several years) to reduce the CV of abundance estimates and to increase the detection power for the MSFD. In the case of population estimates of sampling by photo-identification, the previous ones covered a longer period (7 years in the case of Madeira) and sampling was carried out during the whole year and not only during a given season, and in the monitoring sampling of the SEAS II mixture. With a longer dataset, more individuals associated with the islands would be considered and, possibly, increase population abundance estimates. Therefore, the estimates presented here should not be used to deduct any trend, but should be considered as a minimum estimate. For the pilot?s online sample testing, also prior estimates included a longer period and, in addition, during the design of the online transcript studies using the distance sampling methodology, it was decided to concentrate the effort on high-density areas of the Madeira archipelago. Thus, the estimates given are for these areas and not for all the coastal waters of the Madeira archipelago. For the reasons explained, again no direct comparison should be made with the initial reference values, and therefore no trends should be obtained from the values obtained from the pilot monitoring pilot projects of the SEAS II project. The sampling projects carried out during MISTIC SEAS II have tested sampling strategies (area to be sampled, period to be sampled and effort required) following the methodologies proposed in the SEAS project to monitor the Macaronesian oceanic species in Madeira, the Azores and the Canary Islands. Despite esf
The pilot monitoring programmes carried out as part of the MISIC SEAS II project obtained reference values for the abundance of some stocks of marine mammals. However, it should be noted that these values resulted from planned sampling to test the feasibility of the proposed methodology and as such, caution is advised when comparing these reference values with past or future estimates. No formal assessment has yet been carried out to validate the appropriateness and efficiency of the sampling strategy, but results point to that, at least for some species and/or UGIs, there is a need for more sampling (extending the annual sampling period and several years) to reduce the CV of abundance estimates and to increase the detection power for the MSFD. In the case of population estimates of sampling by photo-identification, the previous ones covered a longer period (7 years in the case of Madeira) and sampling was carried out during the whole year and not only during a given season, and in the monitoring sampling of the SEAS II mixture. With a longer dataset, more individuals associated with the islands would be considered and, possibly, increase population abundance estimates. Therefore, the estimates presented here should not be used to deduct any trend, but should be considered as a minimum estimate. For the pilot?s online sample testing, also prior estimates included a longer period and, in addition, during the design of the online transcript studies using the distance sampling methodology, it was decided to concentrate the effort on high-density areas of the Madeira archipelago. Thus, the estimates given are for these areas and not for all the coastal waters of the Madeira archipelago. For the reasons explained, again no direct comparison should be made with the initial reference values, and therefore no trends should be obtained from the values obtained from the pilot monitoring pilot projects of the SEAS II project. The sampling projects carried out during MISTIC SEAS II have tested sampling strategies (area to be sampled, period to be sampled and effort required) following the methodologies proposed in the SEAS project to monitor the Macaronesian oceanic species in Madeira, the Azores and the Canary Islands. Despite esf
The pilot monitoring programmes carried out as part of the MISIC SEAS II project obtained reference values for the abundance of some stocks of marine mammals. However, it should be noted that these values resulted from planned sampling to test the feasibility of the proposed methodology and as such, caution is advised when comparing these reference values with past or future estimates. No formal assessment has yet been carried out to validate the appropriateness and efficiency of the sampling strategy, but results point to that, at least for some species and/or UGIs, there is a need for more sampling (extending the annual sampling period and several years) to reduce the CV of abundance estimates and to increase the detection power for the MSFD. In the case of population estimates of sampling by photo-identification, the previous ones covered a longer period (7 years in the case of Madeira) and sampling was carried out during the whole year and not only during a given season, and in the monitoring sampling of the SEAS II mixture. With a longer dataset, more individuals associated with the islands would be considered and, possibly, increase population abundance estimates. Therefore, the estimates presented here should not be used to deduct any trend, but should be considered as a minimum estimate. For the pilot?s online sample testing, also prior estimates included a longer period and, in addition, during the design of the online transcript studies using the distance sampling methodology, it was decided to concentrate the effort on high-density areas of the Madeira archipelago. Thus, the estimates given are for these areas and not for all the coastal waters of the Madeira archipelago. For the reasons explained, again no direct comparison should be made with the initial reference values, and therefore no trends should be obtained from the values obtained from the pilot monitoring pilot projects of the SEAS II project. The sampling projects carried out during MISTIC SEAS II have tested sampling strategies (area to be sampled, period to be sampled and effort required) following the methodologies proposed in the SEAS project to monitor the Macaronesian oceanic species in Madeira, the Azores and the Canary Islands. Despite esf
