Progress in the implementation of D11 René Dekeling Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, NL EU TG Noise Mark Tasker Joint Nature Conservation Committee, UK EU TG Noise

Progress 2017-2018 Establishing threshold values at Union level Work planned by TG Noise for 2018/2019 Priorities/issues

Work done by TG Noise on threshold values TG Noise meeting / workshop in Madrid 9-10 Nov 2017 > 30 participants, (government, research, NGO, RSC) Implementation of monitoring, identified issues Consistency with noise mapping by NOAA-US QuietMed project representation EMODNET, EUROGOOS participation Workshop: Towards thresholds for underwater noise. Common approaches for interpretation of data obtained in (Joint) Monitoring Programmes work on concept identified in 2016 Hamburg TG Noise workshop to address habitat degradation EU-wide concept to be readily understood and implemented by multiple regulators (incl. non-specialists) methodology to be usable for multiple (types of) species, not only marine mammals

Work done by TG Noise on threshold values Main outcomes Impulsive noise: 5 different methodologies suggested by experts/MS Identification pros/cons underway If methodologies broken down most methods do stepwise approaches where some of the steps are very similar between methods (but terminology is different) E.g. all methods carry out ‘exposure assessment’ very similar to approaches used in ‘traditional’ risk assessment techniques for hazardous substances Similarities between methodologies identified and (likely) will be basis for possible common methodology

Work done by TG Noise on threshold values Main outcomes Continuous (ambient) noise: (only) 3 different methodologies suggested by experts/MS Knowledge on effects much less developed compared to IN Identification pros/cons underway (but less clear than for IN) Agreed common methodology not likely at short term Approach taken in BIAS-project (Life+) likely to be basis for follow-on projects (like JOMOPANS (North Sea), JONAS (Atlantic Arch))

Work done by TG Noise on threshold values TG Noise aiming to provide WG GES proposals for methodology that can be used at European scale Work unlikely to be finished by next WG GES meeting (fall 2018) Impulsive noise further developed than continuous noise TG Noise will seek advice of WG GES when developing next steps Yet unsolved concern - role of EU CIS group TG Noise and RSC’s Brought up in meeting of TG Noise; TG Noise will work as proposed by EC and work with (rely on) WG GES

Main work planned by TG Noise 2018-2019 Support MS/RSC’s in implementation of operational monitoring programs Continued active coordination between new initiatives in different regions to ensure coherence and complementarity Work on the development of threshold values as provided for under the revised GES Decision TG Noise will prepare report with advice of assessment methodologies for discussion at annual meeting in 5-6 June 2018 Bucharest, Romania To consolidate further advice to MSCG, TG Noise will organise meeting + workshop 6-8 November 2018 in Brussels Review TG NOISE Guidance: update of monitoring guidance (published 2014) Depending people/capacity available for this work; 2018 questionnable Evaluate TOR 2nd half of 2018 and report to MSCG meeting

Main priorities / issues Member States still in the phase of setting up JOINT monitoring projects for underwater Need for longer-term programmes remains, TG Noise contributes to consistency Substantial knowledge gaps remain, these gaps problematic at level of agreeing over methodology Impulsive noise further developed than continuous noise TG Noise has started work on methodology as expert technical group; when starting on options for thresholds foresee role change Relative roles of RSC groups and EU CIS groups to further develop TG Noise will rely on advice of other groups, e.g. WG GES

SPARE From presentation of Sep 2017 brief for WG GES/ MCSG

Conclusions on noise monitoring/registration Progress  Current monitoring /registration programmes can and will deliver relevant information on activities / sound levels Joint monitoring realistic, effective and provides information that cannot be obtained by individual MS monitoring campaigns Limitations  First data 2014 (continuous noise), 2015 (impulsive noise) Pressure monitoring only Trends not known No long-term continuous noise monitoring

Progress on assessing impact Some MS monitoring/registering underwater noise will provide information on sound levels, trends, and relative contribution of anthropogenic noise Pressure indicators only Impulsive noise: Limited # species  Population effects? Local/short term effects  Insufficient for agreed regional scale assessments in 2018 Ambient noise slow progress; probably insufficient even for next MSFD cycle

Possible work flow – e.g. for threshold values 4 6 1 Scope the work 2 Present evidence e.g. current state, trends, reference condition 7 Define methodology e.g. data processing for indicator Principles and options for setting thresholds Agreed thresholds 3 5 Agreement by WG GES/MSCG as basis for next Agreement by WG GES as basis for next steps steps

Decision-making process Technical work Technical agreement Policy adoption Agreed proposal led by JRC, Proposal ICES, TG Litter or TG - in WG GES - in MSCG Noise involving MS, RSC and CIS stakeholders