Skip to main content

State of benthic habitats and seafloor integrity

Benthic ecosystems in the OSPAR Maritime Area are influenced by open Atlantic oceanic currents, geographical and topographical factors, depth variations and temperature and salinity ranges. This wide range of environmental conditions in turn produces a rich and diverse array of benthic ecosystems, from intertidal mudflats to biogenic reefs (https://www.emodnet-seabedhabitats.eu/).

Anthropogenic pressures have caused changes in the extent, distribution, condition and functioning of benthic habitats, with increased degradation in some, particularly those highly sensitive to human pressures. During recent decades, several habitats have been identified as in need of special protection and conservation measures, notably through European Union Directives and by other regional bodies: Natura 2000; Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD), Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission, Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and the Coastal Region of the Mediterranean and The Commission on the Protection of the Black Sea Against Pollution. For OSPAR, these habitats are listed under Threatened and/or Declining Species and Habitats.

For this Quality Status Report (QSR 2023), the assessments of the state of broad-scale and listed benthic habitats in the OSPAR Maritime Area have been undertaken using a variety of indicators and assessment methods applied at different scales. Most of the indicators have been further developed and improved since the publication of the 2017 OSPAR Intermediate Assessment . The key messages from the results of the indicator and listed habitat status assessments have been summarised for each of the five OSPAR Regions in Table S.1, including an overall assessment of confidence. The availability of habitat data and the limited access to high-resolution pressure data from anthropogenic activities present a key challenge to the assessment of benthic ecosystems. Currently, there are large areas of OSPAR Regions with very limited or no monitoring data. Pressure-state-impact relationships, particularly in regard to exposure levels and the recovery of some sensitive habitats, are not always well understood. This and data paucity are the key factors affecting the levels of confidence in the assessments results (Table S.1).

Table S.1: Regional assessment summaries of benthic Common Indicators and OSPAR listed threatened and /or declining habitats

Arctic Waters (Region I)
Common Indicators
  • No OSPAR Common Indicators have been developed. 
  • Efforts are ongoing towards the development of methodological standards and common baselines. 
  • The trends detected are mainly related to climatic impacts. Specific impacts from human activities have not so far been well studied and documented, but some impacts from pressures have been reported. 
Threatened and/or Declining HabitatsHabitats in Poor StatusHabitats in Good StatusHabitats Not Assessed/Unknown Status
Five out of eight OSPAR listed habitats assessed are in poor status
  • Zostera beds
  • Deep-sea sponge aggregations
  • Coral gardens
  • Lophelia pertusa reefs Seamounts
  • Oceanic ridges with hydrothermal vent fields
  • Maerl beds (unknown) Intertidal mudflats (not assessed)
ConfidenceLow - Assessment is based on status assessments of OSPAR listed habitats, expert judgement, published research and third-party assessments, but these assessments cover only a small part of this Region
Greater North Sea (Region II)
Common Indicators
  • Coastal waters are showing mainly high/good status for benthic vegetation and invertebrates, but in the Southern North Sea, Kattegat and the Channel, status was mixed, as eutrophication is still an issue for some areas (BH2a).
  • The Margalef [species] diversity index (BH2b) indicates low relative diversity in infralittoral sand, mud and circalittoral sandy habitats, with moderate to high relative diversity in some offshore areas.
  • Assessments of bottom-contacting fishing activity (BH3a) showed widespread and generally high physical disturbance of benthic habitats. Lower levels of disturbance occurred in some areas of the Central North Sea. Offshore circalittoral mud is the most highly disturbed habitat across the Greater North Sea.
  • Disturbance from aggregate extraction activities (BH3b) was only measured in the Southern North Sea, the Channel, Kattegat and the Norwegian Trench. Not all areas were assessed due to lack of suitable data.
Threatened and/or Declining HabitatsHabitats in Poor StatusHabitats in Good StatusHabitats Not Assessed/Unknown Status
Eight out of nine OSPAR listed habitats assessed are in poor status
  • Maerl beds
  • Intertidal Mytilus edulis beds on mixed and sandy sediments
  • Intertidal mud flats
  • Zostera beds
  • Sea‐pen and burrowing megafauna
  • Deep-sea sponge aggregations
  • Coral gardens
  • Lophelia pertusa reefs
None
  • European Flat oyster (Ostrea edulis) beds (unknown)
ConfidenceMedium - Multiple lines of evidence, indicators and status assessments of OSPAR listed habitats mostly agree, but gaps were observed in the spatial coverage of the biological information available
Celtic Seas (Region III)
Common Indicators
  • Coastal waters are showing mainly high/good status for benthic vegetation and invertebrates (BH2a) although, in the Southern Celtic Seas, a large proportion of the total area of water bodies was not assessed. 
  • Assessments of bottom-contacting fishing activity (BH3a) showed widespread and generally high physical disturbance of benthic habitats. Disturbance was higher in the Southern Celtic Seas, with more than 70% of the assessment unit disturbed by fishing. Offshore circalittoral mud and upper bathyal sediment were the habitats most affected. 
  • Disturbance from aggregate extraction (BH3b) was only measured in a small number of areas. Not all areas were assessed due to lack of suitable data. 
Threatened and/or Declining HabitatsHabitats in Poor StatusHabitats in Good StatusHabitats Not Assessed/Unknown Status
Six out of seven OSPAR Listed habitats assessed are in poor status
  • Maerl beds
  • European flat oyster (Ostrea edulis) beds
  • Intertidal mud flats
  • Zostera beds
  • Sea‐pen and burrowing megafauna
  • Lophelia pertusa reefs
None
  • Intertidal mussel beds (not assessed)
ConfidenceMedium - Multiple lines of evidence, indicators and status assessments of OSPAR listed habitats mostly agree, but gaps were observed in the spatial coverage of biological information available
Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast (Region IV)
Common Indicators
  • Coastal waters are showing mainly high/good status for benthic vegetation and invertebrates (BH2a), although a large proportion of water bodies was not assessed in the Gulf of Cadiz and in the Bay of Biscay. 
  • Assessments of physical disturbance to the seabed by fishing (BH3a) and changes to sensitive species (BH1) showed that a larger proportion of benthic habitats in areas where such fishing could occur was assessed as disturbed or under impact. 
  • All offshore and circalittoral broad habitat types were disturbed to some extent (BH1 and BH3a). Some habitats such as offshore circalittoral mixed sediments, offshore circalittoral mud and circalittoral coarse sediment are showing more than 50% of the area assessed as ‘highly disturbed’ within an assessment period. 
Threatened and/or Declining HabitatsHabitats in Poor StatusHabitats in Good StatusHabitats Not Assessed/Unknown Status
All eight OSPAR Listed habitats assessed are in poor status
  • Maerl beds
  • European flat oyster (Ostrea edulis) beds
  • Intertidal mud flats
  • Zostera beds
  • Lophelia pertusa reefs
  • Deep-sea sponge aggregations
  • Coral gardens
  • Seamounts
None

None

ConfidenceMedium - Multiple lines of evidence, indicators and status assessments of OSPAR listed habitats mostly agree, but gaps were observed in the spatial coverage of biological information available
Wider Atlantic (Region V)
Common Indicators
  • At present there are no OSPAR Common Indicators agreed for this Region. 
  • A pilot assessment of physical disturbance caused by fishing (BH3a) was conducted in some areas within Contracting Parties’ EEZs. It showed that a large proportion of habitats, mainly those classified as bathyal and abyssal, was undisturbed because fishing does not occur in these areas of the seabed. By contrast, the pilot assessment also indicated moderate to high levels of disturbance to offshore circalittoral mud and other soft sediments in areas where fishing activity is widespread. 
  • It should be noted that a large proportion of broad-scale habitats in this Region have not been assessed.
Threatened and/or Declining HabitatsHabitats in Poor StatusHabitats in Good StatusHabitats Not Assessed/Unknown Status
Five out of six OSPAR Listed habitats assessed are in poor status 
  • Deep-sea sponge aggregations 
  • Carbonate mounds
  • Seamounts 
  • Coral gardens 
  • Lophelia pertusa reefs
  • Oceanic ridges and hydrothermal vent fields
None
ConfidenceLow - Data were assessed only in a small proportion of the total area of the Region. Status assessments of OSPAR listed habitats were also undertaken, but large areas were unassessed

The OSPAR Common Indicators have not yet been adapted for and applied to the Arctic Waters (OSPAR Region I). Therefore, the ecosystem state of the Arctic Waters in the OSPAR Maritime Area has been assessed with the best available data and scientific knowledge.

There is some evidence available for selected areas of the Arctic Waters and the Wider Atlantic, but this is limited to third party assessments, the status of some of the OSPAR threatened and/or declining habitats and pilot assessments of candidate indicators. The spatio-temporal coverage of these assessments is limited, which in turn limits the comparability of the results.

For the Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas and Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, quantitative approaches have been applied through the use of regional Common Indicators, which represent an evaluation of status and assessment using common standards of methodology and data formats. Status assessments from the OSPAR-listed threatened and / or declining habitats are also available for these Regions. However, gaps still remain, in particular in terms of the types of pressures addressed, the limited data and the cumulative effects, which prevents the integration of indicators at this stage. The results from indicators cover a wide range of habitat types.

Thanks to the common methodological standards, the lines of evidence (Indicator Assessments, other assessments or third-party assessments) mostly concur, although a minor proportion show some deviation, notably due to differences in the indicators and related methods used between Regions (common and candidate indicators), knowledge gaps and current limitations in methods, which still enable some subjective interpretations of the results.

Despite the large amount of effort invested to develop indicators, quantitative integration is not possible at this stage. This is due to a combination of factors, in particular the lack of agreed regional thresholds alongside the limited coverage of indicator results across some of the assessment units. 

To facilitate overall visualisation, the results of the Indicator Assessments are presented.

Table S.2 and Figure S.2, Figure S.3, Figure S.4, Figure S.5 and Figure S.6 highlight that not all indicators were assessed in all OSPAR Regions due to lack of data or lack of policy support. As previously noted, OSPAR Common Indicators have not yet been adapted for or applied to the Arctic Waters and Wider Atlantic Regions, although the availability of limited data has facilitated a pilot assessment for two indicators in discrete areas within the Arctic Waters and the Wider Atlantic to support the further development of these indicators for these regions.

The assessment of Common Indicators and the pilot assessment of candidate indicators (Table S.2) have been used to assess different aspects of benthic ecosystems, namely the level of disturbance and risks of physical loss to the seafloor (MSFD broad habitat types and OSPAR List of threatened and declining habitats), changes in benthic species diversity, impacts on sensitive species and the status of benthic communities in relation to eutrophication pressures (nutrient and organic enrichment). The assessment units (AUs) used in the analysis reflect the boundaries set up for MSFD and UK Marine Strategy reporting purposes (Figure S.1).


Table S.2 : Overview of the availability per OSPAR Region of Common Indicator results (marked as X in white cells) and the pilot assessment of Common Indicators (marked as (X) in pale grey cells); or where there is no indicator at all (dark grey cell). AU = assessment units. UK = United Kingdom

 Arctic Waters
(Region I)
Greater North Sea
(Region II)
Celtic Seas
(Region III)
Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast
(Region IV)
Wider Atlantic
(Region V)
Sentinels of the Seabed (BH1)   X 
Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a)(X)
coastal waters only
XXX(X)
coastal waters only
Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Margalef diversity in Region II (Greater North Sea) (BH2b) X   
Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)(X)
UK waters only
XXX(X)
Atlantic Projection
nd deeper habitats
in other AUs
Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b) XX  
Pilot Assessment of Area of Habitat Loss (BH4) Pilot   

Figure S.1: Maps of the agreed benthic assessment units overlaying OSPAR Regions

The results presented relating to the Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) in Figures S.3 and S.4 indicate that most of the water bodies for which data were provided, in the Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas and Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, have benthic habitats classified as in good biological status, according to the European Union Water Framework Directive (WFD, 2000/60/EC). For the three OSPAR Regions the assessment of invertebrates was applied to 72% of coastal water bodies (Figure S.2) and 59% of coastal water bodies for the condition of benthic vegetation (Figure S.3). The WFD quality status for the condition of benthic invertebrates was good or high in 79% of the coastal water bodies assessed. The condition of benthic vegetation was good or high in 86% of the coastal water bodies assessed. However, local eutrophication-impacted areas were highlighted in the 2010 and 2016 reporting cycles.

The Sentinels of the Seabed (BH1) Common Indicator Assessment evaluated the level of disturbance to the main benthic habitats affected by bottom-contact fishing in the Common Indicator Assessment units in the Bay of Biscay and Iberian coast Region from 2009 to 2020 (QSR) and from 2016 to 2020 (MSFD). 

The assessment showed that bottom trawling was widely distributed over the continental shelf of the area considered (Figure S.2). This geographical distribution results in the intensity of the fishing effort being primarily concentrated at depths shallower than 500 m and mainly shallower than 200 m. Consequently, the Gulf of Cadiz and the Gulf of Biscay assessment units, which mostly comprise the continental shelf, are trawled to a greater extent and thus have a greater disturbed area. 

When considering disturbance across Broad Habitat Types (BHT) within the assessed area, high disturbance was most significant in circalittoral coarse sediment, offshore circalittoral mixed sediment and offshore circalittoral mud (80% highly or moderately disturbed). These disturbance results were the product of interaction between the moderate to high intensity of trawling and the sensitivity of the habitats to that pressure. The least disturbed habitat type was upper bathyal sediment, at 46% highly or moderately disturbed. The assessment of the South Iberian Atlantic was not reliable because of a lack of Portuguese data.
 

Figure S.2: Summary outputs of disturbance to benthic habitats for bottom trawling assessed by Sentinels of the Seabed (BH1) Common Indicator over the period 2009 to 2020 (QSR assessment period). The spatial distribution of disturbance across the Common Indicator Assessment units is presented on the map. The pie chart plots the percentage of assessment unit area for each disturbance level. This summary did not include data from the Portuguese fleet (VMS unavailable)

Despite the data gaps for many water bodies, this fine-scale Common Indicator Assessment (sub-regions and coastal water bodies) enabled the identification of regional variations and the main locally impacted areas for benthic invertebrates (Figure S.2) and vegetation communities (Figure S.3). The main impacted areas, notably for benthic vegetation, are persistent between 2010 and 2016, all along the Dutch and Danish coasts and the north-west coasts of France. The total area of assessed / reported water bodies increased significantly between 2010 and 2016 in most Regions (except the assessment unit Northern Iberian Atlantic), which led to better representativity, with both new good and bad WFD quality status areas.

High/GoodModeratePoor/BadNo Data

Figure S.3: Distribution of 2016 Water Framework Directive (WFD) quality status (condition) for benthic invertebrates (Common Iindicator BH2a) in intertidal and subtidal sediments in response to the (direct or indirect) effects of nutrient and / or organic enrichment, and proportion (area) of the quality status of coastal water bodies for each benthic habitat assessment unit in the Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas and Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast. Available at: ODIMS

High/GoodModeratePoor/BadNo Data

Figure S.4: Distribution of 2016 Water Framework Directive (WFD) quality status (condition) for benthic vegetation (Common Indicator BH2a) in intertidal and subtidal sediments, in response to the (direct or indirect) effects of nutrient and / or organic enrichment, and proportion (area) of the quality status of coastal water bodies for each benthic habitat assessment unit in the Greater North Sea, Celtic Seas and Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast. Available at: ODIMS

The assessment of the Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Margalef diversity in Region II (Greater North Sea) (BH2b) (Figure S.5) has shown that the relative diversity of benthic communities is higher in offshore circalittoral habitats compared with circalittoral and infralittoral habitats, where low species diversity was found.

Relative diversity still seems to be in a moderate or rather good state in offshore circalittoral habitats, regardless of the expected relatively high fishing pressure. It should be noted that data from 2016-2021 were lacking for extensive areas, so on the basis of the impact assessments from BH3a (see also Figure S.6) a decrease in quality might be expected in the near future. Benthic diversity is relatively low in shallow coastal waters, where various pressures (e.g., eutrophication and diffuse pollution) can affect habitat condition even where fishing appears to be limited, according to the available pressure data. The pattern is especially evident in the Southern - and possibly Central – North Sea. The shallow benthic habitats of the Kattegat appear to be in a poor state; besides fisheries, it is expected that increased variability in low salinity water inflow from the Baltic plays a role. In general, benthic habitat quality status seems better in the Channel (regardless of high fishing pressure) and the Norwegian Trench. There and in the Central North Sea, efforts to improve the representativity of benthic community sampling programmes could improve the reliability of assessments.

Figure S.5: Summary outputs of the Margalef Species Diversity (BH2b) assessment (2016-2021). Bars show proportion (area) of assessment unit with relative diversity level, where the number of assessed habitats under each diversity category is indicated
* The proportion of uncertain or unassessed area (grey bars) is slightly underestimated as it does not include two littoral BHTs for all assessment units and three lower bathyal and abyssal BHTs in the case of the Norwegian Trench.

Figure S.6 summarises the assessment outcomes for two BH3 indicators:

The assessment of indicator BH3a (red colourway, Figure S.5) evaluated the benthic habitat disturbance in the North-East Atlantic associated with bottom-contact fishing over two time frames (QSR:2009 to 2020; MSFD:2016 to 2020). Seafloor disturbance caused by fishing occurred in all broad habitat types, affecting 48% of the assessed area in 2016-2020, and 53% in 2009-2020.

The assessment indicated a ubiquitous distribution of anthropogenic pressure across parts of the OSPAR Maritime Area in habitats where bottom-contact fishing occurs (< 800 m deep). All Broadscale Habitat Types (BHT) had high and/or moderate disturbance, with offshore circalittoral mud having the greatest proportion of high disturbance and offshore circalittoral coarse sediment the greatest proportion of low disturbance. 