The pilot monitoring programmes carried out as part of the MISIC SEAS II project obtained reference values for the abundance of some stocks of marine mammals. However, it should be noted that these values resulted from planned sampling to test the feasibility of the proposed methodology and as such, caution is advised when comparing these reference values with past or future estimates. No formal assessment has yet been carried out to validate the appropriateness and efficiency of the sampling strategy, but results point to that, at least for some species and/or UGIs, there is a need for more sampling (extending the annual sampling period and several years) to reduce the CV of abundance estimates and to increase the detection power for the MSFD. In the case of population estimates of sampling by photo-identification, the previous ones covered a longer period (7 years in the case of Madeira) and sampling was carried out during the whole year and not only during a given season, and in the monitoring sampling of the SEAS II mixture. With a longer dataset, more individuals associated with the islands would be considered and, possibly, increase population abundance estimates. Therefore, the estimates presented here should not be used to deduct any trend, but should be considered as a minimum estimate. For the pilot?s online sample testing, also prior estimates included a longer period and, in addition, during the design of the online transcript studies using the distance sampling methodology, it was decided to concentrate the effort on high-density areas of the Madeira archipelago. Thus, the estimates given are for these areas and not for all the coastal waters of the Madeira archipelago. For the reasons explained, again no direct comparison should be made with the initial reference values, and therefore no trends should be obtained from the values obtained from the pilot monitoring pilot projects of the SEAS II project. The sampling projects carried out during MISTIC SEAS II have tested sampling strategies (area to be sampled, period to be sampled and effort required) following the methodologies proposed in the SEAS project to monitor the Macaronesian oceanic species in Madeira, the Azores and the Canary Islands. Despite esf
Currently, the species is monitored and assessed within the framework of the LIFE13 NAT/ES/000974 and other governmental management plans coordinated by the Regional Secretariat of the Environment and Natural Resources (SRA) and by the Institute for Forestry and Nature Conservation (IFCN, IP-RAM).
Currently, the species is monitored and assessed within the framework of the LIFE13 NAT/ES/000974 and other governmental management plans coordinated by the Regional Secretariat of the Environment and Natural Resources (SRA) and by the Institute for Forestry and Nature Conservation (IFCN, IP-RAM).
Currently, the species is monitored and assessed within the framework of the LIFE13 NAT/ES/000974 and other governmental management plans coordinated by the Regional Secretariat of the Environment and Natural Resources (SRA) and by the Institute for Forestry and Nature Conservation (IFCN, IP-RAM).
Currently, the species is monitored and assessed within the framework of the LIFE13 NAT/ES/000974 and other governmental management plans coordinated by the Regional Secretariat of the Environment and Natural Resources (SRA) and by the Institute for Forestry and Nature Conservation (IFCN, IP-RAM).
Currently, the species is monitored and assessed within the framework of the LIFE13 NAT/ES/000974 and other governmental management plans coordinated by the Regional Secretariat of the Environment and Natural Resources (SRA) and by the Institute for Forestry and Nature Conservation (IFCN, IP-RAM).
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
Related pressures
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Litter in the environment
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Litter in the environment
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Litter in the environment
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Litter in the environment
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Litter in the environment
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Litter in the environment
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Litter in the environment
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Litter in the environment
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Litter in the environment
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Disturbance of species (e.g. where they breed, rest and feed) due to human presence
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Litter in the environment
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
  • Contaminants - UPBT substances
  • Contaminants - non UPBT substances
  • Extraction of, or mortality/injury to, wild species (by commercial and recreational fishing and other activities)
  • Input of anthropogenic sound (impulsive, continuous)
Related targets
  • AMAPT-T003-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T003-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T003-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T003-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T003-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T003-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T003-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T003-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T003-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T003-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA
  • AMAPT-T003-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T005-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T006-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T007-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T009-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T011-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T012-D1MAD
  • AMAPT-T013-D1MAD
  • Diretiva Habitats
  • Meta DQEM BEA