MSFD Article 8 guidance workshop 02/06/2019 MSFD Article 8 - Assessment of habitats David Connor European Commission, DG Environment Brussels Laurent Guerin Museum National d‘Histoire Naturelle Dinard, France MSFD Article 8 guidance workshop 20-21 April 2016, Brussels

Relevant Descriptors: Descriptor 1: Biodiversity Biological diversity is maintained. The quality and occurrence of habitats and the distribution and abundance of species are in line with prevailing physiographic, geographic and climatic conditions. Descriptor 6: Seafloor integrity Sea-floor integrity is at a level that ensures that the structure and functions of the ecosystems are safeguarded and benthic ecosystems, in particular, are not adversely affected. Worked example: NE Atlantic (OSPAR)

Assessment framework

Assessment of ecosystem elements (Art. 8.1a) 02/06/2019 Assessment of specific pressures and their impacts on ecosystem elements (Art. 8.1b) D2 Assessment of ecosystem elements (Art. 8.1a) D8 Reptiles (turtles) (D1) Mammal groups (D1) Fish groups (D1, 3) Pelagic broad habitats (D1) Benthic broad habitats (D1, 6) Bird groups (D1) Ecosystem, food-webs (D1, D4) D3 fishing D9 D5 D10 D6 D7 loss D11 Two slices of the pizza!! D6 damage Other pressures 4

Criteria for habitats in Decision proposal v2 02/06/2019 Criteria for habitats in Decision proposal v2 D1C5: The loss of extent of the habitat type, resulting from anthropogenic pressures, does not exceed 5% of the natural extent of the habitat in the assessment area. In cases where the loss exceeded this value in the reference year used for the Initial Assessment in 2012, there shall be no further loss of the habitat type. D1C6: The spatial extent of impacts from anthropogenic pressures on the condition of the habitat, including its biotic (typical species composition and their relative abundance) and abiotic structure, and its functions, does not exceed 30% of its natural extent in the assessment area. Other relevant criteria: D2C3 (non-indigenous species) D3C1/2/3/4 (commercial fish) D5C6/7/8/9 (eutrophication) D6C2/3 (physical disturbance and loss) D7C2 (hydrographical changes) D8C2/4 (contaminants) Proposed Decision has two criteria: D1C5 (extent of habitat – loss) and D1C6 (condition of habitat) There are a number of other relevant criteria which can provide information on the extent of impacts from different pressures to which the habitat is subject

Decision outline Primary criterion Secondary criterion Assessments of pressures for Article 8(1b) D5 D8, D9 D10 D11 D2 D3 D6 D6, D7 - Nutrients Contam-inants Litter Sound, other energy NIS Fishing/ by-catch Physical damage Physical loss Other P S D5C1 D8C1 D8C3 D9C1 D10C1 D10C2 D11C1 D11C2 D2C1 D2C2 D3C1 D6C1 D7C1 Assessments of state for Article 8(1a) D1 Species groups D1C1 D1C2 D1C3 D1C4 D8C2 D8C4 D10C3 ? D2C3 D3C2 D3C3 D3C4 Pelagic broad habitats D1C6 D5C2 D5C3 D5C4 D5C5 Benthic broad habitats D1C5 D5C6 D5C7 D5C8 D5C9 D3C2 D3C3 D6C2 D7C2 D4 Eco-systems D4C1 D4C2 D4C3 D4C4 D5C3 D5C2 02/06/2019 See spreadsheet for detail of each criterion. Black numbers = primary criteria, Blue smaller numbers = secondary criteria. Assessments under Art 8.1b address each pressure and its impacts (columns) on mobile species, pelagic or benthic habitats (which ones depend on nature of the pressure). Assessments under Art 8.1a address the different ecosystem elements (rows) using the state criteria (green column). These assessments should reflect the collective impacts upon them from all relevant pressures and so can draw upon the outcomes of the pressure-based assessments if the impacts are assessed in a suitable way (i.e. per species/habitat/group).

Assessment flow and methods of integration

Benthic broad habitat types D1/D6 Benthic broad habitat types

Broad habitat types – equated to EUNIS 2015/16 02/06/2019 Broad habitat types – equated to EUNIS 2015/16   Hard Hard/soft Soft Other Level 2 Rock* Biogenic habitat (flora/ fauna) Coarse Mixed Sand Mud e.g. non-oxygen-based habitats Photic Littoral Infralittoral Circalittoral Aphotic Bathyal Abyssal The proposed set of seabed (benthic habitats) are directly linked to the EUNIS level 2 classification (2015 proposal, due to be adopted 2016 version) Some EUNIS level 2 classes are aggregated to reduce the overall number of classes to be assessed for MSFD purposes (red boxes) – most attention (finer resolution of habitat types) is focused on the subtidal shelf (0-200m) where most human activities and thus pressures on seabed habitats occur Proposed Broad Habitat Types *Includes soft rock, marls, clays, artificial hard substrata

02/06/2019 Broadscale maps are now available for ALL European waters from EMODnet – new versions will become available in Autumn 2016. These are at finer resolution than needed for MSFD (EUNIS level 3 or 4) but can readiliy be aggregated to MSFD types for assessment purposes