When considering the spatial distribution of disturbance, the greatest proportions of high and moderate disturbance occurring together were in the Gulf of Biscay and the Southern North Sea, whereas the greatest proportion of high disturbance alone was in the Gulf of Cadiz and the greatest proportion of low disturbance was in the Channel. 

Zero disturbance was found in approximately half the total area of Common Indicator Assessment units in both the QSR (2009-2020) and the MSFD assessment (2016 – 2020) periods. However, gaps in the coverage of VMS (Vessel Monitoring System) data highlighted potential underestimations of disturbance in some areas and habitats. The aforementioned limitations associated with VMS data availability should be addressed in future assessments so as to facilitate more robust findings. 

The results of Common Indicator Extent of physical disturbance to benthic habitats: Aggregate extraction (BH3b) are presented alongside the results from Common Indicator Extent of physical disturbance to benthic habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gear (BH3a) in Figure S.5, using a grey colour scheme. They show that disturbance from aggregate extraction was limited in extent, with high-intensity pressure localised to discrete licensed areas, where permitted by regulators. Disturbance could only be calculated where sufficient extraction pressure data were available. Owing to limitations in commercially sensitive extraction activity data, disturbance results are confined to the exclusive economic zones (EEZs) of the data providers. 

Habitats impacted by extraction pressure typically showed moderate or high disturbance. Across all areas assessed, the sediments typically targeted by the aggregate industry (mixed sediment, coarse sediment, and sand) had the greatest proportions of area with disturbance. However, the total disturbance area for any single BHT across all assessment units remained less than 0,5% of the total habitat area. Additionally, within assessment units, the proportion of any habitat area under disturbance was also low, with offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef being the only BHTs with an area under greater than 1% disturbance in both the QSR and the MSFD assessments. 

Changes in the areas of annual disturbance did not show any clear increasing or decreasing trends between 2009 and 2020. The variation in United Kingdom waters throughout the time series broadly followed the total active annual dredging area reported by the data provider (BMAPA, 2010 to 2021).

Figure S.6: Assessment results for risk of physical disturbance to benthic habitats, as calculated with the BH3a indicator for bottom-contact fishing gears and the BH3b indicator for commercial aggregate extraction, across the QSR 2023 assessment period (2009 to 2020). Disturbance caused by fishing activities is calculated as the percentage of the assessment unit under different levels of disturbance (red colourway), and disturbance caused by commercial aggregate extraction (grey colourway) is calculated as the percentage of disturbance in the areas where the activity is occurring (per assessment unit); shades of grey represent different levels of disturbance

Across all assessment units, abyssal habitats (deeper than 2 000 metres) have the highest habitat extent amounting to 30% of total habitat across all benthic broad-scale habitat types, followed by offshore circalittoral sand (18%) and upper bathyal sediments (14%) (Figure S.7). Physical disturbance remains the main widespread pressure caused by human activities and contributes to a reduction in diversity and changes in sensitive benthic species communities and habitats across the OSPAR Regions. This thematic assessment has highlighted that the highest levels of physical disturbance due to abrasion by bottom trawling fisheries occurred in infralittoral and circalittoral offshore soft habitat types, while coastal habitat benthic communities' diversity and structure were both affected by - probably - several pressure types.

Figure S.7: The percentage of the total OSPAR Common Indicator area covered by each BHT. Additionally, the percentage of the total assessed area where there were no EUNIS data and where no EUNIS to BHT translation was possible is also represented

The recent status assessments of specific threatened and / or declining habitats (OSPAR Agreement 2008-06) indicate that these are generally in poor status. Most of the currently available evidence indicates a declining or not improved condition. Some habitats (such as Ostrea edulis and Zostera beds) also showed a decrease in distribution and extent in some regions. There has been no indication of any improved status in sea-pen and burrowing megafauna habitats. This is further supported by the BH3a indicator results for threatened and declining habitats, which showed that close to 90% of sea-pen and burrowing megafauna habitats were under high risk of disturbance in all assessment units where the habitat was present. Oceanic ridges and hydrothermal vents have been assessed as being in good status, their condition having improved since the last assessment. Detailed evidence and assessment results for these habitats can be found in the relevant sections below for each OSPAR Region.

Summary results of benthic habitat quality status by assessment unit and OSPAR Region

The OSPAR quality status assessments of benthic habitats, both broad habitat types and habitats listed as threatened and / or declining, were undertaken using a variety of assessment methods and scales developed over a number of years (See each indicator’s CEMP guidelines and method section in the Indicator Assessment Sheets). Areas with sufficient data were assessed using common and candidate indicators for agreed pilot studies (Table S.2). All indicator results are summarised for each previously agreed assessment unit, which in some cases overlap OSPAR Regions (Figure S.6). Those habitats classified as threatened and declining by OSPAR Agreement 2008-06 were assessed using a combination of published data and expert judgement. The Arctic Waters section is compiled from a published OSPAR Third Party Assessment: State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity Report . The Wider Atlantic chapter is mainly based on the assessment of OSPAR listed habitats and pilot studies of BH3a in several parts of overlapping assessment units.

Arctic Waters: Polar benthic habitats

No Common Indicators or agreed assessment units with indicator results (only a small area with pilot assessment results for BH3a)

In Arctic Waters, no common OSPAR indicators have been developed. Without any European or OSPAR common methodological standards, almost all of this area was assessed using references to published studies, notably from the Arctic Council, local experts’ judgement.

The status of benthic habitats in Arctic Waters is descriptive and based on a scientific article concerning the Polar Seas’ baseline (Jørgensen et al., 2022), together with information from the most updated ICES reports on benthic communities, and from the Arctic Council’s Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) biodiversity working group. The trends detected are mainly related to climatic impacts which underlines the crucial role of climate change in Arctic benthic habitats. However, the specific impacts of human activities have not yet been well studied and documented. Therefore, this section mainly describes the state of the progress made towards methodological standards (e.g., indicators) and common baselines for Arctic benthic habitats.

According to the latest State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity Report (CAFF, 2017), only one Arctic sub-region presents sufficient data to be assessed by CAFF. This is the Barents Sea, for which the changes over both long- and short-term time spans in macrobenthos spatial patterns are available. Outside the Barents Sea, there are only very limited data available on benthic habitats, biodiversity and abundance, thus pre-empting any assessment at OSPAR sub-regional scale or even by an Arctic third party.

Within the Arctic Waters of the OSPAR Maritime Area, Jørgensen et al., (2022) present data from the eastern and western Barents Sea, Icelandic and Faeroe waters and north-east Greenland. The Norwegian Sea is not included at this time, since benthic mapping is at an early phase for the deeper waters and is mostly done near the Norwegian coastline and the continental slope towards the deep-sea basins central to the Norwegian Sea.

In 2022 a baseline of benthic community biodiversity was established (Jørgensen et al., 2022). The baseline was created on the basis of megabenthic (organism size > 1 cm) data taxa groups reviewed at regional levels, as species diversity would have made comparisons difficult in this circumpolar study. Infauna and free-swimming taxa were excluded from the analyses. This megabenthos diversity baseline can be used to compare any change in status based on future monitoring efforts. The baselines for averaged standardised biomass were higher in Icelandic and Faeroese waters and lower in the Barents Sea. The lowest average standard abundance was found in the south-eastern Barents Sea and southern Iceland waters.

Figure S.8: Average standardized number of taxa (a) and standard deviation (SD) of average number of taxa (b) within each grid cell (50 km × 50 km). Note that this representation is based on a highly uneven effort among (and much less so within) regions and is intended to provide a cautious indication of patterns within regions. Source: Jørgensen et al., 2022

Three megabenthic functional traits were selected – ‘body form’, ‘adult movement’ and ‘skeleton’ – as possible vulnerable traits for impacts. When the movement and body form traits were combined into a ‘sessile and upright’ combination, few areas had more than 50% of taxa with these traits, while the south-eastern Barents Sea usually had less than 25%. These trait combinations can reflect habitat / species vulnerability to seabed disturbances and may be considered to be used for future indicator development to assess this specific human activity impact.

The most recent ecosystem state report from Arctic waters is the ICES report from its Working Group on Integrated Assessments of the Barents Sea (WGIBAR) (ICES, 2022). The Group’s long-term monitoring data series on the dynamics of distribution, biomass and abundance shows that the large-scale distribution of megabenthos has been relatively stable since 2004. The biomass and species diversity of the main taxonomic groups generally followed previous spatial patterns of distribution. However, in 2020 the distribution and biomass/abundance of megabenthos were below the long-term mean. This information is linked to a moderate certainty since the surveys did not cover the entire Barents Sea. The fluctuation in biomass is positively correlated with increasing sea temperature due to climate change .

OSPAR acknowledges the need for a better understanding, based on quantity, periodicity and regionality of carbon supply and demand in the deep-water Arctic basins, in order to evaluate future changes in these benthic ecosystems. This need is also highlighted by ICES (2020). As change from permanently ice-covered to seasonally ice-covered regions occurs, such studies would also be crucial for assessing the state and trends in the benthos of these ecosystems.

CAFF, 2017 State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity Report. Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna International Secretariat, Akureyri, Iceland. 978-9935-431-63-9

ICES (2022): Working Group on the Integrated Assessments of the Barents Sea (WGIBAR). ICES Scientific Reports. Annexes 4 and 5. Report. https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.20051438.v1

ICES (2020): ICES/PICES/PAME Working Group on Integrated Ecosystem Assessment (IEA) for the Central Arctic Ocean (WGICA; outputs from the 2019 meeting). ICES Scientific Reports. Report. https://doi.org/10.17895/ices.pub.6001 

Jørgensen, L.L., Logerwell, E.A., Strelkova, N., Zakharov, D., Roy, V., Nozères, C., Bluhm, B., Ólafsdóttir, S.H., Burgos, J.M., Sørensen, J., Zimina, O. and Rand, K. (2022). International megabenthic long-term monitoring of a changing Arctic ecosystem: Baseline results. Progress in Oceanography, Volume 200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pocean.2021.102712

Assessment of the status of OSPAR listed threatened and/or declining habitats in Arctic Waters

The status of maerl beds in the Arctic Waters Region remains unknown. These species can form extensive beds, mostly in coarse clean sediments of gravels and clean sands or muddy mixed sediments, which occur either on the open coast, in tide-swept channels or in sheltered areas of marine inlets with weak current (OSPAR, 2019). However, some of the maerl beds in this Region exhibit the best condition in the OSPAR Maritime Area. More than in other regions where this habitat occurs, the status assessment predicts that increasing ocean acidification and temperatures will cause a slow but significant reduction in condition and distribution over coming decades.

The assessment of the coastal habitat eelgrass beds (Zostera beds) in the Arctic Waters Region shows an overall declining trend in distribution, extent and condition. However, the current status of the Zostera beds in Greenland is unknown. It is also concerning that there are significant data and knowledge gaps and that maps of eelgrass beds are patchy. The emerging impacts from climate change include darkening of coastal waters and sediment resuspension, which exacerbates the stressors on eelgrass beds and makes it even more important to manage the existing threats from eutrophication and coastal development and extraction, which are assessed as being on the increase in Arctic Waters. However, there is also a possibility that climate change is causing the northern distribution limit of Zostera beds to expand.
It should be noted that for the intertidal mudflats habitat no information was available to enable an assessment of its status in Arctic Waters at this stage.

The condition of deep-sea sponge aggregations was shown to decrease in a four-year study of the Schulz Bank, which indicated a decline in sponge density in areas affected by human activities. Deep-sea sponge aggregations occur at shallowed depths along the Norwegian fjords, more than anywhere else in the OSPAR Maritime Area. The same is true for Lophelia reefs, some of which occur at depths of 40 m along the Norwegian coast, while in other Regions they occur at depths of 200 to 1 200 m. Due to extensive mapping efforts since the last assessment in 2009, a significant number of new occurrences of Lophelia reefs have been detected in the Norwegian and Barents Seas. This is, however, not considered to be an indication of increased extent, and in fact the extent of the habitat within Arctic Waters is likely to still be decreasing due to fishing pressures. However, there are sub-regional differences indicating where activities to minimise destructive impacts on the marine ecosystems and Lophelia reefs are in place. (See case study for the Response measures (on benthic habitat) of the Norwegian EEZ (Region I)). Selected Lophelia reefs within Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) have been monitored regularly since 2012. This has revealed the overall health of the reefs to be in a good state and their condition is assessed as stable. In Arctic Waters, 13% of Lophelia reefs are assessed as being within MPAs. 

Oceanic ridges with hydrothermal vent fields were assessed as remaining in good condition in Arctic Waters. There is an indication that longline fishing may be occurring along the upper bathyal ridges of vent fields, which could potentially result in fishing gear contacting the bottom and breaking the fragile vent chimneys. None of the known habitat occurrences are within MPAs. However, other protective measures are in place, such as local fisheries restricted areas (FRAs), where the pressure from fishing activities on benthic habitats appears to be slightly reduced. (See Case study for Norway Region I for more information).

Seamounts occur in the northern Arctic as well as along the Mid-Atlantic ridge. Few seamounts are of interest for commercial fishing activities, which have a negative impact on the communities associated with an exposed seamount, resulting in a deteriorating condition. There is a considerable knowledge gap regarding seamount communities, and for seamounts within national waters there are ongoing activities to collect more information through individual research programmes.

Table S.3: Summary results of the assessment of the OSPAR threatened and /or declining habitats in Arctic Waters

Arctic WatersMaerl bedsIntertidal mudflatsZostera bedsDeep-sea sponge aggregationsCoral gardensLophelia pertusa reefsOceanic ridges with hydrothermal ventsSeamounts
Distribution?N/A
Extent?N/A??
Condition?N/A
Previous OSPAR status assessmentN/A
Status (overall assessment)?N/Apoorpoorpoorpoorgoodpoor

Legend:

Previous status assessment:
Regions where species occurs (○) and has been recognised by OSPAR to be threatened and/or declining (●)

Trends in status (since the assessment in the background document):

decreasing trend or deterioration of the criterion assessed
increasing trend or improvement in the criterion assessed
no change observed in the criterion assessed
?trend unknown in the criterion assessed
N/Anot applicable (i.e. species not present during breeding or non-breeding season)


Status of criterion assessed:

goodnot goodunknown

 

The level of confidence for the assessment for the Arctic Waters is considered Low 

  • Level of evidence: low. The assessment is based on published research and third-party assessments, but gaps were observed in the spatial coverage of the biological information available. 
  • Degree of agreement: low.  The status assessments of OSPAR listed habitats mostly agree with the summary overview but cover only a small part of this Region.

Greater North Sea - Sandy, muddy and productive benthic habitats

Five assessment units with indicator results: BH2a, BH2b, BH3a, BH3b (pilot assessment BH4)
The Greater North Sea Region is exposed to widespread and generally high intensity and frequency of disturbance from bottom trawling fisheries, except for the Central North Sea where there are generally lower levels of disturbance. Disturbance from aggregate extraction activities affects a small proportion of the Greater North Sea and is mostly concentrated in the Southern North Sea and the Channel. The offshore circalittoral mud areas, in particular, tend to be highly disturbed at OSPAR regional scale due to high-pressure levels in combination with expected high habitat sensitivity. In the Southern North Sea and the Channel, the habitats mostly exposed to high levels of disturbance are offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefs and circalittoral coarse sediments. The observed disturbance from fisheries is in line with the observed levels of diversity in the benthic community, which is mostly low or moderate in high-disturbance areas. In the Southern North Sea, however, circalittoral mud areas tend to have high diversity despite the observed high level of disturbance, although this could be caused by the limited data available for some areas.

Habitat loss from the placement of structures is highest in the Central and Southern North Sea, mainly induced by a higher density of oil and gas platforms and the pipelines needed for transporting the products. A higher probability of sediment changes caused by trawling is observed in the Channel and Southern North Sea, whereas in the Norwegian Trench and the Kattegat fishing pressure is considered to pose a lower risk of loss.

The eutrophication status of benthic habitats in coastal waters is generally good/high but, particularly in several areas of the Southern North Sea and Kattegat, eutrophication is still impacting benthic invertebrate communities and even more macrophyte communities.
OSPAR threatened and declining habitats are not in a good state and sometimes deterioration compared with the previous assessment has been observed (e.g., maerl beds). 

The level of confidence for the assessment for the Greater North Sea is considered medium

  • Level of evidence: medium. The assessment is based on multiple lines of evidence, but gaps were observed in the spatial coverage of the biological information available. 
  • Degree of agreement: medium. The indicators and status assessments of OSPAR listed habitats mostly agree, although a minor proportion show some deviation (i.e., the indicators BH3a and BH2b do not align for offshore circalittoral mud areas in the Southern North Sea).

Faroe-Shetland waters

Faroe Shetland Waters x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Littoral sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Infralittoral sandNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Infralittoral mudNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Circalittoral sandNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Circalittoral mudNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment13,6309686,3690300015,2852084,71479000
Offshore circalittoral sand079,8773220,122680012,0568567,8204720,1226800
Offshore circalittoral mudNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Upper bathyal sediment83,44596013,031153,52289092,4842406,584090,931660
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Lower bathyal sediment10000001000000
AbyssalNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

This assessment unit (AU) was assessed using only indicator BH3a for disturbance caused by fishing activities. During 2009-2020, disturbance occurred in 15% of the area. Moderate disturbance covered the largest proportion of the assessment unit (12%), followed by high and low (3% and <1% respectively). Zero disturbance occurred throughout 84% of the assessment unit due to areas with no reported swept area ratio values. However, most of the assessment unit consisted of deep-sea habitats where bottom contact fishing is unlikely to be possible due to the depth of the seafloor.

