integrated regional monitoring implementation...

Pilot Project - New Knowledge for an integrated management of

human activities in the sea

First Deliverable

Outcomes of the cataloguing of current monitoring

programmes and first assessment of their contribution

to MSFD needs

01 / 10 / 2013 – 31 / 03 / 2014)

IRIS-SES

INTEGRATED REGIONAL MONITORING IMPLEMENTATION

STRATEGY IN THE SOUTH EUROPEAN SEAS

www.iris-ses.eu

Project coordinator: Dr Kalliopi Pagou

Grant Agreement:

07.0335 / 659540 / SUB / C

Pilot Project - New Knowledge for an integrated management of human activities in the sea

First Deliverable

Outcomes of the cataloguing of current monitoring programmes and first assessment of their contribution

to MSFD needs

01 / 10 / 2013 – 31 / 03 / 2014)

IRIS-SES

INTEGRATED REGIONAL MONITORING IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY IN THE SOUTH EUROPEAN SEAS

www.iris-ses.eu

Project coordinator: Dr Kalliopi Pagou

Grant Agreement: 07.0335 / 659540 / SUB / C

Funded by the European Commission – DG Environment

This deliverable should be referenced as follows:

Lazar Luminita, Murciano Virto Carla, Sauzade Didieur, Beken Polat Ҫolpan, Basset Alberto, Moncheva Snejana, Dassenakis Manos, Paramana Theodora, Loizidou Xenia, Alemany Francisco, Assimakopoulou Georgia, Balbín Rosa, Boicenco Laura, Campillo Jose Antonio, Coatu Valentina, Cortés Dolores, Cozzoli Francesco, Deudero Salud, Filimon Adrian, Galatchi Madalina, Giannoudi Louisa, Giraud Jean Pierre, Hatzianestis Ioannis, Karageorgis Aris, Kavadas Stefanos, Krasakopoulou Evangelia, León Victor, López-Jurado José Luis, Louropoulou Elia, Martínez Concepción, Massut Enric, Mercado Jesús, Oros Andra, Pagou Kalliopi, Pavlidou Aleka, Pinna Maurizio, Quetglas Antoni, Renzi Monia, Reizopoulou Sofia, Rosati Ilaria, Stefanova Kremena, Simboura Nomiki, Streftaris Nikos, Tan Ibrahim, Tsangaris Catherine, Tutak Bilge, Vlas Oana, Varkitzi Ioanna, Yebra Lydia, Zervoudaki Soultana. Outcomes of the cataloguing of current monitoring programmes and first assessment of their contribution to MSFD needs. IRIS-SES project.

Edited by: Pagou Kalliopi, Giannoudi Louisa, Streftaris Nikos

Funded by the European Commission – DG Environment i

Contents

List of figures ......................................................................................................................... iii

List of tables ........................................................................................................................... iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 1

Summary of the First deliverable ........................................................................................... 4

1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 6

2. DESIGN OF THE CATALOGUE ............................................................................................ 7

2.1. THE CATALOGUE ........................................................................................................... 9

2.2. DESIGN OF THE DATABASE ......................................................................................... 16

2.3. THE META DATABASE ................................................................................................. 18

3. ANALYSIS OF PRESSURES .................................................................................................. 20

3.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 20

3.2. INVENTORY AND CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL REGULATIONS ....................................................................................................................... 21

3.3. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES, ANALYSIS OF CURRENT AND FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL PRESSURES, AND GAP ANALYSIS ............................................... 28

3.3.1. Socioeconomic characterization of the principal human activities influencing marine ecosystems among Mediterranean and Black Sea countries .................................. 28

3.3.2. Future trends in human activities, current and future pressures resulting from human activities in the Mediterranean and Black Seas ....................................................... 33

3.3.3. Considerations on the need for monitoring data to support future assessments and managerial actions. .............................................................................................................. 39

4. ASSESSMENT OF THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE EXISTING MONITORING PROGRAMMES TO MEET THE MSFD NEEDS .................................................................................................. 44

4.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 44

4.2. Context and sources of information .......................................................................... 45

4.3. Analysis of MSFD related monitoring programs ........................................................ 45

Preliminary results ................................................................................................................ 46

4.4. Analysis of scales of monitoring ................................................................................ 79

Preliminary results ................................................................................................................ 79

4.5. Assessment of optimal strategies .............................................................................. 82

4.6. Gap analysis ............................................................................................................... 82

4.7. Recommendation for filling the gaps ........................................................................ 83

5. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER DELIVERABLES AND WORK PACKAGES WITHIN IRIS-SES

Funded by the European Commission – DG Environment ii

.............................................................................................................................................84

6. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FIRST DELIVERABLE ................................................... 84

ANNEX I. Header rows of each sheet used for the inventory of the monitoring programmes .............................................................................................................................................. 86

