1. Reporting Synergies: MSFD & BHD Miraine Rizzo, Matthew Grima Connell & Luke Tabone Biodiversity & Water Unit Environment & Resources Authority - Malta

2. Contents Assessment of status Monitoring Processes
MSFD first reporting cycle
Synergistic approach:
Assessment of status
Monitoring Processes
Programme of Measures
MSFD second reporting cycle

3. MSFD: first reporting cycle
Challenges related to Biodiversity
Limited data

4. MSFD: first reporting cycle
Challenges related to Biodiversity
Expert judgement

5. MSFD: first reporting cycle
Challenges related to Biodiversity
Qualitative definition of GES

6. MSFD: first reporting cycle
Challenges related to Biodiversity
Monitoring regimes focused
on well-known habitats/species

7. Synergistic approach Definition of objectives Healthy ecosystems
FCS (BHD) ≈ GES (MSFD)
Healthy ecosystems

8. Synergistic approach Complementarities
Overall objective: conservation of biodiversity
Common elements and pressures
Cross-references by the policies themselves

9. Synergistic approach Biodiversity elements
Listed (BHD) vs Predominant (MSFD)
Alignment of biodiversity elements

10. Synergistic approach MSFD Habitat Classification
Annex I habitat types – Habitats Directive
Barcelona
Littoral rock and biogenic reef
Reefs (1170)
Association with Lithophyllum lichenoides (II.4.2.1)
Neogoniolithon brassica-florida concretion (II.4.2.8)
Pools and lagoons sometimes associated with vermetids (II )
Submerged or partially submerged sea caves (8330)
Association with Phymatolithon lenormandii and Hildenbrandia rubra (II.4.3.1)
Shelf sublittoral coarse sediment
Association with rhodoliths (III.3.1.1)
Maerl facies (= Association with Lithothamnion corallioides and Phymatolithon calcareum) (III.3.2.1)
Association with rhodoliths (III.3.2.2)

11. Assessment of status Different definitions of status
FCS of habitats & species listed in the HD
GES of 11 MSFD GES Descriptors

12. Assessment of status Scope for streamlining definitions of status
Use of common assessment criteria
Use of common targets/thresholds
Indicators
(WFD & MSFD)
Parameters
(HD)

13. Assessment of status MSFD Commission Decision 2010/477/EU
Habitats Directive Parameters
Methodologies used for assessment of status
Criteria
Indicators
Habitat Distribution (1.4)
Distributional range (1.4.1)
Range
Assessment and reporting under Article 17 of the Habitats Directive:
Explanatory Notes & Guidelines for the period Final Draft. April 2011.
Habitat extent (1.5)
Habitat area (1.5.1)
Area covered by habitat type within range
Physical Damage, having regard to substrate characteristic (6.1)
Type, abundance, biomass and areal extent of biogenic substrate (6.1.1)
Habitat Condition (1.6)
Condition of the typical species and communities (1.6.1); Relative abundance and/or biomass as appropriate (1.6.2)
Specific Structures and Functions (including typical species)
Indices used for assessment of Biological Quality Elements under Water Framework Directive processes
Condition of benthic community (6.2)
Presence of particularly sensitive and/or tolerant species (6.2.1)

14. Assessment of status Posidonia oceanica Policy Element
Parameters / Criteria / Indicators
Methodologies
Habitats Directive
Priority Habitat
Range
Trend & range surface area compared to favourable reference range.
Area
Trend &
area covered by habitat compared to favourable reference area
Structure and Functions
% of the habitat type area in the region being assessed considered in good condition
MSFD
Habitat type
Distributional range (1.4.1) & Habitat area (1.5.1)
Favourable Reference Range/Area
Condition of the typical species and communities (1.6.1); Relative abundance and/or biomass as appropriate (1.6.2)
Use of intercalibrated boundaries for high and good status under WFD processes.
WFD
Biological Quality Element as an indicator of status – biotic indices

15. Assessment of status MSFD Commission Decision 2010/477/EU
Good Environment Status
Favourable Conservation Status
Criteria
Habitat Distribution (1.4)
The natural range and extent of marine habitats and species are stable, or otherwise in line with the physiographic and climatic conditions, taking into consideration the sustainable use of the marine environment.
Favourable: Stable (loss and expansion in balance) or increasing and not smaller than the ‘favourable reference range’
Stable (loss and expansion in balance) or increasing AND not smaller than the 'favourable reference area' AND without significant changes in distribution pattern within range (if data available)
Habitat extent (1.5)
Physical Damage, having regard to substrate characteristic (6.1)
Habitat Condition (1.6)
The structure and function of marine habitats ensure their long-term viability
The long-term viability of key marine habitats is not compromised by anthropogenic pressures and impacts.
Structures and functions (including typical species) in good condition and no significant deteriorations /pressures. The habitats prospects for its future are excellent /good, no significant impact from threats expected; long-term viability assured.
Condition of benthic community (6.2)
1.2 Population Size
The population abundance of key marine species is stable and their population dynamics are indicative of long-term viability.
Population not lower than ‘favourable reference population’ AND reproduction, mortality and age structure not deviating from normal (if data available)
Main pressures and threats to the species not significant; species will remain viable in the long-term.
1.3 Population Condition

16. One marine monitoring programme
Streamlining
elements to be assessed
assessment criteria & monitoring methodologies
One marine monitoring programme
for MSFD, WFD and BHD

17. Monitoring Streamlining CARLIT (macroalgae)
Habitat 1170 in HD
(range, area, structure & functions)
MSFD assessment criteria for Descriptor 1
WFD Biological Quality Elements

18. Management Contribution to site-specific management measures
MSFD Programme of measures
Knowledge improvement on the interactions of seabirds, marine reptiles and marine mammals with fisheries activity and definition of good practice as necessary

19. Management Contribution to site-specific management measures
MSFD Programme of measures
Preparation and promotion of a code of good practice for sea-farers including guidelines for navigation within marine protected areas or otherwise sensitive areas.

20. Management Contribution to site-specific management measures
MSFD Programme of measures
Pilot implementation of selected management options aimed at addressing impacts from anchoring on the seabed.

21. Management Contribution to site-specific management measures
MSFD Programme of measures
Inventory of fishery activity in coastal Marine Protected Areas designated for the protection of seabed habitats

22. MSFD: second reporting cycle
Forward look
Stronger alignment of MSFD criteria with BHD parameters

23. MSFD: second reporting cycle
Forward look
Specifications for the selection of species and habitats for assessment under MSFD processes

24. MSFD: second reporting cycle
Forward look
Processes under the MSFD targeting conservation at ecosystem level contribute to holistic protection regimes for listed habitats and species

25. Thank you!