The percentage area disturbed by fishing activities decreased slightly to approximately 6% during 2016-2020. Moderate disturbance covered the largest proportion of the assessment unit (6%), followed by high and low (both <1%). A large proportion (92%) of this assessment was under zero disturbance.

The Central North Sea

Central North Sea x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) 


Coastal water body status:

poor/bad
moderate
high/good
no data
BH existing in AU coastal water bodies
Broadscale habitat typeBH2a invertebrates (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a invertebrates (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
not assessed
 
Littoral sediment  
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sediment not assessed
Infralittoral mixed sediment not assessed
Infralittoral sand not assessed
Infralittoral mud not assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment not assessed
Circalittoral mixed sediment not assessed
Circalittoral sand not assessed
Circalittoral mud not assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudnot assessednot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Upper bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Abyssalnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU

Central North Sea x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Margalef diversity in Region II (Greater North Sea) (BH2b)

Relative Margalef diversity (0-1):

Relative high diversity (0,8-1)
Moderate diversity (0,6-0,8)
Relative low diversity (0-0,6)
Uncertain due to very low sample size or not assessed

    ↘       Significant decrease
    ↗       Significant increase
   ↔       No significant changes in relative Margalef diversity
    ?       Unknown: Data for period of concern or period to compare with are lacking

2009-2021 is compared with 1998-2008; 2016-2021 is compared with 2009-2015
In case no data available for 2016-2021: Results for 2009-2015 are presented for 2016-2021, however with lowered confidence level
Data based on grab-core samples; trends extracted from either 'grab-core' samples or 'small core' samples (presented when observed based on one or the other)

Broadscale habitat typeBH2b (2009-2021)BH2b (2016-2021)
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sediment0,46 ?0,46 ?
Infralittoral sand0,33 ? 0,33 ?
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment0,64 ?0,71 ?
Circalittoral mixed sediment0,38 ? 0,38 ?
Circalittoral sand0,78 ?0,74 ↔
Circalittoral mud0,86 ?0,86 ?
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment0,64 ?0,64 ↔
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment0,90 ?0,90?
Offshore circalittoral sand0,69 ?0,71 ↔
Offshore circalittoral mud0,65 ?0,65 ↔
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessmentnot in assessment
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessmentnot in assessment
Lower bathyal sedimentnot in assessmentnot in assessment
Abyssalnot in assessmentnot in assessment

Central North Sea x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef43,1533737,179349,0434710,62380054,9395126,876929,058569,125010
Infralittoral coarse sediment7,6548483,073809,268640,0027208,7949385,218205,984140,002720
Infralittoral mixed sediment36,82524059,557633,61714037,13907059,243793,617140
Infralittoral sand43,7481338,6290510,861176,76165051,2177338,666663,548046,567570
Infralittoral mud34,6749856,068924,666234,58986035,41709054,962137,502312,118480
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef12,6935147,6440026,1238113,53868026,6467538,4431624,3844710,525620
Circalittoral coarse sediment2,3681353,3454143,234941,0515204,0901065,4303129,428071,051520
Circalittoral mixed sediment4,0725453,2873223,5874519,0526908,6973046,8314831,6836712,787550
Circalittoral sand5,9316241,8964147,760124,41186011,1403542,2590742,704623,895960
Circalittoral mud10,6570947,2771624,0661717,99958018,8375237,0267532,3601311,775600
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef0,4675533,1399120,5010923,4132322,4782210,1837733,4717715,6383318,8263021,87983
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment2,9949895,054301,780330,1703807,1932291,585301,107030,114450
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment4,6481872,8170722,047190,4875608,4102571,7647519,608640,216360
Offshore circalittoral sand5,8684634,0972859,856790,17748015,5396935,8806848,471220,108410
Offshore circalittoral mud1,125898,427692,7279787,7184603,302557,718349,6528379,326280
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sediment001,2407198,7592900,12489014,3360285,539080
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

Central North Sea x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

Central North Sea x Pilot Assessment of Area of Habitat Loss (BH4)

Broadscale habitat typeBH4 Sealed lossBH4 Unsealed loss (by trawling)            
 % estimated lossNo loss% low risk% moderate risk% high risk
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessed

Infralittoral rock and

biogenic reef

<0,01

0

100

91,8

0

0

0

8,2

0

0

Infralittoral coarse sediment095,24,800
Infralittoral mixed sediment0100000
Infralittoral sand0100000
Infralittoral mud049,250,800

Circalittoral rock and

biogenic reef

<0,01

0

100

21

0

0

0

79

0

0

Circalittoral coarse sediment0,0192,37,700
Circalittoral mixed sediment<0,0195,231,80
Circalittoral sand0,0199,40,600
Circalittoral mud0,0131,4680,30,4

Offshore circalittoral rock and

biogenic reef

<0,01

0

100

8,6

0

0

0

91,4

0

0

Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment0,0136,662,60,80
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment0,0188,49,52,10
Offshore circalittoral sand0,0299,50,500
Offshore circalittoral mud0,0286,612,90,40
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unit
Upper bathyal sediment0,0295,24,60,20
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unit
Abyssalnot in assessment unit

no colours for sealed loss (also not in the assessment sheet) 

The Central North Sea assessment unit (AU) is characterised by the presence of vast areas of offshore circalittoral habitat, with commonly occurring sandy (61% of the AU) and muddy (24% of the AU) substrates and smaller patches of coarse or mixed sediments or rocks. Smaller areas consist of upper bathyal habitats (typically towards the Norwegian Trench) and circalittoral habitat types (typically along the United Kingdom coasts and towards the Southern North Sea).

The assessment of Common Indicator BH2a specifically focuses on eutrophication of benthic habitats in coastal water bodies, including a large share of the circalittoral habitats in the case of the Central North Sea along the United Kingdom coastline. These coastal waters are considered to be almost entirely of high quality or in good status in terms of nutrient enrichment/eutrophication, with few unassessed areas, and regardless of whether assessments are based on invertebrates or vegetation. Minor areas (around 1% of the total assessed) are considered to be in moderate quality status.

In terms of diversity, as assessed with the relative Margalef diversity index (BH2b) the circalittoral and infralittoral waters are not considered to be in a good status. It should be mentioned that these results largely apply to the northern slope of the Dogger Bank and to the Danish EEZ in the south-eastern extension of the Central North Sea, as well as some observations from the most southern part of the United Kingdom coastline. Only the relative diversity of circalittoral muddy habitat is considered high, although sampling predominantly took place in areas with high fishing pressure. The vast areas of offshore habitat seem to be maintaining at least moderate levels of relative diversity.

The expected impacts from physical disturbance due to bottom-contacting fisheries (BH3a) are assessed as high to moderate in offshore circalittoral sandy and muddy habitats, due to observed high fishing pressure levels and, in the case of muddy habitats, the high sensitivity of the habitat type. This might contradict the findings for BH2b that are based on benthic community sampling. It should be noted that benthic community sampling efforts are restricted to certain areas and that it is largely unclear whether these can be considered representative of the entire Central North Sea. It seems that benthic community sampling in offshore circalittoral sandy habitats has taken place mostly in areas with relatively low fishing pressure. For offshore circalittoral habitat types, other than sandy or muddy, the expected impact of physical disturbance due to fisheries is in general considered to be low. For circalittoral coarse and mixed sediment habitats, the expected impact is generally considered lower, but increasing (as grain size decreases) from coarse to muddy sediment types, especially from higher intensity fishery activities.

The results from a pilot assessment of the candidate indicator BH4 indicate that risk of habitat loss is in general non-existent or low, with the exception of biogenic reefs, where the risk of loss in offshore circalittoral and circalittoral areas is in general moderate (which could suggest that these habitats are at risk). Moreover, the exact locations of biogenic reefs are largely unclear and the potentially suitable areas (in the case of low pressure) probably underestimated. Most references are thus made to sea-pen and burrowing megafauna communities, but other types of biogenic reefs can also be expected to be at risk.

The Norwegian Trench

The Norwegian Trench x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) 


Coastal water body status:

poor/bad
moderate
high/good
no data
BH existing in AU coastal water bodies
Broadscale habitat typeBH2a invertebrates (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a invertebrates (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
not assessed
 
Littoral sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed 
Infralittoral coarse sediment  
Infralittoral mixed sediment  
Infralittoral sand  
Infralittoral mud  
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed 
Circalittoral coarse sediment  
Circalittoral mixed sediment  
Circalittoral sand  
Circalittoral mud  
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudnot assessednot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Abyssalnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU

The Norwegian Trench x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Margalef diversity in Region II (Greater North Sea) (BH2b)

Relative Margalef diversity (0-1):

Relative high diversity (0,8-1)
Moderate diversity (0,6-0,8)
Relative low diversity (0-0,6)
Uncertain due to very low sample size or not assessed

    ↘       Significant decrease
    ↗       Significant increase
   ↔       No significant changes in relative Margalef diversity
    ?       Unknown: Data for period of concern or period to compare with are lacking

2009-2021 is compared with 1998-2008; 2016-2021 is compared with 2009-2015
In case no data available for 2016-2021: Results for 2009-2015 are presented for 2016-2021, however with lowered confidence level
Data based on grab-core samples; trends extracted from either 'grab-core' samples or 'small core' samples (presented when observed based on one or the other)

Broadscale habitat typeBH2b (2009-2021)BH2b (2016-2021)
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sediment0,70 ?0,70 ?
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mud0,45 ?0,45 ?
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mixed sediment0,77 ?0,77 ?
Circalittoral sand0,95 ?0,95 ↔
Circalittoral mud0,68 0,55 ↘
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment0,94 ?0,94 ?
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment0,95 0,84 
Offshore circalittoral sand0,84 0,71 ↔
Offshore circalittoral mud0,630,60 ↔
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sediment0,74 ?0,70 
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessed

The Norwegian Trench x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef93,328163,695791,224161,75189094,643282,663850,843761,849110
Infralittoral coarse sediment88,644066,426924,929020089,455195,598964,9458400
Infralittoral mixed sediment96,2635600,923412,81302096,3146900,872292,813020
Infralittoral sand26,5393717,0555151,887424,51770027,3825016,2123851,887424,517700
Infralittoral mud96,009372,882230,614810,49359096,245582,646020,713730,394660
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef90,538515,252812,409991,79869091,743404,355601,793942,107060
Circalittoral coarse sediment72,1111818,565929,322900074,1623916,514719,3229000
Circalittoral mixed sediment93,216644,3219202,46144093,216644,3219202,461440
Circalittoral sand44,4662318,6845436,849230045,1875617,9632136,8492300
Circalittoral mud91,360224,050591,009793,57941091,846813,506910,325244,321040
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef89,637161,239071,209300,389447,5250392,257581,101471,183610,437675,01967
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment73,1310526,8689500073,6760026,32400000
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment38,2964737,5021922,289491,91185038,6243239,6716019,792241,911850
Offshore circalittoral sand23,036664,9620972,001250024,1743419,2237656,6019000
Offshore circalittoral mud23,256996,659000,4186069,66541025,074264,781791,5707668,573180
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef90,696890009,3031194,842350005,15765
Upper bathyal sediment51,30264032,6869016,01046061,03222025,4742513,493520
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef10000001000000
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

The Norwegian Trench x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed1,126798440,6900218281,9884943990
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,0970803320,0834234080,8251681680
Circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

The Norwegian Trench x Pilot Assessment of Area of Habitat Loss (BH4)

Broadscale habitat typeBH4 Sealed lossBH4 Unsealed loss (by trawling)            
 % estimated lossNo loss% low risk% moderate risk% high risk
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessed

Infralittoral rock and

biogenic reef

<0,01100000
Infralittoral coarse sediment093,94,31,80
Infralittoral mixed sediment0100000
Infralittoral sand092,27,800
Infralittoral mud097,12,900

Circalittoral rock and

biogenic reef

<0,01100000
Circalittoral coarse sediment094,73,51,80
Circalittoral mixed sediment099,70,300
Circalittoral sand098,61,400
Circalittoral mud093,65,30,11

Offshore circalittoral rock and

biogenic reef

<0,01100000
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment094,55,40,10
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment098,31,700
Offshore circalittoral sand0,03802000
Offshore circalittoral mud<0,0182,117,40,60

Upper bathyal rock and

biogenic reef

<0,01100000
Upper bathyal sediment0,0198,91,10,10
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot assessed (extent < 1km2)
Lower bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unit
Abyssalnot in assessment unit

no colours for sealed loss (also not in the assessment sheet) 

The Norwegian Trench assessment unit (AU) comprises a variety of broad-scale habitats from the littoral down to the upper bathyal at around 700 m depth. Most of the AU is in the upper bathyal zone, dominated by upper bathyal muddy sediments. The Norwegian Trench Upper Bathyal Sediments are rated as near-threatened in the Norwegian Red List for Ecosystems and Habitat Types, based on the occurrence of sea-pens and the bamboo coral Isidella lofotensis. Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef (cold-water coral reefs) are found in the western and eastern part of the AU. In the western part (western Norway), these reefs are not exposed to bottom trawling, but accidental contact with longlines and gill nets may cause some degree of damage. The coral reefs in the eastern part of the AU are located inside the Ytre Hvaler National Park that was protected in 2009.

The coastal zone (Water bodies according to the European Union Water Framework Directive (WFD) and other national equivalents of Contracting Parties not part of the EU) of this AU consists of many fjords, some very large, and large archipelagos with numerous islands. For this vast area, only around 40% (benthic invertebrates) and 13% (vegetation) of the total coastal area was assessed. From those, the majority of coastal area results are considered to be in high/good or moderate quality status (WFD status classes). Relative Margalef diversity (BH2b) is found to be moderate to high for those offshore circalittoral and upper bathyal habitats with some benthic community observations available, and low to moderate for infralittoral and circalittoral habitats. Data availability is, however, only considered sufficient to good in terms of representativity for offshore circalittoral and circalittoral mud, respectively. The offshore circalittoral mud is also the habitat type expected to be most impacted by fisheries (almost 70% of habitat expected to be highly impacted) due to expected high sensitivity for physical disturbance in combination with observed high fishing pressure (as indicated by the BH3a indicator). A large part of the infralittoral and offshore circalittoral sandy habitats is expected to be moderately impacted for at least 50%, and circalittoral sand and upper bathyal sediment contain a substantial area expected to be moderately impacted. All other BHTs in the Norwegian Trench are expected to be predominantly low-impacted or not impacted at all as fishing pressure is considered very low. However, fishing pressure there might be underestimated, as VMS data from the Norwegian fleet are not included in the assessments. The pilot assessment of the candidate indicator BH4 shows that sealed loss is local and that risk of unsealed loss
(largely due to fishing activities) is low and rare.

The Kattegat

The Kattegat x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) 


Coastal water body status:

poor/bad
moderate
high/good
no data
BH existing in AU coastal water bodies
Broadscale habitat typeBH2a invertebrates (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a invertebrates (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
not assessed
 
Littoral sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed 
Infralittoral coarse sediment  
Infralittoral mixed sediment  
Infralittoral sand  
Infralittoral mud  
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed 
Circalittoral coarse sediment  
Circalittoral mixed sediment  
Circalittoral sand  
Circalittoral mud  
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudnot assessednot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Upper bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Abyssalnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU

The Kattegat x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Margalef diversity in Region II (Greater North Sea) (BH2b)

Relative Margalef diversity (0-1):

Relative high diversity (0,8-1)
Moderate diversity (0,6-0,8)
Relative low diversity (0-0,6)
Uncertain due to very low sample size or not assessed

    ↘       Significant decrease
    ↗       Significant increase
   ↔       No significant changes in relative Margalef diversity
    ?       Unknown: Data for period of concern or period to compare with are lacking

2009-2021 is compared with 1998-2008; 2016-2021 is compared with 2009-2015
In case no data available for 2016-2021: Results for 2009-2015 are presented for 2016-2021, however with lowered confidence level
Data based on grab-core samples; trends extracted from either 'grab-core' samples or 'small core' samples (presented when observed based on one or the other)

Broadscale habitat typeBH2b (2009-2021)BH2b (2016-2021)
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sediment0,41 ↘0,31 ↘
Infralittoral mixed sediment0,30 ↔0,28 ↔
Infralittoral sand0,41 ↘0,48 ↗
Infralittoral mud0,18 ↘0,18 ↔
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment0,77 ↔0,77 ?
Circalittoral mixed sediment0,57 ↔0,55 ↔
Circalittoral sand0,33 ↘0,30 ↔
Circalittoral mud0,62 ↔0,54 ↘
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment0,77 ↘0,66 ↔
Offshore circalittoral sand1,41 ?1,41 ?
Offshore circalittoral mud0,9 ↔0,78 ↔
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Upper bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Abyssalnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit

The Kattegat x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Littoral sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Infralittoral rock and

91,348614,705971,658812,28661096,749602,289010,961400 
biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Infralittoral coarse sediment70,0424128,549911,362260,04543078,0708720,765931,1632000
Infralittoral mixed sediment57,10199041,086561,81145070,44020028,544101,015700
Infralittoral sand65,7999630,478003,364500,35753077,9651320,664741,366080,004050
Infralittoral mud64,1693633,413092,413090,00445082,5353915,962921,5016900
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef99,4697800,497340,03288099,518420,032880,4487000
Circalittoral coarse sediment34,0645649,6557416,279700046,0886238,3854715,5259100
Circalittoral mixed sediment43,2792138,128391,9296816,66272057,3195527,533793,8160111,330640
Circalittoral sand15,7518257,5408624,737811,96952031,5320348,1270819,747770,593130
Circalittoral mud30,2038016,0447729,9621823,78926034,9548317,7339527,3165419,994680
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef53,46670011,05820035,4751053,46670011,05820035,47510
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment3,7656368,4730727,76131003,7656368,4730727,7613100
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment11,4550067,3602721,184730012,6539768,2721419,0739000
Offshore circalittoral sand18,4865325,1942155,525550,79371021,8984024,6549452,652960,793710
Offshore circalittoral mud4,543521,419580,9694393,0674704,641352,123871,5007391,734050
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
AbyssalNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

