1. A tale of two directives:
A Swedish approach to assessment of benthic habitats
Anna Karlsson
Norbert Häubner

2. A tale of two directives:
"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair”
Quote from A Tale of Two Cities, by Charles Dickens

3. Coordination HD-MSFD Marine mammals regional assessment in RSC:s
Integration rules according to HD applied
Discussion about reference values
Focus in Sweden on benthic habitats (D6C5)

4. Basis for assessment of benthic habitats (D6C5):
For an ecologically relevant assessment, you need:
Habitat specific thresholds below EUNIS 2/3 in order to cover biology
For acceptable loss of essential habitats, e.g. fish recruitment
Definition of adverse effects (threshold in terms of state/pressure relation)
Aggregation of relevant habitat types towards broad habitat types
Habitat maps of relevant resolution
Mapping of relevant pressures

5. Questions we tried to answer:
Are N2000 habitats representative for certain broad habitat types?
N2000 are biotope complexes and might not fit in the EUNIS system on levels below level 2 or 3.

6. Questions we tried to answer:
Are N2000 habitats representative for certain broad habitat types?
Spice 2018

7. Questions we tried to answer:
Are N2000 habitats representative for certain broad habitat types?
N2000 are biotope complexes and might not fit in the EUNIS system on levels below level 2 or 3.
Could typical species assigned for N2000 habitats be used for definition of structure & function within MSFD?

8. Questions we tried to answer - structure & function:
Helcom: ”Condition of benthic habitats”
Parameter
Status
GES
sub-GES, close to GES
sub-GES, far from GES
Area
Stable or increasing
Decline <10%
Decline >10%
Extent
Quality*
≥90% of area or stations in good status
<90-75% of area or stations in good status
>25% of area or stations in bad status
Overall assessment**
All "green"
One or more "amber", but no "red"
One or more "red"

9. Questions we tried to answer - structure & function:
Pilot study in the North of Sweden for lagoons
Response parameters:
Number of typical species (average & max)
Number of HUB level 6 species and HUB level 6 classes (average & max)
Coverage HUB level 6 species
in relation to relevant pressures (physical disturbance)

10. Questions we tried to answer - structure & function:
Weak pressure/state correlation
GES assessment in lagoons not possible

11. Alternative assessment for benthic habitats:
Based on WFD/Helcom assessment
If assessment not available HD assessment
Risk analysis
Areabased threshold 90 % - precautionary approach
1/17/2019

12. Assessment of Benthic habitats

13. Assessment of benthic habitats
Broad Habitat types
North Sea
Baltic Sea
Bay of Bothnia
Infralitoral
Hard bottoms & biog. rev
Sand
Mud
Cirkalitoral
Lera
Cirkalitoral off shore
1/17/2019

14. Summary Regional coordination of MSFD vs. Coordination MSFD/HBD
Coordination MSFD/WFD vs. Coordination MSFD/HBD
Aggregation of habitats
Coordination of methods to define structure & function between MSFD/HBD

15. Processes needed: National coordination: Regional coordination
MPA; fishing; MSP
Regional coordination
Mapping, monitoring, assessment methods
European coordination:
Expert groups to discuss thresholds, reference values, aggregation, assessment methods
1/17/2019

16. Thanks for the attention!
Anna Karlsson
Norbert Häubner

17. Alternative assessment for benthic habitats
> 10 % in GES
Sub-GES
< 10 % in GES
No assessment (< 75 % assessed)
> 90% GES
GES
< 90% GES
Assessment from either WFD or RSC:s available
Assessment from either WFD or RSC:s NOT available
No assessment
Assessment for N2000 habitat type
NO assessment for N2000 habitat type
Risk analysis
Favourable
= GES
Not favourable = Sub-GES