All TMs are kindly asked to fill in the information asked for in the template and to present the information at the CORESET II 2/2014 workshop. TMLs are.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 MARINE STRATEGY FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE (MSFD) COMMON IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY MSFD regional data work flow: schema and examples Document: DIKE TSG1 WP4 MSFD.
Advertisements

The state of the Gulf of Finland- gaps in our present knowledge
Population growth rate, abundance and distribution of marine mammals Population growth rate. Population growth rate should be positive until hampered by.
Marine Strategy Framework Directive: Goals and Challenges
HELCOM proposal on project aiming at BSAP development and implementation Baltic Sea Region Programme Conference May 2007, Hamburg HELCOM.
The Marine Strategy Framework Directive 17th March 2010, Newcastle North Sea Stakeholders Conference Leo de Vrees European Commission (DG Environment,
Female reproductive status of marine mammals -particular emphasis of seals The concept of using reproductive parameters of seals as core indicator for.
Nutritional status of seals The concept of using body condition of seals as core indicator for GES within Helcom is based on -Blubber thickness is a commonly.
Implementation process at EU level Marine Strategy Framework Directive: implementation process at EU level Gert Verreet – submitted to EMECO meeting -
Launching the core indicators! Samuli Korpinen HELCOM CORESET May 2013, Riga.
(18 JUNE 2014) WP Leader: Neil Holdsworth, ICES EMODnet Chemistry II ( ) WP5 Analysis and Recommendations.
Cetacean by-catch M.B. Santos Workshop Marine Environment and fisheries.
Expert Workshop, June , Split, Croatia Output from TG Data for MSFD implementation EMODnet Chemistry Giordano Giorgi - ISPRA.
State of the Forest: Data harmonization and management Helping us to know whether we are getting the job done.
Reporting on Programme of Measures (Art. 13)
The Marine Strategy Framework Directive “good environmental status” and the Water Framework Directive “good ecological/chemical status/potential” ECOSTAT.
ECOSTAT WG2A meeting 7-8 October 2004 Eutrophication Activity Status report Presented by Ana Cristina Cardoso.
Counselor dr. Otilia Mihail Ministry of Environment, Water and Forest Constanta 17 June
26 February 2014 Views to practical support on management of HELCOM biodiversity data by an EU Service contract Hermanni Kaartokallio (SYKE) EEA workshop.
GEF Expanded Constituency Workshop 27 – 29 March 2012 Tirana, Albania ECW Practical Exercise.
Stela Barova, senior expert, “Marine environmental protection and Monitoring” Department, “Plans and Permits” Directorate State of play of MSFD implementation.
Monitoring Fact Sheets DIKE TSG1 04. July 2013, Copenhagen Proposal for the use of web-based monitoring “fact sheets” for the purpose of MSFD reporting.
MSFD monitoring guidance MSCG proposed amendments Nikolaos ZAMPOUKAS.
Cover slide Project, course, team, date. Outline welcome  1 slide introducing the key sections/ information items in this presentation.
EMODnet Biology Kick-off Meeting – VLIZ, Oostende September 2013 EMODnet Biology Work Package 2 Mark Costello & Dan Lear
The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) The key and only legislation completely focused on the marine environment Clear ecosystem based thinking.
Marine Strategy Framework Directive State of play and follow up
Alignment and Integration to MSFD
ICES led Reviews of D3, D4, D6 & D11
Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)
Draft Article 8 MSFD assessment guidance
Indicator structure and common elements for information flow
Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)
Monitoring and assessments of biodiversity in the Baltic Sea
Strategic Coordination Group Eutrophication Guidance
Lead Country approach to indicator development
Annex III Annex I Qualitative descriptors Characteristics
Technical review of Commission Decision 2010/477/EU concerning MSFD criteria for assessing GES Work flow and progress 20/21 October th WG GES.
Lena Bergström, Project Coordinator
WG GES Workshop Art. 8 MSFD Assessment
Marine Strategy Framework Directive State of play and follow up
European Commission DG Environment
Project MORE We are revising the strategy
Meeting on the implementation of the INSPIRE Directive
DG ENV/MSFD 2018 call for proposals
MSFD Com Dec 2010/ 477/ EU review Recommendations for D2
Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)
Revision of MSFD Decision 2010/477/EU - overview
Determining Eligibility
Morning session: discussion on spatial scales
Project 2.7 Guidance on Monitoring
Marine Strategy Framework Directive State of play and follow up
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
HOLAS II: project to develop a 2nd Holistic Assessment of the Ecosystem Health of the Baltic Sea Ulla Li Zweifel, Professional Secretary.
Marine Strategy Framework Directive Contaminants Implementation of descriptors Coordination MSFD – WFD , WFD WG chemicals, Bruxelles,
HELCOM WORK Submitted by the Contracting Parties in HELCOM that are also EU member states Name Surname.
Streamlining of monitoring and reporting under WFD, Nitrates Directive and EEA's SoE –concept paper DG Environment.
HELCOM Baltic Sea Protected Areas
Sylvia Barova Unit B.3 – Nature DG Environment, European Commission
PIANC, Chair of WFD Navigation Task Group
Scene setter European Commission DG Environment
Marine Strategy Framework Directive Descriptor 3+
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Existing BSAP follow up
ICES requested to give guidance on integration
Baltic Sea GIG Status April 2009
Marine Strategy Coordination Group 14 November 2011, Brussels
Indicators reviewed for the SEBI2010
Uli Claussen Co-lead ECOSTAT
By-catch work at ICES Lara Salvany,
Presentation transcript:

All TMs are kindly asked to fill in the information asked for in the template and to present the information at the CORESET II 2/2014 workshop. TMLs are to collect the information, provide it to the Project Manager and present at the workshop or agree with a TMa to present. By 8th September, please provide first drafts to the Project Manager. TMLs are welcome to present other information of interest as well at the workshop, noting that each indicator will be given a maxiumum time of 15 minutes. Please, amend/fill-in sections in orange and delete examples.

[indicator title] Short introduction to the concept of the indicator and main parameters

[indicator title] Stage of developmentIndicator type Core/pre-core/candidateState/Pressure/Impact Primary importanceSecondary importance BSAP Segment and Objective  Natural Distribution and occurrence of plans and animals  Viable populations of species none stated MSFD Descriptors and Criteria 1.3. Population condition (demography, genetic structure) 1.1 Species distribution (range, pattern, covered area) 1.2 Population size (abundance, biomass) 4.1 Productivity of key species or trophic groups (productivity) 4.3 Abundance/distribution of key trophic groups and species Other relevant legislation: (e.g. WFD) Legislative linkage:

[indicator title] Concept/ design Coordinated monitoringAssessment Research needs for operationalization (in relation to needs stated under the coordinated monitoring and assessment columns) Data arrangements Monitoring strategy (method, frequency, spatial resolution) in relation to relevant indicator parametersTechnical guidelinesGeographic scale Assessment method GES / assessment criteria (currently all GES are provisional) A ) in place B) under development C ) not available, what needs - action level? A ) monitoring in place B ) monitoring needs revision C ) monitoring not available, what needs - action level? A ) in place B ) needs revision, what needs doing C ) not available, what needs - action level? HELCOM assessment units: A ) identified B) Identified not described C) not identified, what needs - action level? A ) available and described B ) available not described C ) not available, what needs - action level? A ) proposed and described B ) proposed but needs more supporting data C ) not available, what needs - action level? A ) in place B ) needs revision, what needs doing C ) not available, what needs - action level? B - Harbour porpoise needs to be developed - TM B - clarification of when and how counts are made -TM B - elaboration on counting methods needed - TM, BALSAM B - units to be clarified - TM AB - harbour porpoise GES to be determined - TM Harbour porpoise background data, Harbour porpoise data lacking on abundance and distribution B - data submission arrangements to be incoorporated into the indicator to be discussed, preliminary strategy and schedual agreed among experts - TM, HELCOM Example Fill in for current situation (action level = who needs to complete the task)

[indicator title] Present work on GES so far, briefly describe the concept and who has been involved

[indicator title] Example HELCOM Assessment Unit Level: 3 The indicator is applicable in: all coastal areas around the Baltic Sea Currently data is available : however only available for coastal areas of the Gulf of Riga

[indicator title] List of issues that still need to be solved for the indicator Describe what is hindering solving the issue e.g. Low confidence in the result Funding for data collection and analysis is still unsecure and the amount of data needed for the analysis has not yet been met.

[indicator title] Any and all other information that TMs would like to present in the following slides