The Kattegat x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,2773978060,0119088040,0548036390
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed00,1508391060,2071444250
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,0835592230,0078497550,026054150
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,093393607000
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,0935028040,0010262860,0018022910
Circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,0674815660,0035353380,0175951410
Circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

The Kattegat x Pilot Assessment of Area of Habitat Loss (BH4)

Broadscale habitat typeBH4 Sealed lossBH4 Unsealed loss (by trawling)            
 % estimated lossNo loss% low risk% moderate risk% high risk
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and
biogenic reef
0
0
100
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
Infralittoral coarse sediment099,70,300
Infralittoral mixed sediment0100000
Infralittoral sand0100000
Infralittoral mud087,412,600
Circalittoral rock and
biogenic reef
0100000
Circalittoral coarse sediment085,314,700
Circalittoral mixed sediment0100000
Circalittoral sand0100000
Circalittoral mud072,127,900
Offshore circalittoral rock and
biogenic reef
0100000
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment01584,50,40
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment099,80,200
Offshore circalittoral sand0100000
Offshore circalittoral mud07821,40,60
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unit
Upper bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unit
Abyssalnot in assessment unit

no colours for sealed loss (also not in the assessment sheet) 

The Kattegat-Skagerrak is a transitional area between the brackish Baltic waters and the marine waters of the North Sea, resulting in periodic stratifications in the large shallower parts (< 20 m) and more stable and fully marine conditions in the deeper areas. These environmental conditions have a strong impact on the biota in the benthic habitats. The western part of Kattegat is dominated by shallow infralittoral sands, in contrast to the eastern deeper circalittoral muddy parts containing several highly diverse protected offshore banks. The deeper muddy areas around offshore banks are heavily impacted by bottom trawling except for a protected fishing-free zone (since 2009) in the south-eastern part and the Sound (Oeresund), where bottom trawling has been banned since 1932. This high fishing pressure is reflected in the expected high impact on most (93%) of the area of offshore circalittoral mud and moderate to high impact on more than half (54%) of the circalittoral muddy habitat (BH3), reflecting the expected high sensitivity of these broad habitat types (BHT). Substantial parts of several other BHTs (e.g., circalittoral or infralittoral mixed sediment, offshore circalittoral sand) are expected to be moderately to highly impacted as well. Disturbance from aggregate extraction was recorded in 0,067% of the total Kattegat area (not all suitable for this activity), with most habitats of interest exposed to low level of disturbance. It should be noted that there are limitations in the accuracy of the fishing pressure layers provided by the ICES due to the resolution of c-squares in confined areas, in particular in Skagerrak/Kattegat. This issue has been included under the knowledge gaps section of the BH3a indicator. 

Due to the high fishing pressure, there is some (albeit low) risk of partial habitat loss for the indicated muddy habitats, but also for some of the coarse sediment habitats and for the largest part of the offshore circalittoral coarse sediments (pilot assessment BH4). Please note the caveats above regarding fishing pressure data layers.

The various pressure levels (fisheries, nutrient loads and anoxic conditions), combined with ‘natural' or climate-change induced increased variability in low-salinity water inflow from the Baltic, results in observed relatively low diversity levels for most of the infralittoral and circalittoral habitat types (BH2b). Relative diversity seems to be higher (moderate to high) for the offshore circalittoral habitat types.

Regarding nutrient and organic enrichments, the majority of the coastal waters area appears not to be in good quality status, based both on the invertebrate and the vegetation communities, with mainly poor/bad status arising from the vegetation assessment.

The assessment results in the Kattegat have to be treated with caution, since the indicator used to assess the coastal water quality may be sensitive to various pressure types, including physical ones. Besides, the underlying habitat map is of low quality and low resolution for Swedish waters, which also makes the assessment of physical pressures relative. The quality of the habitat map for Swedish waters needs to be improved ahead of the next assessments. Habitat mapping is underway and new data will be available in coming years. However, the low resolution of the underlying habitat map relates to national security and will probably not be improved in the near future.

The Southern North Sea

Southern North Sea x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) 


Coastal water body status:

poor/bad
moderate
high/good
no data
BH existing in AU coastal water bodies
Broadscale habitat typeBH2a invertebrates (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a invertebrates (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
not assessed
 
Littoral sediment  
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed 
Infralittoral coarse sediment  
Infralittoral mixed sediment  
Infralittoral sand  
Infralittoral mud  
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed 
Circalittoral coarse sediment  
Circalittoral mixed sediment  
Circalittoral sand  
Circalittoral mud  
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed not assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentnot assessed not assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentnot assessed not assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandnot assessed not assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudnot assessed not assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Upper bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Abyssalnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU

The Kattegat x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Margalef diversity in Region II (Greater North Sea) (BH2b)

Relative Margalef diversity (0-1):

Relative high diversity (0,8-1)
Moderate diversity (0,6-0,8)
Relative low diversity (0-0,6)
Uncertain due to very low sample size or not assessed

    ↘       Significant decrease
    ↗       Significant increase
   ↔       No significant changes in relative Margalef diversity
    ?       Unknown: Data for period of concern or period to compare with are lacking

2009-2021 is compared with 1998-2008; 2016-2021 is compared with 2009-2015
In case no data available for 2016-2021: Results for 2009-2015 are presented for 2016-2021, however with lowered confidence level
Data based on grab-core samples; trends extracted from either 'grab-core' samples or 'small core' samples (presented when observed based on one or the other)

Broadscale habitat typeBH2b (2009-2021)BH2b (2016-2021)
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sediment0,41 ↘0,31 ↘
Infralittoral mixed sediment0,30 ↔0,28 ↔
Infralittoral sand0,41 ↘0,48 ↗
Infralittoral mud0,18 ↘0,18 ↔
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment0,77 ↔0,77 ?
Circalittoral mixed sediment0,57 ↔0,55 ↔
Circalittoral sand0,33 ↘0,30 ↔
Circalittoral mud0,62 ↔0,54 ↘
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment0,77 ↘0,66 ↔
Offshore circalittoral sand1,41 ?1,41 ?
Offshore circalittoral mud0,9 ↔0,78 ↔
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Upper bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Abyssalnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit

The Kattegat x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Littoral sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Infralittoral rock and

91,348614,705971,658812,28661096,749602,289010,961400 
biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Infralittoral coarse sediment70,0424128,549911,362260,04543078,0708720,765931,1632000
Infralittoral mixed sediment57,10199041,086561,81145070,44020028,544101,015700
Infralittoral sand65,7999630,478003,364500,35753077,9651320,664741,366080,004050
Infralittoral mud64,1693633,413092,413090,00445082,5353915,962921,5016900
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef99,4697800,497340,03288099,518420,032880,4487000
Circalittoral coarse sediment34,0645649,6557416,279700046,0886238,3854715,5259100
Circalittoral mixed sediment43,2792138,128391,9296816,66272057,3195527,533793,8160111,330640
Circalittoral sand15,7518257,5408624,737811,96952031,5320348,1270819,747770,593130
Circalittoral mud30,2038016,0447729,9621823,78926034,9548317,7339527,3165419,994680
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef53,46670011,05820035,4751053,46670011,05820035,47510
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment3,7656368,4730727,76131003,7656368,4730727,7613100
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment11,4550067,3602721,184730012,6539768,2721419,0739000
Offshore circalittoral sand18,4865325,1942155,525550,79371021,8984024,6549452,652960,793710
Offshore circalittoral mud4,543521,419580,9694393,0674704,641352,123871,5007391,734050
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
AbyssalNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

The Kattegat x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,2773978060,0119088040,0548036390
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed00,1508391060,2071444250
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,0835592230,0078497550,026054150
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,093393607000
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,0935028040,0010262860,0018022910
Circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,0674815660,0035353380,0175951410
Circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

The Kattegat x Pilot Assessment of Area of Habitat Loss (BH4)

Broadscale habitat typeBH4 Sealed lossBH4 Unsealed loss (by trawling)            
 % estimated lossNo loss% low risk% moderate risk% high risk
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and
biogenic reef
0
0
100
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
Infralittoral coarse sediment099,70,300
Infralittoral mixed sediment0100000
Infralittoral sand0100000
Infralittoral mud087,412,600
Circalittoral rock and
biogenic reef
0100000
Circalittoral coarse sediment085,314,700
Circalittoral mixed sediment0100000
Circalittoral sand0100000
Circalittoral mud072,127,900
Offshore circalittoral rock and
biogenic reef
0100000
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment01584,50,40
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment099,80,200
Offshore circalittoral sand0100000
Offshore circalittoral mud07821,40,60
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unit
Upper bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unit
Abyssalnot in assessment unit

no colours for sealed loss (also not in the assessment sheet) 

In the Southern North Sea, shallow sandy sediments prevail along the southern and western coasts and on the Dogger Bank. Deeper, offshore circalittoral areas are dominated by sands as well and include larger muddy areas in the central part of the assessment unit. Coarse and mixed sediments are mainly distributed along the English and Danish coasts. The extended littoral zone of the Dutch, German and Danish Wadden Sea represents a unique habitat in the OSPAR Region that is protected as the OSPAR listed threatened and/or declining habitat, “intertidal mudflats”.

Eutrophication in coastal waters is still impacting benthic invertebrates and, even more, macrophytes. Particularly along the Dutch, German and Danish coasts, benthic habitats are not in good status with regard to nutrients or organic enrichment (BH2a). Another major impact, on sublittoral and more offshore habitats, is the widespread disturbance by bottom trawling that covers 93% of the Southern North Sea (BH3a). The greatest proportion of the area (53%) is classified as having moderate disturbance from trawling, while 23% of the area is estimated to be highly disturbed. Trawling disturbance is highest in the offshore mud habitats in the centre of this assessment unit. Offshore circalittoral mud and circalittoral mud are the habitats with the highest trawling disturbance due to high fishing pressure in combination with the expected high sensitivity of these habitats. Likewise, the risk of sediment changes from trawling, potentially leading to habitat loss, is estimated highest for these two habitats (BH4). The Southern North Sea is also a focus area for energy production, with an area of 40 km2 (0,02% of the total assessment unit, but which is not all suitable for this activity) sealed by offshore structures. Extraction of sand and gravel is another anthropogenic activity that is carried out to a considerable extent in the Southern North Sea. The extraction of sediment impacts benthic organisms (BH3b) and may lead to habitat loss (BH4).

The overall impact of anthropogenic pressures is reflected in the condition of benthic habitats as assessed with the Margalef diversity index (BH2b). Most assessed habitats have low or moderate relative diversity. Mixed sediments are the only habitats considered to host high relative diversity. However, these habitats comprise only 2% of the assessment area. The predominant sandy habitats as well as coarse sediments are assessed as having low relative diversity.

The Channel

Channel x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) 


Coastal water body status:

poor/bad
moderate
high/good
no data
BH existing in AU coastal water bodies
Broadscale habitat typeBH2a invertebrates (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a invertebrates (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
not assessed
 
Littoral sediment  
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed 
Infralittoral coarse sediment  
Infralittoral mixed sediment  
Infralittoral sand  
Infralittoral mud  
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed 
Circalittoral coarse sediment  
Circalittoral mixed sediment  
Circalittoral sand  
Circalittoral mud  
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudnot assessednot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Upper bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Abyssalnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU

Channel x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Margalef diversity in Region II (Greater North Sea) (BH2b)

Relative Margalef diversity (0-1):

Relative high diversity (0,8-1)
Moderate diversity (0,6-0,8)
Relative low diversity (0-0,6)
Uncertain due to very low sample size or not assessed

    ↘       Significant decrease
    ↗       Significant increase
   ↔       No significant changes in relative Margalef diversity
    ?       Unknown: Data for period of concern or period to compare with are lacking

2009-2021 is compared with 1998-2008; 2016-2021 is compared with 2009-2015
In case no data available for 2016-2021: Results for 2009-2015 are presented for 2016-2021, however with lowered confidence level
Data based on grab-core samples; trends extracted from either 'grab-core' samples or 'small core' samples (presented when observed based on one or the other)

Broadscale habitat typeBH2b (2009-2021)BH2b (2016-2021)
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sediment0,75 ?0,75 ?
Infralittoral mixed sediment0,67 ?0,67 ?
Infralittoral sand0,53 ?0,53 ?
Infralittoral mud0,69 ?0,69 ?
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment0,63 ?0,63 ?
Circalittoral mixed sediment0,98 ?0,98 ?
Circalittoral sand0,45 ↘0,45 ?
Circalittoral mud0,84 ?0,84 ?
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment0,60 ?0,60 ?
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment0,79 ?0,79 ?
Offshore circalittoral sand0,42 ?0,42 ?
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Upper bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit
Abyssalnot in assessment unitnot in assessment unit

Channel x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Littoral sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

23,9877148,003977,371520,63681026,5793847,6998610,0152615,705510
Infralittoral coarse sediment7,7414361,870830,3877300,000048,310162,7288428,9610200,00004
Infralittoral mixed sediment49,9166310,8316332,949096,299990,0026755,9289910,3446729,195514,528160,00267
Infralittoral sand16,526919,7366543,7705619,96588016,7039524,9293647,5888910,777810
Infralittoral mud18,3848114,3768639,1519528,08638018,3848116,1758948,0255317,413770
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef14,7977349,4333313,8538221,91513023,5022946,3978319,4506710,649210
Circalittoral coarse sediment6,7577436,4377756,804480013,369539,5813647,0491400
Circalittoral mixed sediment18,7619334,1779912,8452534,21482032,3130727,4665914,0753126,145040
Circalittoral sand5,2059114,39278,716261,6858305,367719,2787674,113381,240160
Circalittoral mud4,9623314,4077154,1037626,5262104,9623313,4361362,1711519,43040
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef0,1813751,272945,2655734,538818,741313,8420951,957517,0351328,42748,73787
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment0,2619695,691433,994380,0522301,0384295,44573,463640,052230
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment0,1741580,545830,3194818,9605402,1691378,557290,4059918,867590
Offshore circalittoral sand0,000011,2631588,1357310,6011100,000013,4476786,5303610,021960
Offshore circalittoral mud0,022620,43961099,5377700,022620,290664,6539295,03280
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
AbyssalNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Channel x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sediment0,0002817280,0001354110,0005422390Not assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed00,1508391060,2071444250
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed0,0835592230,0078497550,026054150
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef0,0000145070,0087251480,017078387000,0058463620,0087252880
Circalittoral coarse sediment0,2113518860,037223310,27550345900,1026701470,0174147410,1343611870
Circalittoral mixed sediment00,0483142860,019983608000,00025244300
Circalittoral sand0,0016091390,0003230680,00832726200,0023804370,0005263950,0069649560
Circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef0,000000283000Not assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment0,0320164120,0057683350,06358664400,0281042260,0056426150,0416143290
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment0,000057076000Not assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

Channel x Pilot Assessment of Area of Habitat Loss (BH4)

Broadscale habitat typeBH4 Sealed lossBH4 Unsealed loss (by trawling)            
 % estimated lossNo loss% low risk% moderate risk% high risk
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and
biogenic reef
0
0
100
0,9
0
0
0
82,9
0
16,2
Infralittoral coarse sediment097,20,42,50
Infralittoral mixed sediment0100000
Infralittoral sand099,10,900
Infralittoral mud020,664,20,914,3
Circalittoral rock and
biogenic reef
0
0
100
97,2
0
0
0
1,9
0
0,9
Circalittoral coarse sediment<0,0187,84,180
Circalittoral mixed sediment0100000
Circalittoral sand092,77,300
Circalittoral mud08,772,37,911,1
Offshore circalittoral rock and
biogenic reef
0100000
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment08213,44,60
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment093700
Offshore circalittoral sand092,57,500
Offshore circalittoral mud09,369,3615,4
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unit
Upper bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot in assessment unit
Lower bathyal sedimentnot in assessment unit
Abyssalnot in assessment unit

no colours for sealed loss (also not in the assessment sheet) 

In the Channel, the total assessed area for coastal waters quality (BH2a) changed significantly between the two available reporting cycles: from 43,4% (invertebrates) and 0,02% (vegetation) to respectively 83,2% and 49,0% of the total area of coastal water bodies in this assessment unit (AU). During the assessment period 2010-2015, 83,2% of the total area of coastal water bodies in the AU was assessed as in high or good quality status based on benthic invertebrate compositions, while no data were available for the remaining area. Quality status as based on benthic vegetation was assessed to be high or good for 31,1%, moderate for 16,9% (The Solent, the eastern part of the Normano-Breton Gulf) and poor or bad status for 1,0% (western part of the Bay of Seine) of the total area of coastal water bodies. Data were, however, lacking for more than half (51,0%) of the coastal water bodies area.
Diversity assessed with the relative Margalef diversity index (BH2b) was low or moderate in the infralittoral habitats and several of the circalittoral habitats. Only in the circalittoral mixed sediment and in the circalittoral mud habitats was relative diversity assessed as high, although the monitoring and assessment was limited to a small proportion of the total habitat area.