Funded by the European Commission – DG Environment iii

List of figures

Figure 4.3.1: MSFD parameters used per each matrix (water, sediment, biota, other, left side)

and Descriptor coverage (indicators per descriptor, right side), expressed as % of the total

parameters or indicators used, respectively., which are monitored by partner countries in the

Mediterranean Sea. _________________________________________________________ 76




Black Sea. _________________________________________________________________ 77

Figure 4.3.3: Number of indicators per biodiversity component in ascending order and the

indicator status: A) - Black Sea and B) Mediterranean (Source: http://www.devotes-

project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/D3-1_Existing-biodiversity-indicators.pdf) ______ 78

Figure 4.4.1: Water column habitats, phytoplankton: A) Maps of monitoring stations, B)

Density of sampling (number of stations within each grid cell), C) Frequency of sampling

(average frequency of the stations within each cell) and D) Sampling effort (number of

stations X average frequency of sampling) _______________________________________ 80

Fig.4.4.2: Seabed habitats, phytobenthos. A) Maps of monitoring stations, B) Density of

sampling (number of stations within each grid cell), C) Frequency of sampling (average

frequency of the stations within each cell) and D) Sampling effort (number of stations X

average frequency of sampling) _______________________________________________ 81

Funded by the European Commission – DG Environment iv

List of tables Table 2.1: METADATA as defined in WG DIKE Monitoring under MSFD recommendations for

Implementation Report (May, 2013). ___________________________________________ 17

Table 3.1: Inventory and critical assessment of international and regional regulations (A-J) 21

Table 3.2: Inventory and critical assessment of international and regional regulations (K-A) 22

Table 3.3: Inventory and critical assessment of Regional regulations: the Barcelona

Convention. _______________________________________________________________ 24

Table 3.4: Inventory and critical assessment of International regulations: the Bucharest

Convention. _______________________________________________________________ 26

Table 3.5: Economic and social assessment of the Mediterranean and Black Seas drivers (A-K)

_________________________________________________________________________ 29

Table 3.6: Economic and social assessment of the Mediterranean and Black Seas drivers (L-X)

_________________________________________________________________________ 29

Table 3.7: Economic and social assessment of the Mediterranean and Black Seas MSs. The

Case of Italy. ______________________________________________________________ 31

Table 3.8: Economic and social assessment of Mediterranean and Black Seas MSs. The case of

Romania. _________________________________________________________________ 32

Table 3.9: Human Activities and links with the MSFD Pressure Indicators _______________ 35

Table 3.10: Human Activities, Future Trends and Future Pressures ____________________ 35

Table3.11: MSFD Criteria and Indicators regarding Environmental Pressures ____________ 36

Table 3.12: Future trends in human activities, current pressures and future pressures resulting

from human activities in the Mediterranean and Black Seas. Land-based activities/ industries.

Agriculture and Forestry run-off. _______________________________________________ 38

Table 3.13: Monitoring gaps and needs according to the ongoing surveillance programmes 39

Table 3.14: Monitoring needs for D2 ____________________________________________ 42

Table 3.15: Monitoring needs for D8 and D9 _____________________________________ 43

Table 4.3.1: Monitoring Programmes coverage of the MSFD biological components (D1, D2,

D3, D4, D6) by MS.__________________________________________________________ 47

Table 4.3.2: Monitoring Programmes coverage of nutrients, hydrographic, contaminants,

Funded by the European Commission – DG Environment v

marine litter, energy and noise indicators (D5, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) by MS. _________ 49

Table 4.3.3: Monitoring of biotic components descriptors (D1, D2, D3, D4, D6) compliance to

existing EU Directives and RSC - Bulgaria ________________________________________ 51

Table 4.3.4: Monitoring of nutrients, hydrographic, contaminants, marine litter, energy and

noise indicators (D5, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) in compliance to the existing EU Directives

and RSC- Bulgaria __________________________________________________________ 53

Table 4.3.5: Monitoring of the biotic components descriptors (D1, D2, D3, D4, D6) in

compliance to the existing EU Directives and RSC - Greece __________________________ 55


noise indicators (D5, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) compliance to existing EU Directives and RSC -

Greece ___________________________________________________________________ 57


existing EU Directives and RSC –Italy ___________________________________________ 59


noise indicators (D5, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) compliance to existing EU Directives and RSC-

Italy _____________________________________________________________________ 61


existing EU Directives and RSC –Romania ________________________________________ 63



Romania _________________________________________________________________ 65


existing EU Directives and RSC –Turkey/Black Sea _________________________________ 67


noise indicators (D5, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) compliance to existing EU Directives and RSC –

Turkey/Black Sea ___________________________________________________________ 69


existing EU Directives and RSC –Turkey/Aegean/Mediterranean Sea ___________________ 71


noise indicators (D5, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) compliance to existing EU Directives and RSC –

Funded by the European Commission – DG Environment vi

Turkey/Aegean/Mediterranean Sea ____________________________________________ 73

Table 4.6.1: Descriptors gap scores (0 – no gap, 0.5 – partial gap, 1 = major gap) ________ 83

Funded by the European Commission – DG Environment 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The deliverable comprises of the results of the Activity 1 of the project IRIS-SES –

Analysis of the monitoring programmes carried on the framework of the

European/Regional/National in relation to MSFD requirements. Initially, this activity had

three tasks (T1.1a-The Inventory, T1.1b-The Database, T1.2-Analysis of pressures and T1.3-

Assessment of the contribution of existing monitoring programmes to meet MSFD needs).

