1. Disturbance or loss or both – and how to deal with this?
Some thoughts on a controversely discussed issue in Germany – and in context with doc. GES_

2. no recovery = irreversibel = lost forever
Human activity
Impact on seafloor
long-lasting,
Com. Dec. 2017/848:
if lasting >12 years
= Permanent
= Loss (of habitat)
short-term,
Com. Dec. 2017/848:
recovery <12 years
= Disturbance
understood as
no recovery = irreversibel
= lost forever
But is really so? Either disturbance or loss? And forever?

3. Can a human activity lead to both disturbance and loss?
Yes, it can!
As side effect to a long-lasting/permanent effect, e.g. a sediment plume during construction at sea (e.g. cable, bridge, platform) – installation remains >12 years in place, but plume effects are short-term only
b) But what about impacts allowing full recovery of benthic
communities, but which will take e.g years?
→Loss of habitat and associated community at site is only
or temporary, though >12 years. Loss or disturb.?

4. to get the full picture (and correct assignment to loss/dist.)?
Do we need to consider the reversibility of effects
to get the full picture (and correct assignment to loss/dist.)?
Impact on seafloor
short-term, reversible
Com. Dec. 2017/848:
recovery <12 years
= Disturbance
long-lasting,
if lasting >12 years
and irreversible
= Permanent
= Loss
long-lasting, >12 years, but reversible
= semi-permanent
= temporary and/or partial loss
Guidance for „grey zones“ needed. Help from TG Seafloor and ICES D6-workshops?