Most of the Channel was assessed as disturbed by trawling (BH3a) mostly at moderate or low levels during the 2009-2020 assessment period. The greatest disturbance was observed in offshore circalittoral mud, with 99,53% of the area under high disturbance, although it should be noted that this habitat covered <1% of the Channel, so that the high disturbance extended to discrete areas only. More than 50% of the area of infralittoral coarse sediment, offshore circalittoral rock, biogenic reef, offshore circalittoral coarse sediment and offshore circalittoral mixed sediment were assessed as under low disturbance. The infralittoral mixed sediment has the largest area expected to be without disturbance (49,9%). In the 2016-2020 assessment period, the disturbance patterns were very similar, but the areas expected to be without impact were larger. This is because the 2009-2020 QSR assessment interval provided more years of VMS data overall, and therefore presented an increased likelihood of disturbance compared to the 2016-2020 period. The most disturbed areas were the south-east of the Isle of Wight as well as the coastal regions of England and France. The area without disturbance was situated to the west of the Isle of Wight, and there was lower disturbance around Guernsey, Jersey and the coast of Normandy by comparison with the rest of the Channel. The Channel has the highest proportion of total disturbed area within an assessment unit due to aggregate extraction (BH3b) compared with other assessment units, with the greatest disturbance occurring on the south coast of England. It should be noted that only aggregate extraction data available from United Kingdom and Danish waters were used for the disturbance calculations. Other countries, for example Germany, the Netherlands and Belgium, have extraction activity, but the footprint data required for a detailed analysis of disturbance, were not available at the time of assessment. Therefore, comparisons between assessment units were the result of data availability. The most affected habitat was circalittoral coarse sediment, with the highest proportion of high disturbance (0,3%).

The risk of sediment changes leading to habitat loss (BH4) is estimated as low for most of the habitat types assessed. The highest risk was assessed for circalittoral mud, offshore circalittoral mud, infralittoral mud and infralittoral biogenic reef and ranged from 11% to 16%.

 

Assessment of the status of OSPAR listed threatened and/or declining habitats in the Greater North Sea

Maerl beds were assessed as being in poor status, while recognising that there was a lot of uncertainty in the assessment and gaps in the data. However, compared with the last assessment in 2010, when this habitat type was simply assessed as occurring in the Region but not as threatened and/or declining, the latest assessment points towards a deteriorating status.

The European flat oyster Ostrea edulis is native to the North-East Atlantic and occurs in intertidal and subtidal habitats from Norway to Morocco and has historically covered extensive offshore areas. For the Greater North Sea, it was not possible to conclusively determine the status of Ostrea edulis beds since they have been severely depleted. Some remnant populations occur in waters around the United Kingdom, France, the Netherlands and Denmark, whereas the oysters are considered functionally extinct in German and Belgian waters. Remnant oyster beds are generally supported by extensive reintroduction and restoration efforts.

Intertidal mussel beds were assessed to have improved compared with 2009 in the Dutch and German Wadden Sea, due to the management actions in those habitats, but show (local) declines in other areas, such as Scotland and Sweden.
Compared with the last report from 2009, the status of intertidal mudflats remains poor. While the geographical distribution and extent of the habitat is generally good in the Greater North Sea (stable) the condition of intertidal mudflats is poor due to anthropogenic pressures including climate change, nutrient enrichment, invasive species and hydrological changes (e.g., construction).

Sea-pen and burrowing megafauna habitats occur at productive muddy seafloor sites and there has been no indication of improved status. Towed, bottom-contacting fishing gear continues to be the most significant pressure, the use of which was assessed as increasing in the Greater North Sea. This pressure is assessed to have resulted from the absence of sensitive and large-bodied sea-pen species in muddy sediment habitats which would otherwise be suitable for them, for example the Fladen grounds between Scotland and Norway. Smaller-bodied sea-pens and burrowing crustaceans were found to be less sensitive to the pressure.

There are significant differences within the Greater North Sea Region in the health of eelgrass beds (Zostera beds). In some locations, the historically significant declines in distribution and extent are continuing. However, in southern parts of the Region, and in the waters of Denmark, the Netherlands and France, there might be a stable or slightly increasing trend when viewed over the past 10-year period. The condition of Zostera beds is notoriously complex to assess, and future work could focus on assessing ecosystem functions such as habitat provision and carbon sequestration as well as the density of the seagrass beds. The regeneration of Zostera beds takes place over much longer time scales than do reductions in coverage, and therefore it is more important to avoid further damage and loss than to rely on habitat restoration.

The status of coral gardens is assessed as continuing to be in poor status due to the habitat’s slow recovery rate. However, the assessment shows that for this habitat the pressure from fisheries has been decreasing recently.

Table S.4: Summary results of the assessment of the OSPAR threatened and /or declining habitats in the Greater North Sea

Greater North SeaMaerl bedsFlat oyster and Ostrea edulis bedsIntertidal Mytilus edulis beds on mixed and sandy sedimentsIntertidal mudflatsZostera bedsSea-pen and burrowing megafaunaDeep-sea sponge aggregationsCoral gardensLophelia pertusa reefs
Distribution??
North ↓
Rest 
?
Extent??
North ↓
Rest 
?
??
Condition??
↓ ↔ ?
Previous OSPAR status assessment
Status (overall assessment)poor?poorpoorpoorpoorpoorpoorpoor

Legend:

Previous status assessment:
Regions where species occurs (○) and has been recognised by OSPAR to be threatened and/or declining (●)

Trends in status (since the assessment in the background document):

decreasing trend or deterioration of the criterion assessed
increasing trend or improvement in the criterion assessed
no change observed in the criterion assessed
chaos symbol demonstrating that the available information is pointing in all directions within the specific region
?trend unknown in the criterion assessed
N/Anot applicable (i.e. species not present during breeding or non-breeding season)


Status of criterion assessed:

goodnot goodunknown


Celtic Seas - Shelf edge benthic habitats

Two assessment units with indicator results: BH2a, BH3a and BH3b
The Celtic Seas (Region III) are home to a rich and diverse range of species and habitats. Warm southern waters mix with cold northern waters, resulting in high levels of productivity and a food-rich environment. The Celtic Seas Region contains a rich variety of physical habitats and associated species, ranging from shallow inshore reefs and sandbanks to canyons, seamounts, and cold-water coral reef in deeper waters. Deep-water habitats host slow-growing species which are highly sensitive to physical disturbance. Indicators BH2a and BH3a and BH3b were analysed for the Northern and Southern Celtic Sea assessment units.

The benthic vegetation and benthic invertebrates of coastal water bodies assessed (respectively 68% and 75% of the total area) in the Northern Celtic seas were in high/good status. In the Southern Celtic Sea, most of the total area of water bodies was not assessed (respectively 99,1 and 59,9% for invertebrates and vegetation), thus compromising any conclusion at this scale.

For the period 2009-2020, less than half of the Northern Celtic Sea was assessed as disturbed by bottom-contacting fisheries. Fishing disturbance in the Southern Celtic Seas was much higher, at more than 70% of the area. The broad habitat types that were most disturbed in both assessment units were offshore circalittoral mud and upper bathyal sediment. Disturbance from aggregate extraction was low in both areas (<0,01% of total area).

The level of confidence for the assessment for the Celtic Seas is considered medium

  • Level of evidence: medium. The assessment is based on multiple lines of evidence, but gaps were observed in the spatial coverage of the biological information available. 
  • Degree of agreement: medium. The indicators and status assessments of OSPAR listed habitats results mostly agree.
     

The Northern Celtic Sea

Northern Celtic Sea x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) 


Coastal water body status:

poor/bad
moderate
high/good
no data
BH existing in AU coastal water bodies
Broadscale habitat typeBH2a invertebrates (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a invertebrates (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
not assessed
 
Littoral sediment  
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sediment not assessed
Infralittoral mixed sediment not assessed
Infralittoral sand not assessed
Infralittoral mud not assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment not assessed
Circalittoral mixed sediment not assessed
Circalittoral sand not assessed
Circalittoral mudnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudnot assessednot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Upper bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Abyssalnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU

Northern Celtic Sea x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Littoral sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

52,8686525,9378914,581715,911580,7001862,4864519,8741912,123714,885650,62999
Infralittoral coarse sediment43,2421748,414858,188130,128570,0262853,8995840,31385,64530,115040,02628
Infralittoral mixed sediment49,80220,8009344,44524,95168058,776060,4520536,622274,149620
Infralittoral sand41,8059250,628075,319622,24638052,010842,534234,564960,890010
Infralittoral mud45,3775646,40096,618321,60322051,4095745,315372,723570,55150
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef41,1543935,6475516,159867,0382052,8534627,4844914,559975,102080
Circalittoral coarse sediment22,3601862,6452614,898280,09628038,1811852,057779,723390,037650
Circalittoral mixed sediment14,4547354,0866518,757812,70082029,5174643,4944419,907257,080850
Circalittoral sand20,9018571,057957,866340,173470,000430,9177163,031296,01520,03580
Circalittoral mud12,2266544,0358718,8935424,84395021,6307443,8888317,7115616,768860
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef27,740427,576325,28742,4059536,9899441,1349219,504445,292661,5163432,55165
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment13,253285,411551,266130,06913024,2262374,874920,852160,046680
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment11,3383578,80598,456071,39968024,2731867,354916,857461,514450
Offshore circalittoral sand6,5916632,4638860,0520,89246014,2735533,7619451,325440,639070
Offshore circalittoral mud1,4695814,96445,1491278,416904,9593915,88419,4293269,727190
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef46,4804401,052810,1406852,3260784,8218900,012980,1406815,02446
Upper bathyal sediment34,616630,0000623,8258441,555310,0021646,355810,0000619,933,743090,00105
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef74,6352607,96703017,3977298,5735600,9647100,46173
Lower bathyal sediment91,0349508,518330,44672096,8294303,120860,04970
Abyssal96,2719103,604350,115630,0081197,4128102,46340,115680,00811

Northern Celtic Sea x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sediment0,000489500,00217130Not assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment0,00767480,00078010,009944800,00819870,00075870,00534620
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral sand0,00555430,00075630,0003440Not assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment0,00223490,00031760,001634500,00060040,000065670,00078080
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sand0,00220020,0002950,00083840Not assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

The Northern Celtic Sea assessment unit was only assessed with the Common Indicators nutrient and organic enrichment(BH2a), physical disturbance from fishery (BH3a) and physical disturbance from aggregate extraction(BH3b).
Assessment of BH2a was conducted for data pre-2009 and for the period 2010-2015. The benthic vegetation and benthic invertebrates of coastal water bodies in the Northern Celtic Sea in 2009 were largely in high/good status (67% for invertebrates, 75% for vegetation), 6,5% (for invertebrates) were in moderate status, while 25,8% (invertebrates) and 24,9% (vegetation) were not assessed. During the period 2010-2015, for both components the proportion of water bodies in high/good status was approximately 80%. The remaining areas of the total coastal waters for invertebrates were in moderate status (5,5%) or not assessed (14,5%), while for vegetation they were not assessed.

When considering the extent of physical disturbance caused by fisheries and aggregates extraction (BH3), during the period 2009-2020, less than half (48%) of the Northern Celtic Sea was assessed as having disturbance from bottom-contacting fisheries, based on areas under low (19%), moderate (15%) and high (14%) disturbance. Just under half (48%) of the Northern Celtic Sea had zero disturbance, reflecting solely VMS data paucity, primarily around the coasts of the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England, the Rockall Plateau and the north and west of the assessment unit. Offshore circalittoral mud had the largest proportion of area under high disturbance, followed by upper bathyal sediments. The remaining proportion of the Northern Celtic Sea could not be assessed; this included the littoral rock and biogenic reefs and littoral sediments. Disturbance from aggregates extraction occurred in less than 0,1% of the Northern Celtic Sea, with circalittoral coarse sediments showing the largest extent of high disturbance (0,001%).

A similar picture was observed for the period 2016 to 2020: In total, 41% of the area of the Northern Celtic Sea assessment unit had disturbance from fisheries. Low disturbance covered the largest proportion of the assessment unit (17%), followed by high and moderate (both 12% of the area). Additionally, zero disturbance occurred across 56% of the assessment unit, mostly caused by the absence of VMS data. Habitats with the greatest proportions of their area under high disturbance included offshore circalittoral mud, followed by upper bathyal sediment, then circalittoral mixed sediment. Disturbance from aggregates extraction occurred only in small proportions of circalittoral and offshore circalittoral coarse sediments, with both habitats mostly under low levels of disturbance.

Southern Celtic Sea

Southern Celtic Sea x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) 


Coastal water body status:

poor/bad
moderate
high/good
no data
BH existing in AU coastal water bodies
Broadscale habitat typeBH2a invertebrates (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a invertebrates (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
not assessed
 
Littoral sediment  
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed 
Infralittoral coarse sediment  
Infralittoral mixed sediment  
Infralittoral sand  
Infralittoral mud  
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment  
Circalittoral mixed sediment  
Circalittoral sand  
Circalittoral mud  
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudnot assessednot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Upper bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Abyssalnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU

Southern Celtic Sea x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Littoral sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

37,1545951,633266,825644,385050,0014744,1881445,093678,046072,670650,00147
Infralittoral coarse sediment18,8107762,6416916,943381,60417020,9988960,4456817,250541,304890
Infralittoral mixed sediment16,101630,0017167,0093116,88735018,713710,0017170,8032410,481340
Infralittoral sand42,8171836,0999417,838533,236480,0078953,5711828,8075615,212012,401440,00782
Infralittoral mud84,0719512,983952,94340,00069086,2688910,948622,78180,000690
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef27,5479445,094215,2010712,15679034,0370939,2112617,695389,056260
Circalittoral coarse sediment9,6079368,6390121,752480,00058018,686866,7153814,597240,000580
Circalittoral mixed sediment4,9005766,439955,6597922,99969010,7041567,282952,7919119,220990
Circalittoral sand9,3919969,8674420,554930,18565013,9077271,492614,59130,008370
Circalittoral mud22,2000828,1833447,341262,27532025,3575329,4399443,666131,536390
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef5,4295913,915959,4780818,5844652,591938,2812916,106710,4209913,8191451,37188
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment0,4055794,846914,689950,0575701,0177394,255474,669240,057570
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment1,0818576,8474,7777317,2934202,9569875,960224,0754117,007380
Offshore circalittoral sand0,090614,5302294,621460,7577100,2157911,9041687,232850,64720
Offshore circalittoral mud0,002430,758411,5333197,7058500,002432,4431610,7010886,853340
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef000,30273099,69727000,30273099,69727
Upper bathyal sediment4,59777013,3868481,53020,48526,67382018,3490474,491950,4852
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Lower bathyal sediment28,92285066,767434,30972052,06415047,264360,67150
Abyssal92,2587807,741220098,1432301,8567700

Southern Celtic Sea x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef00,00024010,006620660Not assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sediment0,005283640,000211350,0009744700,00180466000
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sand0,075156660,01435870,0254030600,002294460,000207450,000060
Infralittoral mud0,00106843000Not assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef00,041453850,05516352000,010287090,023491710
Circalittoral coarse sediment0,024477470,002309580,0107728600,012668720,001018880,006711630
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral sand0,067850840,010458880,0911696300,033812670,008104470,052821440
Circalittoral mud0,00253390,003138710,0016295800,001753710,002009820,000610760
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

The Southern Celtic Sea assessment unit was assessed by the indicators nutrient and organic enrichment(BH2a) physical disturbance from fisheries(BH3a) and physical disturbance from aggregate extraction (BH3b).

Assessment of BH2a was conducted for data pre-2009 and for the period 2010-2015. Benthic invertebrates were largely data-poor in 2009, meaning that status could be assessed only in less than 1% of coastal water bodies. For benthic vegetation, approximately 60% of water bodies were data poor, 31% in high/good status, 5% in moderate status and 4% in poor/bad status. More data were available during the period 2010-2015, with approximately 42% and 28% of water bodies being data-poor for benthic invertebrates and vegetation respectively, but still not sufficiently representative of the total area to create sufficient confidence in the assessment. When enough data were available, the largest proportion of water bodies was in high/good status both for invertebrates (53%) and benthic vegetation (34%).

Disturbance from fisheries in the Southern Celtic Sea during 2009-2020 occurred throughout 73% of the assessment unit area. Moderate disturbance was the greatest proportion (33%), followed by low (24%) and high (16%). Zero disturbance occurred in 24% of the area of the Southern Celtic Sea, due solely to VMS data paucity, predominantly in areas beyond the continental shelf, inshore areas in the south-west coast of Ireland, the Bristol Channel and inshore areas of France. The habitat with the greatest proportion of area under high disturbance was offshore circalittoral mud, followed by upper bathyal sediment. Disturbance from aggregates extraction was recorded in 0,005% of the Southern Celtic Sea. High disturbance accounted for 0,003% of the area, followed by low (0.002%) and moderate disturbance (less than 0,001%), respectively. Within habitats, the greatest proportion of high disturbance occurred in circalittoral sand (0,091%)

During the period 2016 to 2020, 68% of the Southern Celtic Sea area had disturbance from fisheries. Moderate disturbance covered the greatest percentage (28%) of area, followed by low (26%) and high (14%). Zero disturbance occurred in 29% of the Southern Celtic Sea, due to VMS data paucity alone, located largely in the Bristol Channel and Rockall Trough. Habitats with the largest proportion of area under high disturbance included offshore circalittoral mud, followed by upper bathyal sediment.

Disturbance from aggregate extraction was recorded in 0,003% of the assessment unit and there were noticeably fewer discrete areas of activity than were found for the 2009 to 2020 period.