Scales/areas of assessment

Defined set of (nested) areas 02/06/2019 Defined set of (nested) areas Region Sub-region Sub-division Whilst the broad habitat types for MSFD assessment are quite coarse, the proposed scale is the subdivision of a region/subregion – this is to ensure the biogeographic variation in community characteristics is addressed, as well as using a scale more suitable to management (measures) National part of sub-division Coastal part (WFD)

Habitat assessment areas – Greater North Sea 02/06/2019 Habitat assessment areas – Greater North Sea D C E B Suitable 'subdivisions' for the North Sea were proposed by ICG-COBAM (OSPAR) in 2010 - ???? UPDATE ON SCALES A

Adapted from OSPAR Biodiversity guidance for MSFD Assessment scenario - for a specified habitat and assessment area – multiple impacts - draw from other assessments Hydrological changes – minor effects Hydrological changes – impacts Physical loss (coastal infrastructure) D6C3 loss Nutrient enrichment - eutrophication Nutrient enrichment – minor effects D7C2 D2C3 Non-indigenous species D5C8/9 Cumulative pressures - impact Occasional disturbances - minor effects Contaminants - minor effects D6C2 damage Hydrological changes - impacts Physical damage (bottom trawling) - impacts Physical loss (offshore infrastructure) Contamination - impacts D7C2 D6C3 loss This slide aims to illustrate the multiple use of an area/habitat type, and the potential for varying degrees of impact from these uses. It should be possible to define GES quality (i.e. determine when a pressure is causing impact – calibrate through monitoring) and then to decide what proportion of the whole habitat in the area should be at this quality level (i.e. the light and dark green areas). This approach accommodates a certain level of activities, including ones which are quite destructive, because of the scale at which the assessment is made. Monitoring by industry – where possible industry should determine the scale/extent of impact it has, according to agreed standards, and provide the evidence to government to contribute to an overall assessment. D8C2 Greens – acceptable state Orange, red – unacceptable state Adapted from OSPAR Biodiversity guidance for MSFD 14

Benthic broad habitat (e.g. circalittoral sand) 02/06/2019 Benthic broad habitat (e.g. circalittoral sand) Both criteria to achieve threshold values Criterion D1C5 – habitat extent (proportion lost) Criterion D1C6 – habitat condition (proportion impacted) Threshold values for extent of loss and impact Extent of physical loss – from D6C3 (loss) Extent of physical damage – from D6C2 (damage) Extent of other impacts (e.g. D5 - eutrophication, D8 - contaminants) This diagram shows the envisaged aggregation process, including use of assessments from other descriptors. Sub-habitat 1 Sub-habitat 2 Sub-habitats selected to assess condition Threshold values for condition of sub-type Extent/distribution D1C5 Benthic condition D1C6 Benthic condition D1C6

Visualising the assessment results

Possible ways to express extent to which GES is achieved: Proportion of habitats in GES/not in GES (total for assessment area)

Possible ways to express extent to which GES is achieved: Proportion of habitats assessed in GES/not in GES for assessment area

Worked example: OSPAR

Pelagic broad habitat types

Broad Habitat Types Ecosystem component Habitat groups Benthic (formerly seabed) habitats Littoral rock and biogenic reef Littoral sediment Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef Infralittoral coarse sediment Infralittoral sand Infralittoral mud Infralittoral mixed sediment Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef Circalittoral coarse sediment Circalittoral sand Circalittoral mud Circalittoral mixed sediment Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef Upper bathyal sediment Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef Lower bathyal sediment Abyssal rock and biogenic reef Abyssal sediment Pelagic (formerly water column) habitats Variable salinity Coastal Shelf Oceanic

D4 D1 D1 D1 D1 D1, D3 D1, 6 02/06/2019 Pelagic habitats Coastal Shelf Bird group 1 Bird group 2 Bird group 3 Bird group 4 D1 Pelagic habitats D1 Coastal Shelf Ocean/deep sea Mammal group 1 Mammal group 2 Mammal group 3 D1 Turtles Cephalopod group 1 Cephalopod group 2 D1 The proposed habitat types for the pelagic zone are very broad, reflecting only limited major change in their characteristics, based on distance from coastal influences. The practicalities of pelagic habitat assessment will need further discussion. Fish group 1 Fish group 2 Fish group 3 Fish group 4 D1, D3 Benthic habitats D1, 6

Key challenges and opportunities Understanding current approaches between regions and countries Making use of assessments from other descriptors (e.g. D5 eutrophication) Agreeing appropriate scales of assessment (e.g. in Mediterranean and Black Sea) Understanding level of detail needed for assessment and management purposes (degree of confidence)

Concluding remarks and areas for further work We are moving rapidly from conceptual to operational Significant developments in past few years to: Map and model the seabed habitat types over all regions of Europe Map the different human activities and their (potential) pressures on the seabed Assess the distribution and extent of pressure per habitat type Use sensitivity assessments (generic) and ground-truth sampling (specific) to validate the outcomes of pressure/habitat overlays There is still need for discussion to reach consensus on a common approach, particularly integration of pressure/impact results with ‘state’ assessments and scales of assessment Plenty to discuss during the workshop!