Baltic GIG Progress report by Jens Brøgger Jensen Danish Environmental Protection Agency Ecostat meeting 15 - 16 March 2005

Outline Meetings Workplan Overview of data, metrics and options Boundary setting protocol a) Reference conditions b) Boundary setting tools Further work and meetings

Meetings 1st GIG meeting in Copenhagen 13 - 14 December 2004. Participants: Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Germany and Denmark 2nd GIG meeting in Helsinki 22 - 23 February 2005. Participants: Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania. Poland, Germany and Denmark

Workplan

Workplan The main outcomes from the GIG will be: type specific assessment methods and metrics for each the individual biological quality elements. methods and metrics that could be used for the various intercalibration sites. options for intercalibration Evaluation of data for the type specific assessment methods and metrics across the GIG. reference conditions for the biological quality elements for the agreed common Baltic intercalibration-types. the boundary setting protocol to identify the high/good and good/moderate boundaries for the type specific assessment methods and metrics for the biological quality elements. Interim reports on progress from the GIG contact persons. Interim reports from the GIG Co-ordinator to JRC and to WGA Ecostat. Final intercalibration type-specific report from the GIG

Workplan

Overview of data

Metrics and options Quality Element Metric Option Chlorofyll a all types Mean summer value 2 (June- September) Macroalgae 3 types Fucus depth limit 2 1 type Furcellaria depth limit 2 Angiosperms 1 type Zostera depth limit 2 Benthic fauna all types no common metric 3

Boundary setting protocol Reference conditions Historical data used to the extent possible Agreed not to use the best status of available sites.

Boundary setting protocol Boundary setting tools Options discussed: Pressure gradient to be established by modelling and bounderies found from a) Main changes of pressure gradient b) Percentage change from reference conditions c) Combination

Boundary setting protocol Boundary setting tools - discussion Zostera Reference condition and EQO at 25% deviation Ulva biomass 300 % deviation from reference!! { - or should the threshold for exponential growth of Ulva be used as a marker for “slight deviation”?

Other indicators may react differently Zostera Reference condition and EQO at 25% deviation Ulva biomass 66% deviation from reference { - or is there a maximum deviation for it to be accepted inside the definition “slight deviation”?

Further work and meetings Data overview and assessment methods by end of March 2005 Reference conditions established for each type Data Collection Progress report from type co-ordinators by 1 June 2005 Next full GIG meeting: 20 - 23 September 2005 in Stockholm

Further work and meetings