Assessment of the status of OSPAR listed threatened and/or declining habitats in the Celtic Seas

Some of the largest maerl bed occurrences within the OSPAR Maritime Area are in the Celtic Seas, where the habitat is listed as threatened. There may have been a misidentification of the habitat in the Northern Irish part of the Region, resulting in distribution estimates that are inaccurate (OSPAR, 2019). However, the condition of the habitats in this area has been assessed as declining. In the southern parts of the Celtic Seas, there has been a continued decline over the total extent since 2007 due to demersal fishing activities. In previous assessments, the decline of maerl has been attributed to impacts from commercial sand and gravel extraction, mariculture and demersal fishing. Maerl beds are formed by slowly growing coralline red algae and are very sensitive to pressures from human activities as well as being slow to recover. Due to these traits, the future trends predict a continued decrease in maerl beds. 

The European flat oyster Ostrea edulis creates densely bedded habitats that are important for many other benthic species. The distribution and extent of Ostrea edulis beds has declined in the Celtic Seas. The last assessment in 2010 noted the habitat as occurring in the Region but did not consider it to be threatened. This most recent status assessment concludes that the status of the habitat is poor. The main threats behind this deterioration have been identified as the introduction of non-indigenous species and habitat damage. 

The status of intertidal mussel beds in the Celtic Seas is not entirely clear due to a lack of data and information.

Compared with the last report from 2009, the status of intertidal mudflats is still poor, although little information is available. While the geographical distribution and extent of the habitat is generally good and stable in the Celtic Seas, the condition of intertidal mudflats is poor due to anthropogenic pressures including climate change, nutrient enrichment, invasive species and hydrological changes (e.g., construction).

The sea-pen and burrowing megafauna habitat covers large muddy seafloor areas in the north-western part of the Celtic Seas. The habitat is not considered to have been fully mapped, and therefore it is difficult to identify any change in extent or distribution. 

Eelgrass (Zostera) beds exhibit an overall stable trend in distribution and extent and no significant improvement on the historically significant declines and signs of increasing pressures from fishing. In some smaller locations there are signs of further decline.

Deep-water Lophelia pertusa reefs at Mingulay are not in good status, with evidence present of damage from fishing activities. However, monitoring will chart progress following the designation of this location as a Special Area of Conservation and the implementation of fishery management measures (a prohibition on towed bottom-contacting fishing and the use of static gear, e.g., creels).

Table S.5: Summary results of the assessment of the OSPAR threatened and /or declining habitats in Celtic Seas

Celtic SeasMaerl bedsFlat oyster and Ostrea edulis bedsIntertidal Mytilus edulis beds on mixed and sandy sedimentsIntertidal mudflatsZostera bedsSea-pen and burrowing megafaunaLophelia pertusa reefs
Distribution???
Extent??
Condition???
Previous OSPAR status assessment
Status (overall assessment)poorpoor?poorpoorpoorpoor

Legend:

Previous status assessment:
Regions where species occurs (○) and has been recognised by OSPAR to be threatened and/or declining (●)

Trends in status (since the assessment in the background document):

decreasing trend or deterioration of the criterion assessed
increasing trend or improvement in the criterion assessed
no change observed in the criterion assessed
chaos symbol demonstrating that the available information is pointing in all directions within the specific region
?trend unknown
N/Anot applicable (i.e. species not present during breeding or non-breeding season)


Status of criterion assessed:

goodnot goodunknown

 

Bay of Biscay and Iberian coast: Canyon, shelf and deep benthic habitats

Four assessment units with indicator results: BH1, BH2a, BH3a
The bottom topography of the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast is highly complex, with a very narrow continental shelf (except in the northern part of the Region) alongside other features such as submarine canyons and seamounts. The abyssal plain covering most of the region contains a great variety of deep-sea ecosystems including several listed habitats. The assessments of the status of OSPAR threatened and/or declining habitats show that all the habitats assessed in this Region are in poor condition.

The results from the indicators also show that most of the assessed benthic habitats are not in good status and are under significant threat or impact. Physical disturbance caused by bottom trawling is the most extended pressure in this region and was evaluated using two different Common Indicators: Sentinel of the Seabed (SoS)(BH1) and Physical disturbance to benthic habitats (BH3a). Both indicators showed good general agreement in terms of the extent and distribution of the disturbance across habitats, although with some important differences in relation to the percentage of each benthic broad habitat type classified as highly disturbed. This is mainly due to differences in the condition ranges applied to define these categories for each indicator.

According to BH1, disturbance of benthic habitats related to trawling occurred in 17,5% (2009-2020) and 16,9% (2016-2020) of the total assessed area of the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast. In both assessment periods the proportions of disturbance in the assessed area were similar, with high disturbance accrued respectively in 6,8% and 6,9%, low 4,6% in both, and moderate in 4,2% and 3,7%, respectively, of the assessed area. In both periods, less than 2% of the disturbed area was not assessed. The area with no bottom trawling pressure covers 82,5% (2009-2020) and 83,1% (2016-2020) of the total assessed extent. 

All offshore and circalittoral broad habitat types (BHT) in this OSPAR Region showed areas classified as highly disturbed, according to BH1. Three BHTs had more than 50% of their total extent classified as highly disturbed in only one of the periods. These were offshore circalittoral mixed sediment (2009-2020: 57,9%; 2016-2020: 63,8%), offshore circalittoral mud (2009-2020: 42,8%; 2016-2020: 50,4%) and circalittoral coarse sediment (2009-2020: 64,6%; 2016-2020: 66,3%). The least impacted in terms of total extent classified as low disturbance were offshore circalittoral sand (2009-2020: 32,4%; 2016-2020: 34,9%) and upper bathyal sediment (2009-2020: 27,5%; 2016-2020: 25,2%). Circalittoral mixed sediment (2009-2020:79,9%; 2016-2020: 86,5%), circalittoral mud (2009-2020: 39,4%; 2016-2020: 41,1%) and upper bathyal sediment (2009-2020: 39,2%; 2016-2020: 44,3%) had the largest areas with no trawling pressure. 

BH3a was also assessed across this whole region for disturbance caused by fishing activities. Aggregate extraction pressure (BH3b) was not assessed, as the activity is not currently occurring in this Region. The largest proportion of the area with disturbance was in the north-east part of the Region (Gulf of Biscay), with 94% disturbance for the assessed period, and in its south-eastern part (Gulf of Cadiz) with 72%; this applied to both assessment cycles (2009-2020, 2016-2020). Among all the assessment units, the Gulf of Cadiz had the greatest percentage of area with high disturbance (32% for the QSR period), which must be considered in the context of the proportion of area suitable for this activity between each assessment unit. In the Gulf of Biscay, the greatest percentage of area with high and moderate disturbance was approximately 70% for the QSR period. Similar disturbance values were found for the MSFD period (2016-2020). The habitat types under high levels of disturbance were offshore circalittoral mud, followed by circalittoral mixed sediments.

The BH3a indicator shows that the assessment of zero disturbance was most prevalent in the South-Iberian Atlantic (2009-2020: 94%; 2016-2020: 95%), mainly because of the extended areas of deep-sea habitat unsuitable for bottom trawling due to the depth of the seafloor.

The areas free of trawling are very numerous because the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast Region hosts a very extensive abyssal plain, with depths unsuitable for trawling. The percentages of total areas affected by trawling would be much higher if only areas shallower than 800 m of depth were assessed, or if these percentages were analysed by broad habitat type. For instance, the proportion of the area affected by trawling (regardless of intensity) in the offshore circalittoral coarse sediment for the period 2009-2020 reached values of 96,9% of total extent, followed by offshore circalittoral sand (94,3%) and circalittoral coarse sediment (93,2%). These percentages would be similar regardless of the indicator used. 

Other pressures, such as organic enrichment, were also assessed across the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast using the BH2a indicator, revealing an increase in the assessed area between assessment periods (<2009, 2010-2015). The proportion of assessed area increased from 36% to 63% for the benthic invertebrate quality element and from 49% to 61% for the vegetation quality element. In both assessment periods, the majority of the assessed area was certified as in high or good quality status. In 2010-2015 the relevant levels were 49,7% (benthic invertebrates) and 53,4% (vegetation), compared with 36,2% and 48,8% respectively in < 2009. The bad or poor quality status of the assessed area (2010-2015) for benthic invertebrates was 0,5% and 1% for vegetation, while moderate quality status was respectively 6,5% and 13%. In the pre-2009 assessment period, bad or poor and moderate quality status for coastal water bodies was assessed in less than 0,5% of the area. The largest proportion of the assessed area (2010-2015) was in the South Iberian Sea 76,6% (vegetation) and 90,7% (invertebrates), and the lowest in the Gulf of Cadiz (less than 6%) and the Bay of Biscay (around 40%), thus compromising, for these two last assessment units, any confidence in the resulting proportions at these scales.

The level of confidence for the assessment of the Bay of Biscay and Iberian coast is considered medium

  • Level of evidence: medium. The assessment is based on multiple lines of evidence, but gaps were observed in the spatial coverage of the biological information available and the absence of VMS and logbook fisheries data from Portuguese fleets. 
  • Degree of agreement: medium. Indicators and status assessments of OSPAR listed habitats mostly agree, although a minor proportion show some deviation (i.e. the indicators BH3a and BH1 do not align for all habitat types).

The Bay of Biscay

Bay of Biscay x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH1 2009-2020 (% habitat area under each disturbance group)BH1 2016-2020 (% habitat area under each disturbance group)
 No trawling
pressure
LowModerateHighNo trawling
pressure
LowModerateHigh
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
Littoral sedimentNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

Not assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment1,4417,6611,7469,161,617,79,9470,76
Circalittoral mixed sediment4,229,4633,353,024,2216,7623,3855,64
Circalittoral sand2,9225,8918,0753,123,9431,2945,0919,67
Circalittoral mud6,4844,7117,2731,548,8846,0320,4924,6
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment0,6714,0855,5929,650,6719,1233,5746,64
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment0,941,4510,6286,980,941,329,5188,24
Offshore circalittoral sand1,5129,4336,1332,931,5134,9634,2529,28
Offshore circalittoral mud1,497,7330,7959,991,497,9122,5368,06
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sediment31,9826,316,8734,8431,9832,2610,6225,14
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
AbyssalNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed

Bay of Biscay x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) 


Coastal water body status:

poor/bad
moderate
high/good
no data
BH existing in AU coastal water bodies
Broadscale habitat typeBH2a invertebrates (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a invertebrates (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
not assessed
 
Littoral sediment  
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed 
Infralittoral coarse sediment  
Infralittoral mixed sediment  
Infralittoral sand  
Infralittoral mud  
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessed 
Circalittoral coarse sediment  
Circalittoral mixed sediment  
Circalittoral sand  
Circalittoral mud  
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudnot assessednot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Upper bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Abyssalnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU

Bay of Biscay x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Littoral sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

35,3966946,065296,9136611,463040,1613241,6637339,9343610,297448,02160,08286
Infralittoral coarse sediment35,6657556,304186,773561,25651041,145750,967317,8869800
Infralittoral mixed sediment62,1198032,013965,86624070,06778024,066015,86620
Infralittoral sand25,3383844,206627,966862,403360,0848132,1006440,7046226,479990,714750
Infralittoral mud46,0519645,511114,641762,480241,3149357,8383734,250416,5962901,31493
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef3,1720239,0378715,4814642,3086604,3611439,5505519,1743136,9140
Circalittoral coarse sediment0,6447111,4491587,90614000,7923213,9113885,2963100
Circalittoral mixed sediment6,5740634,51871,2352557,6719907,0260133,894177,4680851,611740
Circalittoral sand0,7335332,6450766,6214001,3032734,2105864,4861500
Circalittoral mud3,5739728,6207134,4004533,4048704,8296832,5479937,0977325,524610
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef0,068720,085097,105950,1915492,54870,068720,205646,98540,1915492,5487
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment0,0050599,994950000,0050599,99495000
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment0,0061699,993840000,0061699,99384000
Offshore circalittoral sand0,002141,7326498,26523000,002149,0071390,9907300
Offshore circalittoral mud0,009910,647280,5618698,7809400,009911,110313,5901795,289610
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef00001000000100
Upper bathyal sediment0016,122783,877300032,0113767,988630
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
AbyssalNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Bay of Biscay x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

In the BH1 assessment (2009-2020) all assessed habitats had more than 29,6% of their areas under high disturbance. The highest proportion of such habitats was in offshore circalittoral mixed sediment (86,98%) and in circalittoral coarse sediment (69,16%). The greatest ‘no trawling pressure’ occurred in upper bathyal sediment, affecting 31,98% of the habitat area. The same pattern was observed during the 2016-2020 assessment period, but the proportion of disturbed area was slightly higher for circalittoral mixed sediment (88,24%) and in circalittoral coarse sediment (70,76%). In circalittoral sand, the proportion of highly disturbed areas declined from 53,12% in 2009-2020 to 19,67% in 2016-2020.

The BH2a assessment for the period 2010-2015 shows that 60,4% of the coastal water bodies area was in high or good status in respect of the benthic invertebrate quality element, while the remaining area was not assessed. The assessed areas significantly increased between reporting cycles, as in the previous assessment period only 8,22% of the assessment units’ area had been covered. Concerning the assessment of benthic vegetation in 2010-2015, 47,53% of the area was in high or good status, 18,49% in moderate and 2,81% in poor or bad status. 31,17% of the total area of coastal water bodies was not assessed. This situation is worse than in the previous cycle, where a greater area of coastal water bodies was assessed and 80,9% of assessment unit areas were in high or good status.

The Gulf of Biscay had the greatest percentage of area under high and moderate disturbance from trawling (BH3a) in both assessment periods.

Disturbance was present throughout 94% of the Gulf, with the highest level occurring along the Armorican shelf and in the north-west portion of the assessment unit, bordering the North-Iberian Atlantic assessment unit. Only 3% of the assessment unit area had zero disturbance, largely around the inshore areas of France. Offshore circalittoral mud had the greatest proportion of area under high disturbance, followed by upper bathyal sediment and circalittoral coarse sediment in both assessment periods.

The North Iberian Atlantic

North Iberian Atlantic x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH1 2009-2020 (% habitat area under each disturbance group)BH1 2016-2020 (% habitat area under each disturbance group)
 No trawling
pressure
LowModerateHighNo trawling
pressure
LowModerateHigh
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
Littoral sedimentNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

Not assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mudNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment92,043,240,7592,93,551,552,8
Circalittoral mixed sediment97,61,480,92097,61,480,920
Circalittoral sand91,268,050,460,2391,87,520,150,53
Circalittoral mud91,877,300,8391,947,2300,83
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment20,6635,339,184,8621,7634,0727,7516,42
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment5,79,160,0225,195,79,6333,351,38
Offshore circalittoral sand7,5737,5726,7528,19,1932,0515,1743,59
Offshore circalittoral mud5,2212,5135,7346,545,739,3314,8170,13
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sediment38,6125,138,0628,243,0823,985,8227,12
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed

North Iberian Atlantic x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) 


Coastal water body status:

poor/bad
moderate
high/good
no data
BH existing in AU coastal water bodies
Broadscale habitat typeBH2a invertebrates (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a invertebrates (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
not assessed
 
Littoral sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sediment not assessed
Infralittoral mixed sediment not assessed
Infralittoral sand not assessed
Infralittoral mud not assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment not assessed
Circalittoral mixed sediment not assessed
Circalittoral sand not assessed
Circalittoral mud not assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandnot assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudnot assessednot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Upper bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Abyssalnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU

North Iberian Atlantic x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Littoral sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

55,5341737831,949039649,271471693,24531489062,347789724,0137927211,284720052,353697530
Infralittoral coarse sediment51,299162448,700837600057,3513236342,64867637000
Infralittoral mixed sediment80,85310534015,940744523,20615014081,82152572018,1784742800
Infralittoral sand69,3854685730,159979430,4545520076,0808685123,484434070,4346974100
Infralittoral mud81,5048569618,339118370,156024680082,6397840117,36021599000
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef28,7607542737,0524985724,72740229,45934497040,8813862625,2350427,118826596,764747150
Circalittoral coarse sediment11,136510762,963455625,90003370016,0861587459,0967580724,8170831900
Circalittoral mixed sediment22,5830088261,4571675,4088800510,55094413027,0946633350,3628250215,97607486,566436840
Circalittoral sand31,0449331653,4142272215,540839620042,3746439844,9861795212,639176500
Circalittoral mud12,6269739133,1834446747,780476666,40910476014,0677966432,8800783747,869490355,182634640
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef10,500878866,140294783,94175195,1382916974,2787827615,658740235,319915855,095978353,9379991869,98736639
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment2,1168889289,990628066,159123751,7333592707,3281456884,77937136,159123751,733359270
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment1,5071873476,7887421310,5947564811,1093140601,5071873476,887119610,4963790111,109314060
Offshore circalittoral sand1,355032217,3744057777,88095943,3896026303,870879116,7418515875,997666693,389602630
Offshore circalittoral mud0,320353984,92262530,9792749793,7777457500,999675715,569779322,564567190,865977870
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef63,181228220,280187190,207958960,1887490336,141876667,821823210,280187190,184620930,2116604331,50170825
Upper bathyal sediment17,02500095038,0486206644,92637839026,41716208037,4411831936,141654740
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef88,4409929100,000808850,0000819911,5581162589,7774383200,00089084010,22167083
Lower bathyal sediment56,85929007042,373178290,76753164076,99648237022,810927560,192590070
Abyssal98,7616615501,224579710,000022940,013735899,209999600,776241670,000022940,0137358

North Iberian Atlantic x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

The assessments evaluated benthic habitat disturbance in the North Iberian Atlantic assessment unit in response to bottom-contact fishing over two assessment periods (QSR: 2009 to 2020; MSFD: 2016 to 2020). For the QSR period, the assessments estimated that around 10% of this assessment unit area had disturbance, with high disturbance covering a third of it. The areas under the highest disturbance were located along the Galician coast and the border with the Gulf of Biscay unit. Offshore circalittoral mud had the most significant proportion of area under high disturbance, followed by upper bathyal sediment. ‘No trawling pressure’ occurred in 90% of this assessment due to the remarkable extent of deep areas beyond the continental shelf (mainly abyssal habitat) in this assessment unit. However, it is also true that all the infralittoral and circalittoral habitats and the upper bathyal sediment had unpressured extensions of more than 10%. Offshore circalittoral habitats did not reach this unpressured percentage. For the MSFD period, the evaluations showed very similar results. The general percentage of the assessment unit under disturbance (~10%) and high disturbance (~3,3%) and the areas in which the disturbance is concentrated were maintained. Offshore circalittoral mud had the greatest proportion of area under high disturbance, followed by upper bathyal sediment and offshore circalittoral mixed sediment. 

The benthic quality status of coastal water bodies against nutrient and organic enrichment was assessed over two assessment periods (1st assessment cycle before 2009; 2nd assessment cycle from 2010 to 2015). For both reporting cycles (2010, 2016) the evaluation determined that the vast majority (nearly 100% of the water bodies assessed, i.e., as long as data was available) had benthic habitats classified as in good/high biological status. In 2010 the status of coastal water bodies was good/high for 92% (invertebrates) and 40% (vegetation), but with respectively 7,7% and 60% of the total area not assessed. In 2016 the status of coastal water bodies was good/high for 39,83% (invertebrates) and 39,78% (for vegetation), but in both cases, 60% of the total area not assessed. Therefore, the six-year status decrease for benthic invertebrates can be explained by the reduction of the number and total area of water bodies evaluated in this assessment unit. This unit is one that presented a minor proportion of assessed coastal water bodies. No bad/poor and very few moderate quality status assessments were made in some areas for benthic invertebrates and vegetation communities in the North Iberian assessment unit.

The South Iberian Atlantic

South Iberian Atlantic x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH1 2009-2020 (% habitat area under each disturbance group)BH1 2016-2020 (% habitat area under each disturbance group)
 No trawling
pressure
LowModerateHighNo trawling
pressure
LowModerateHigh
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
Littoral sedimentNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

Not assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
Circalittoral mixed sediment88,5611,440096,433,5700
Circalittoral sand93,66,40097,162,8400
Circalittoral mud95,024,980097,442,5600
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment87,2912,710087,2912,7100
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment67,6132,390077,2221,920,860
Offshore circalittoral sand44,9854,790,23049,4550,5500
Offshore circalittoral mud56,7640,852,39063,1235,930,950
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sediment46,6642,066,265,0251,9438,078,921,07
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed

South Iberian Atlantic x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) 


Coastal water body status:

poor/bad
moderate
high/good
no data
BH existing in AU coastal water bodies
Broadscale habitat typeBH2a invertebrates (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a invertebrates (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
Littoral rock and biogenic reef 
 
not assessed
 
Littoral sediment   not assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef  not assessed 
Infralittoral coarse sediment   not assessed
Infralittoral mixed sediment   not assessed
Infralittoral sand   not assessed
Infralittoral mud   not assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef  not assessed 
Circalittoral coarse sedimentnot existing
in CWB of AU
not existing
in CWB of AU
not existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Circalittoral mixed sediment   not assessed
Circalittoral sand   not assessed
Circalittoral mud   not assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef  not assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment  not assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment  not assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sand  not assessednot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mud  not assessednot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Upper bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Abyssalnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU

South Iberian Atlantic x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Littoral sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

99,960795550,0349905400,00421391099,99578609000,004213910
Infralittoral coarse sediment10000001000000
Infralittoral mixed sediment98,9497773301,050222670098,9497773301,0502226700
Infralittoral sand98,706779991,292747120,000472890099,08503430,914492810,0004728900
Infralittoral mud90,47848859,501816690,019694810090,47848859,501816690,0196948100
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef90,866237675,780641742,699634780,6534858095,168178583,616491680,561843940,65348580
Circalittoral coarse sediment95,274960714,724895750,000143540099,823962910,175893550,0001435400
Circalittoral mixed sediment95,35186914,5056014900,14252941097,342526032,5149445500,142529410
Circalittoral sand95,26311394,576514470,160371620099,574257910,265370460,1603716200
Circalittoral mud94,407590644,738289070,223476610,63064367097,713057461,432822250,223476610,630643670
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef43,864505721,3400272,860806032,4021069329,5325543354,3924946517,743298813,282711911,6193397522,96215487
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment60,7926519839,2073480200081,2891036318,71089637000
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment71,8701526628,1298473400079,2123160920,78768391000
Offshore circalittoral sand34,5617573532,5364321432,901810510043,4545405232,6288741723,9165853100
Offshore circalittoral mud69,1155267313,909660952,5512753814,42353693073,8419370610,388321336,196600119,573141510
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef62,0551732300037,9448267776,9112050900023,08879491
Upper bathyal sediment47,07341219031,5644567121,361608490,0005226152,56178833026,4852207120,952468350,00052261
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Lower bathyal sediment98,1984410701,801558930098,2450516101,7549483900
Abyssal99,9569290400,043070960099,9890310400,0109689600

South Iberian Atlantic x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

The assessment of benthic habitat disturbance in the South Iberian Atlantic assessment unit from bottom-contact fishing was determined over two assessment periods (QSR: 2009 to 2020; MSFD: 2016 to 2020). VMS data from this assessment unit did not pass ICES quality checks. Therefore, some fleet activities may be absent and underrepresented. With this limitation, the determination of disturbance in this assessment unit lacks rigour. The assessment of this unit should thus be taken with caution. For the QSR period, the assessments estimated that around 5% of this assessment unit area had disturbance, with low or moderate disturbance covering the most significant proportion. Disturbance was predominantly located along the margin of the continental shelf, with the highest occurrences towards the north of the assessment unit. The habitat with the highest proportion of area under high disturbance was upper bathyal sediments. No trawling pressure occurred in 95% of this assessment due to VMS data paucity in the deeper waters beyond the continental shelf edge and coastal areas, which resulted in all the habitats assessed having unpressured extensions greater than 10%. For the MSFD period, the assessment showed very similar results. Four per cent of the unit area had disturbance, with moderate and low disturbances covering the largest proportion of the assessment unit, maintaining the geographical distribution of the disturbance. Upper bathyal sediment was again the habitat with the largest area under high disturbance.

The BH2a assessments determined the benthic quality status of the coastal water bodies in the South Iberian Atlantic assessment unit, involving nutrient and organic enrichment over two assessment periods (1st assessment cycle before 2009; 2nd assessment cycle from 2010 to 2015). For both assessment cycles (2010, 2016), the evaluation determined that the greatest proportion of the water bodies assessed had benthic habitats classified as in good/high biological status. In 2010 the status of coastal water bodies for benthic invertebrates was good/high for 33,35%, poor/bad for 0,02%, with 66,63% of the total area of coastal water bodies not having been assessed. The status for vegetation was good/high for 28,96% and moderate for 0,05%, with 28,96% of the total area of coastal water bodies not having been assessed. In 2016 the status of coastal water bodies benthic invertebrates was good/high for 52,63%, moderate for 36,57% and poor/bad for 1,48%, with 9,32% of the total area of coastal water bodies not having been assessed. The status for vegetation was good/high for 76,62%, with 23,38% of the total area of coastal water bodies not having been assessed. The status changes between the assessment cycles were mainly due to differences in the total assessed area of coastal water bodies and by a change in the ecological status of some coastal water bodies. The impacted areas for benthic invertebrate communities were found mainly in the South Iberian assessment unit.

The Gulf of Cadiz

Gulf of Cadiz x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH1 2009-2020 (% habitat area under each disturbance group)BH1 2016-2020 (% habitat area under each disturbance group)
 No trawling
pressure
LowModerateHighNo trawling
pressure
LowModerateHigh
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
Littoral sedimentNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

Not assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sediment16,4610,7256,8615,9616,4618,9539,6524,94
Circalittoral mixed sediment30,2605,8163,9330,2604,6265,12
Circalittoral sand40,61029,0330,3640,610,6927,1931,51
Circalittoral mud19,0300,2580,7319,0300,2580,73
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment056,0721,8122,12056,0721,8122,12
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment0049,5950,410043,956,1
Offshore circalittoral sand4,696,585,23,624,698,9882,723,62
Offshore circalittoral mud009,4190,59009,4190,59
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sediment32,6618,788,5739,9841,4912,2810,0136,22
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed
AbyssalNo trawling pressure / Not assessedNo trawling pressure / Not assessed

Gulf of Cadiz x Condition of Benthic Habitat Communities: Assessment of some Coastal Habitats in Relation to Nutrient and/or Organic Enrichment (BH2a) 


Coastal water body status:

poor/bad
moderate
high/good
no data
BH existing in AU coastal water bodies
Broadscale habitat typeBH2a invertebrates (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (< 2009)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a invertebrates (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
BH2a vegetation (2010-2015)
% of the coastal waterbodies (CWB) area under each quality status
Littoral rock and biogenic reef 
 
not assessed
 
Littoral sediment   not assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef  not assessed 
Infralittoral coarse sediment   not assessed
Infralittoral mixed sediment   not assessed
Infralittoral sand   not assessed
Infralittoral mud   not assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef  not assessed 
Circalittoral coarse sedimentnot existing
in CWB of AU
not existing
in CWB of AU
not existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Circalittoral mixed sedimentnot existing
in CWB of AU
not existing
in CWB of AU
not existing
in CWB of AU
not existing
in CWB of AU
Circalittoral sand   not assessed
Circalittoral mud   not assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Offshore circalittoral sandnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Offshore circalittoral mudnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Upper bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Lower bathyal sedimentnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU
Abyssalnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AUnot existing in CWB of AU

Gulf of Cadiz x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Littoral sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

52,455350840,103344697,44130450061,3713186131,096118747,5325626400
Infralittoral coarse sediment8,7706075889,084514462,14487796008,7706075889,084514462,1448779600
Infralittoral mixed sediment0064,1380820235,8619179800064,1380820235,861917980
Infralittoral sand32,4146311661,292004994,079266742,2140971034,3747774659,331858694,680747271,612616580
Infralittoral mud41,115072954,01382284,287699660,58340465041,115072954,01382284,287699660,583404650
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef36,9031171752,0168497511,080033080038,0998026250,8201643111,0800330800
Circalittoral coarse sediment12,4640925371,3886652616,147242210012,4640925371,3886652616,1472422100
Circalittoral mixed sediment03,53803102096,46196898001,554806921,983224196,461968980
Circalittoral sand7,2505209653,7285322339,02094681008,2630431852,7160100139,0209468100
Circalittoral mud2,465386610,5251947216,9311097670,0783089202,8253880810,1294103117,1721393269,873062280
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sediment7,1674273492,832572660007,1674273492,83257266000
Offshore circalittoral mixed sediment01000000100000
Offshore circalittoral sand1,6391650486,9436811311,41715383001,6391650486,9436811311,4171538300
Offshore circalittoral mud001,9506448598,049355150001,9506448598,049355150
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef73,5722791502,62089821023,8068226474,6924757302,62089821022,68662606
Upper bathyal sediment48,45438078024,7002812125,533837611,3115003948,94193575023,7570292325,999264831,30177019
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Lower bathyal sediment98,1984410701,801558930098,2450516101,7549483900
Abyssal99,9569290400,043070960099,9890310400,0109689600

Gulf of Cadiz x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

In the Gulf of Cadiz only minor changes were observed in the BH1 assessment between assessment periods. The habitat most affected was offshore circalittoral mud, with high disturbance in 91% of the habitat area. The greatest ‘No trawling pressure’ occurred in the circalittoral sand in 41% of the habitat area.

The BH2a assessment was only carried out for benthic invertebrates during the latest assessment period (2010-2015). Only 5% of coastal water bodies were assessed, which compromises any estimate or conclusion concerning the distribution of quality status at this scale.

Regarding disturbance from bottom-contact fishing (BH3a), the Gulf of Cadiz had the highest proportion of area under high disturbance, in all assessment units. When combined with low and moderate disturbance groups, 72% of the Gulf of Cadiz was under this type of disturbance. Disturbance was predominantly located towards the Spanish coast, and higher in the north of the assessment unit. Zero disturbance occurred in 26% of the Gulf of Cadiz. The most affected habitats were offshore circalittoral mud and circalittoral mixed sediment, with respectively 98% and 96% of high disturbance in both assessment periods.

Assessment of the status of OSPAR listed threatened and /or declining habitats in the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast 

The condition of the European flat oyster Ostrea edulis has been negatively impacted by diseases and parasites in the oyster beds along the coasts of France and Spain. The last assessment in 2010 noted that this habitat was occurring in the Region but was not considered to be threatened. This most recent status assessment concludes that the status of the habitat is poor. The same change in assessment outcome was seen for maerl beds, where the most recent assessment assigns it poor status. Commercial extraction has been identified as a continued threat to maerl beds in this Region, whereas this activity has been banned in other Regions where this habitat occurs. 

Compared with the last report from 2009, the status of intertidal mudflats is still poor. The geographical distribution and extent of the habitat are generally good and stable in the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast, but its condition is poor due to anthropogenic pressures including climate change, nutrient enrichment, invasive species and hydrological changes (e.g., construction).

A likely effect of climate change on eelgrass (Zostera) beds may be a future contraction in the trailing edge of distribution in Portugal and Spain. The latest OSPAR status assessment has already detected a decreasing trend in the extent of eelgrass beds in this region.

Deep-sea sponge aggregations with populations of Phakellia ventilabrum in the Cantabrian Sea, both in the Avilés Canyon and Le Danois Bank, have a much lower genetic diversity than populations dominated by the same species in other OSPAR Regions. This is seen as an indication of deteriorating condition. However, it is also considered typical for this habitat to show a patchier distribution at lower latitudes compared with, for example, Arctic Waters.

Coral gardens have been mapped on the Galician Bank, and new survey efforts have also resulted in a substantial increase in the known records of the continental slope. The habitat is believed to be more widely spread on the slope than previously known. Most coral gardens are known about from point location data only. The seamount at Le Danois Bank in the Bay of Biscay shows evidence of coral garden habitat recovery after protective measures were introduced. The improvement in the condition of coral gardens at this location is not considered sufficient to indicate improvement across the whole Region. In addition to coral gardens, many other habitat types and species are associated with seamounts. Communities associated with seamounts are sensitive to fishing pressure, which can cause abrasion. For example, the fishing activities known to be prominent at the Gorringe Bank seamounts in southern parts of the Region have resulted in an assessment of a deteriorating condition for the habitat. The seamounts rise to 1 000 m or more above the surrounding seafloor.

Table S.6: Summary results of the assessment of the OSPAR threatened and / or declining habitats in Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast

Celtic SeasMaerl bedsFlat oyster and Ostrea edulis bedsIntertidal mudflatsZostera bedsDeep-sea sponge aggregationsCoral gardensLophelia pertusa reefsSeamounts
Distribution?
Extent????
Condition?
Previous OSPAR status assessment
Status (overall assessment)poorpoor1,2,5poor3,5poor1,4,5poorpoorpoorpoor

Legend:

Previous status assessment:
Regions where species occurs (○) and has been recognised by OSPAR to be threatened and/or declining (●)

Trends in status (since the assessment in the background document):

decreasing trend or deterioration of the criterion assessed
increasing trend or improvement in the criterion assessed
no change observed in the criterion assessed
?trend unknown


Status of criterion assessed:

goodnot goodunknown


Method of assessment:

1direct data driven
2indirect data driven
3third party assessment, close-geographic match
4third party assessment, partial-geographic match
5expert judgement

 

The Wider Atlantic: Abyssal plains, seamounts and the Mid-Atlantic Ridge

No Common Indicators, some parts of agreed assessment units overlapping this region, with indicator results (candidate BH3a results)
The Wider Atlantic, is one of the largest OSPAR Regions. It is mainly composed of deep-sea habitats such as those found in the abyssal plains, although shallower habitats can be found around the Azores Archipelago. Data on the extent and distribution of habitats is available for some areas, but most of this Region is unknown (Figure S.4). Most of its habitats are considered to be highly sensitive to human activities owing to their low exposure to natural disturbance and the slow growth rates of many deep-sea species (Brett, 2001; Althaus et al., 2009; Orejas et al., 2011). There is an overall lack of knowledge about the status of deep-sea habitats. However, the knowledge base has been increasing since the last assessment, in 2010, of the OSPAR List of threatened and / or declining habitats. The latest assessments of these habitats indicate poor or unimproved conditions for deep-sea sponge aggregations, carbonate mounds and seamounts, coral gardens and Lophelia pertusa reefs. Detailed assessments can be found in the section below.

There are no OSPAR Common Indicators for benthic habitats in the Wider Atlantic Region, but the BH3a (Physical disturbance by fisheries) indicator has been assessed as a candidate indicator in some areas, namely the “Atlantic projection” assessment unit and deep habitats in the Northern Celtic Seas, Southern Celtic Sea, North Iberian and South Iberian Atlantic assessment units.

Results based on the BH3a indicator show that a large proportion of habitats, mainly those classified as bathyal and abyssal, are undisturbed by bottom-fishing gear as they are not suitable for this activity and are under bottom-fishing restrictions imposed by the North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC). By contrast, moderate to high disturbance was found in circalittoral mud, upper bathyal sediment, and lower bathyal sediment all around the open Atlantic areas assessed, where this activity is widespread. In the habitats off the coast of Ireland (e.g., Porcupine Bank / Seabight), high to moderate disturbance was assessed mostly in offshore circalittoral sand, upper bathyal sediment and deep-sea habitats. Surface abrasion during the 2009 – 2020 period was also measured in areas outside the assessment units mentioned above (Figure S.6), with some areas evaluated as under constant fishing (Figure S.7), but it should be noted that the BH3a indicator method of assessing the disturbance caused in those areas, based on exposure to sensitivity ranges, was not applied due to lack of resources.

The level of confidence for the assessment for the Wider Atlantic region is considered low

  • Level of evidence: low. Habitat and human activity data were assessed only in a small proportion of the total area of the region (the “Atlantic Projection” assessment unit and the deeper parts of the Northern and Southern Celtic Seas and the North Iberian and South Iberian Atlantic assessment units). Status assessments for some OSPAR listed habitats were also undertaken. However, large parts of the seabed habitats are unassessed.
  • Degree of agreement: low. The indicators and status assessments for OSPAR listed habitats mostly agree, but they are limited to a small proportion of this Region.

Atlantic Projection assessment unit

Atlantic Projection x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears (BH3a)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 fisheries abrasion 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)BH3 fisheries abrasion 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group)
 ZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbanceZeroLowModerateHighUnassessed disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Littoral sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed

Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef

Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Infralittoral sandNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Infralittoral mudNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Circalittoral sandNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Circalittoral mudNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reef000010012,200087,8
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Not
assessed
Offshore circalittoral sand010000082,417,6000
Offshore circalittoral mud0,0179377583,3860381312,384172164,21185195017,0552370982,94476291000
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef86,3423403400013,6576596688,4653183200011,53468168
Upper bathyal sediment85,80229535011,429245412,76845924093,8157021604,810889281,373408560
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef73,8418525600,00000016026,1581472883,905707400,00000011016,09429248
Lower bathyal sediment75,61350702022,88062511,50586787084,44149189015,235253420,323254690
Abyssal99,5871099400,4022907700,0105992999,6242653800,37246900,00326561

Atlantic Projection x Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Aggregate Extraction (BH3b)

Broadscale habitat typeBH3 aggregates extraction 2009-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)BH3 aggregates extraction 2016-2020 (% habitat area within assessment unit under each disturbance group, note 'Zero' disturbance not assessed)
 LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
LowModerateHighUnassessed
disturbance
Littoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Littoral sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Infralittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral coarse sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mixed sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral sandNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Offshore circalittoral mudNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Upper bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reefNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
Lower bathyal sedimentNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed
AbyssalNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessedNot assessed

The Atlantic Projection was assessed only by the indicator BH3a for physical disturbance caused by bottom-contacting fisheries on offshore circalittoral, bathyal and abyssal habitats. BH3a is a candidate indicator in this assessment unit.

The large proportion of area assessed was classified as undisturbed by fishing. This is because the deep-sea habitats were in most cases too deep for this activity and, as established by the NEAFC, the vast majority of deep-sea fisheries currently operating are found in EEZs rather than Marine Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJs). This finding is also based on an assessment of existing fishing activities over a 20-year period (1987-2007) carried out under Recommendation 19:2014 on Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (as in the latest update from 2023 Recommendation 07:2023. During the period 2009-2020, 11% of the assessment unit was under some level of disturbance, and 6% for the period 2016-2020. In both periods, the observed disturbance levels are generally moderate and limited to the broad habitat types where fishing activity occurs. (See: Extent of Physical Disturbance to Benthic Habitats: Fisheries with mobile bottom-contacting gears ).

For the assessment period 2009-2020, no assessment was possible for rock and biogenic circalittoral habitats. The greater proportion of circalittoral sand (100%) and circalittoral mud (83%) habitats were under low levels of disturbance. Bathyal and abyssal habitats were, logically, largely undisturbed, with percentages ranging from 73,8% to 99,5% of area under zero disturbance, depending on the habitat considered. Moderate disturbance in bathyal and abyssal habitats ranged from a maximum of approximately 23% in the lower bathyal sediments to a minimum of 0% in upper bathyal rock and biogenic reefs. High disturbance level was observed only in limited areas of circalittoral mud (~4%), upper bathyal sediment (2,7%) and lower bathyal sediment (1,5%)

For the assessment period 2016-2020, rock and biogenic circalittoral habitats were largely unassessed (87%). Circalittoral sand habitats were mostly undisturbed (82%) or under low levels of disturbance (18%). A contrasting picture was observed for circalittoral mud habitats, which showed low levels of disturbance in approximately 83% of their extent, with 17% undisturbed. Bathyal and abyssal habitats were, logically, largely undisturbed, with percentages ranging from 83,9% to 99,6% of area under zero disturbance depending on the habitat considered. Moderate disturbance in these habitats ranged from a maximum of 15,2% (lower bathyal sediments) to a minimum of 0% (upper and lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef). During 2016-2020, high disturbance levels were observed only in upper bathyal sediments (1,4%) and lower bathyal sediments (0,3%)

Assessment of the status of OSPAR listed threatened and /or declining habitats in the Wider Atlantic

The status assessments highlight a particular lack of information to describe change over time, with most of the available information coming from single mapping studies and surveys, rather than repeated monitoring efforts at the same location over a long period. To improve understanding of the status of deep-sea benthic habitats and changes to their status over time, there is a need to develop and implement dedicated monitoring programmes. Regional coordination would be beneficial, due to the relatively high costs and the difficulty in accessing deep-sea habitat sites. Several status assessments revealed the need to better understand how climate change can impact deep ocean circulation, and in turn to improve knowledge of how these changes could impact the larval dispersal of habitat-forming species.

Carbonate mounds occur as clusters of mounds formed by successive periods (>10 000 years) of coral reef development, sedimentation and (bio)erosion. The Wider Atlantic Region in the OSPAR Maritime Area is believed to contain the greatest concentration and largest examples of coral carbonate mounds worldwide. Since the last assessment in 2010, new mounds have been discovered on the Iberian margin of the Galicia Bank. These are not being interpreted as increasing in extent but rather as an improvement on knowledge. A wider range of threatened and / or listed habitat types has been found to be associated with carbonate mounds than was recognised during the previous assessment. Habitats dominated by fragile and long-lived filter- and suspension-feeders, such as Lophelia reefs, deep-sea sponge aggregations and coral gardens, occur on carbonate mounds, as do a high diversity of shrimps, crabs, crinoids, ophiuroids, and fish species such as the orange roughy. While the carbonate mounds are not seen as directly threatened by human activities, unless new activities such as aggregate removal are initiated, the habitats that form on them are sensitive to disturbance. 

A decrease in the density, biomass and body diameter of deep-sea sponges (Phernoema carpenteri) has been detected over the past decades at the Porcupine Sea bight, due to human activities. The deep-sea sponge aggregations are sensitive to pressures from fishing, and their documented decline is considered to be an indication of a downward trend in the condition of the habitat. Similarly, coral gardens are sensitive to bottom-contacting fisheries, and their condition has been assessed as increasingly unfavourable in previously trawled marine protected areas. 

Lophelia reefs occur along the shelf edge and around seamounts and ridges in the Wider Atlantic. Fifty per cent of the Region’s known Lophelia reefs occur within marine protected areas. The Lophelia reefs at Rockall have been found not to be in good status. 

The oceanic ridges and hydrothermal vent habitat were assessed as being in good status, with an improvement in condition since the last assessment but with a low level of confidence. This is the only deep-sea habitat in the Wider Atlantic which has changed its overall status assessment since QSR 2010. Hydrothermal vents, which are rare, sensitive and island-like ecosystems, require protective measures to ensure that the habitat remains in good condition and is not exploited through extractive activities. Biodiversity and population densities at the small sites of active hydrothermal vents are high compared with densities in the surrounding areas, with higher degrees of endemism for species in deeper vent fields than in shallower vents. Time series information on population densities is only available from one vent field (Lucky Strike) and shows stable megafauna populations. Due to the limited monitoring and knowledge, it is not possible to assess overall trends for this Region.

Seamounts occur most abundantly in the Wider Atlantic Region. The distribution and extent of seamounts does not change over time, but the communities of species on them that represent their ecological condition, can change and have been assessed as declining. For example, the Anton Dohrn, Rosemary Bank and Hebrides Terrace seamounts are seen to be in a favourable state, but the communities associated with them have been impacted by fishing activities, although recent management strategies have reduced the fishing pressure that this northern area was experiencing. Seamounts with summits deeper than 1 500 m are believed to be in better condition, as they are not targeted by fishing activities.

Table S.7: Summary results of the assessment of the OSPAR threatened and / or declining habitats in the Wider Atlantic

 

Celtic SeasDeep-sea sponge aggregationsCarbonate moundCoral gardensLophelia pertusa reefsOceanic ridges and hydrothermal ventsSeamounts
Distribution
Extent??
Condition?
Previous OSPAR status assessment
Status (overall assessment)poorpoorpoorpoorgoodpoor

Legend:

Trends in status (since the assessment in the background document):

decreasing trend or deterioration of the criterion assessed
increasing trend or improvement in the criterion assessed
no change observed in the criterion assessed
?trend unknown


Regions where species occurs (○) and has been recognised by OSPAR to be threatened and/or declining (●)

Status of criterion assessed:

goodnot goodunknown

Progress made, remaining knowledge gaps, and way forward towards a more integrated assessment of benthic habitats

Even if the full integration method is not yet agreed or complete for the benthic thematic assessment, several “pieces of this puzzle” have already been developed and further progressed under the EcApRHA and NEA PANACEA projects, with contributions and review from the whole OSPAR Benthic Habitat Expert Group.

The indicators are being developed by the experts who lead the different work areas, using a complementary approach to ensure that indicators can be operationalised as a set and integrated in the future. There are two main types of OSPAR benthic indicators:

BH2a, is already extrapolating the station results for each assessed coastal water body, which is the relevant scale for benthic quality elements under the EU Water Framework Directive, the corresponding Norwegian water regulations (Vannforskriften) and the Water Environment Regulations and Water Environment Water and Services Act for United Kingdom waters. 

The BH2common conceptual approach” a precursor of this thematic assessment, was developed as a separate “chapeau” concerning the use of several multi-metric indices to address different pressure types but involving common requirements in terms of sampling at similar biological and geographical scales, and data requirements in terms of parameters and taxonomical referencing. The more recent BH1 indicator, focusing on sensitivities at species biological scale and more pressure-specific sensitivities, is also included with these types of indicators.

More recently, BH3 was also applied to two different types of physical pressure, leading to two separate and specific assessments: BH3a considered physical disturbance by bottom-contacting fisheries, while BH3b looked at physical disturbance by aggregate extraction. Although this area- and model-based type of indicator is different from the previously mentioned BH1 and BH2, its approach and conceptual chapeau is similar, and it aims to use similar methods to assess different pressure types and thus facilitate comparison and further methodological development under the “common approach” (See: CEMP Guideline: Common Indicator - BH3 Extent of Physical damage to predominant and special habitats (Agreement 2017-09)).

At a more advanced integration level, the conceptual approach to link and combine (data and methods) these two types of indicators has been published as a detailed deliverable of the EcApRHA project (Elliott et al., 2017a) and summarised as an article in a peer-reviewed international scientific journal (Elliott et al., 2018). Under the NEA PANACEA project, this common approach was successfully tested and published both as a CEMP appendix of BH1, also referred to in BH3 and in a pilot assessment in the Bay of Biscay and Iberian Coast. Even if there are still data and methodological limitations, this new recent step forward will help the progress towards a more integrated method which combines these two types of indicators to help improve methodologies and confidence in the overall assessment of benthic habitat quality status (Figure S.9).

Despite this recent significant progress, more working and scientific policy interactions are still needed, at both regional-sea and European levels. In line with the steps described above, the coordination and additional resources shared through common projects are key to enabling this work to proceed under commonly agreed and defined timelines and priorities.

In the near future, significant progress is urgently needed to greatly improve the monitoring that supplies the required data, and the scientific policy process itself, to enable sufficient technical, methodological and management progress towards a more integrated assessment, as well as provide information and evidence to support evaluation of the efficiency of management measures. This needs to happen both within and between benthic and biodiversity assessments (Elliott et al., 2017b; Padegimas et al., 2017), considering also the most recent progress made nationally and through the MSFD (Guérin and Lizińska, 2022), and in wider socio-economic areas (Révelard et al., 2022).

Figure S.9: Overarching conceptual approach for an integrated assessment of benthic habitat indicators at sub-regional scale, to highlight the feedback of information gathered across Indicator Assessments and provide increased confidence in benthic Indicator Assessment. (Elliott et al., 2018)

The Wider Atlantic: Abyssal plains, seamounts and the Mid-Atlantic Ridge

Althaus, F., Williams, A., Schlacher, T., Kloser, R., Green, M., Barker, B., Bax, N., Brodie, P. and Schlacher-Hoenlinger, M. 2009. Impacts of bottom trawling on deep-coral ecosystems of seamounts are long-lasting. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 397, 279-294. DOI https://doi.org/10.3354/meps08248

Bett, B.J., 2001. UK Atlantic Margin environmental survey: introduction and overview of bathyal benthic ecology. Continental Shelf Research, 21, 917-956.

Orejas, C., Ferrier-Pagès, C., Reynaud, S., Gori, A., Beraud, E., Tsounis, G., Allemand, D. and Gili, J. 2011. Long-term growth rates of four Mediterranean cold-water coral species maintained in aquaria. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 429, 57-65. DOI https://doi.org/10.3354/meps09104

 

Elliott, S.A.M., Arroyo, A.L., Safi, G., Ostle, C., Guérin, L., McQuatters-Gollop, A., Aubert, A., Artigas, F., Pesch, R., Schmitt, P., Vina-Herbon, C., Meakins, B., González-Irusta, J.M., Preciado, I., López-López, L., Punzón, A., de la Torriente, A., Serrano, A., Haraldsson, M., Capuzzo, E., Claquin, P., Kromkamp, J., Niquil, N., Judd, A., Padegimas, B. and Corcoran, E. 2017b. Proposed approaches for indicator integration. EcApRHA deliverable WP4.1, ISBN: 978-1-911458-29-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.11217.61287

Elliott, S.A.M., Guérin, L., Pesch, R., Schmitt, P., Meakins, B., Vina-Herbon, C., González-Irusta, J.M., de la Torriente, A. and Serrano, A., 2018. Integrating benthic habitat indicators: Working towards an ecosystem approach. Marine Policy 90, 88-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.01.003

Elliott, S.A.M., Guérin, L., Pesch, R., Schmitt, P., Meakins, B., Vina-Herbon, C., González-Irusta, J.M., de la Torriente, A. and Serrano, A. 2017a. Applying a risk-based approach towards an integrated assessment of benthic habitat communities at a regional sea scale. EcApRHA deliverable WP4.1, ISBN: 978-1-911458-25-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.32189.13289

Guérin L. and Lizińska A., 2022. Analysis of the main elements of the “Good Environmental Status” from the 1st and 2nd MSFD cycles, reported by the European Member States for the Descriptor 6 (seafloor integrity) - links with Regional Seas’ Conventions and D4 (food webs integrity) and D5 (eutrophication). NEA PANACEA European project deliverable 3.1. PatriNat joint unit (OFB, MNHN, CNRS). Station marine de Dinard. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.16732.46728

McQuatters-Gollop A., L. Guérin, N.L. Arroyo, A. Aubert, L.F. Artigas, J. Bedford, E. Corcoran, V. Dierschke, S.A.M. Elliott, S.C.V. Geelhoed, A. Gilles, J.M. González-Irusta, J. Haelters, M. Johansen, F. Le Loc'h, C.P. Lynam, N. Niquil, B. Meakins, I. Mitchell, B. Padegimas, R. Pesch, I. Preciado, I. Rombouts, G. Safi, P. Schmitt, U. Schückel, A. Serrano, P. Stebbing, A. De la Torriente and C. Vina-Herbon. 2022. Assessing the state of marine biodiversity in the Northeast Atlantic, Ecological Indicators, Volume 141, 109148, ISSN 1470-160X, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2022.109148 (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X22006203)

Padegimas B., F. Artigas, N.L. Arroyo, A. Aubert, A. Budria, E. Capuzzo, E. Corcoran, S. A. M. Elliott, J. M., González-Irusta, L. Guérin, A. Judd and J. Kromkamp. 2017. Action Plan for the further implementation of habitat and food web indicators and progressing integrated assessments in OSPAR (sub) regions. EcApRHA deliverable WP5.6, ISBN: 978-1-911458-30-2. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.27994.82889

Révelard A, Tintoré J, Verron J, Bahurel P, Barth JA, Belbéoch M, Benveniste J, Bonnefond P, Chassignet EP, Cravatte S, Davidson F, deYoung B, Heupel M, Heslop E, Hörstmann C, Karstensen J, Le Traon PY, Marques M, McLean C, Medina R, Paluszkiewicz T, Pascual A, Pearlman J, Petihakis G, Pinardi N, Pouliquen S, Rayner R, Shepherd I, Sprintall J, Tanhua T, Testor P, Seppälä J, Siddorn J, Thomsen S, Valdés L, Visbeck M, Waite AM, Werner F, Wilkin J and Williams B. 2022. Ocean Integration: The Needs and Challenges of Effective Coordination Within the Ocean Observing System. Front. Mar. Sci. 8:737671. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2021.737671

PressuresImpact