The first Steering Committee decided to move T1.3 to Activity 2 - Integrating scales of

monitoring with those of processes to be monitored.

The first IRIS-SES deliverable consists of the catalogue (T1.1a) of the monitoring

programmes carried on six MS: from Black Sea (Romania, Bulgaria) and from Mediterranean

Sea (Greece, Cyprus, Italy, Spain) and one candidate country, Turkey (with monitoring both

in the Black Sea and Mediterranean Sea). The catalogue has 7 Excel Files comprising of 17

sheets grouped as follows: D1,4,6 – Birds; D1,4,6 – Mammals,;D1,4,6 – Fish; D1,4,6 – Seabed

habitats Phytobenthos;D1,4,6 – Seabed habitat Zoobenthos; D1,4,6 – Water column habitats

Phytoplankton; D1,4,6 – Water column habitat Zooplankton; D2-Non-Indigenous species;

D3-Commercial Fish and Shellfish, D5 – Eutrophication; D7 – hydrographical changes; D8 –

contaminants in water; D8-contaminants in sediments; D8-contaminants in biota; D9-

contaminants in seafood; D10-marine litter; D11-energy&noise. All the information from the

catalogue was aggregated into one (meta) database (T1.1b), consisting of one Excel file,

planned to be compatible with larger oceanographic/environmental databases like

SeaDataNet and EMODNET through the use of INSPIRE and SeaDataNet standards.

The analysis of pressures (T1.2) consists of the Inventory and critical assessment of

international and regional legislation developed under two Excel sheets which include the

review of significant regional and international regulatory bodies which may contain

monitoring obligations, and which may be linked to monitoring programmes already

implemented by the countries beneficiaries of the IRIS-SES Project. Contact and consultation

have been envisaged and made with Regional Activity Centers for the Mediterranean Action

Plan (REMPEC, RAC-SPA) as well as with MedPol Programme, all responsible for the

implementation of several of the Protocols to the Barcelona Convention. Similarly, in the


context of the Bucharest Convention of the Black Sea, contact has been made with the Black

Sea Commission.

Another content of the analysis of pressures is the socio-economic assessment of

human activities, analysis of current and future environmental pressures, and gap analysis

delivered through an excel file with three sheets containing:

- socio-economic characterization of principal human activities influencing marine

ecosystems among Mediterranean and Black Sea countries (provide information on the

status quo of human activities –drivers- impacting coastal and marine ecosystems of the

IRIS-SES beneficiary countries, which border the eastern and southern Black Sea and the

Mediterranean northern and eastern rim. To this end, official descriptive data and indicators

characterizing the main socioeconomic activities have been gathered and presented). The

analysis has been carried out for Bulgaria, Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Romania Slovenia,

and Spain, according to the MSFD Initial Assessment delivered to the EC. In contrast, data

are lacking for Malta, Croatia and Turkey regarding the analysis of economic activities

influencing their marine environment. The socioeconomic section of Malta’s IA is still not

publicly available. Croatia, which recently accessed the EC, will join the second cycle of the

MSFD. Finally, Turkey, as EU candidate state, has no reporting obligations on European

directives.

- future trends in human activities, current pressures and future pressures resulting from

human activities in the Mediterranean and Black Seas concerns future trends expected for

socioeconomic activities in the Mediterranean and Black Seas, as well as current and future

expected environmental pressures, and links with impacts. Future trends according to a BAU

Scenario for the principal socioeconomic activities directly or closely linked to marine

environments are detailed subsequently. These are provided for: Agriculture and forestry

run-off; Coastal urbanization and development; Damming (Human demand for water

resources); Tourism frequentation and yachting; Desalination/ water abstraction; Land

claim, coastal defence; Port operations; Submarine cable and pipeline operations; Shipping;

Hydrocarbon extraction; Marine-based renewable energy generation; Fisheries and

Aquaculture; Marine Research and Survey.


- considerations on the need for monitoring data to support future assessments and

managerial actions - identifies data gaps and at highlights monitoring needs regarding

environmental pressures, in order to guide monitoring efforts and support the development

of coherent future joint monitoring programmes. The assessment of data gaps/ monitoring

needs has been carried out in the third Excel sheet. Monitoring gaps regarding

environmental pressures are in line with what has been observed for most of the data gaps

on impacts and states of marine environments in the Black Sea and Mediterranean seas.

Most of the MSFD Descriptors and related pressure indicators appear at least partially

described/ addressed by one or more parameters measured by ongoing monitoring

programmes. However, the partial description appears insufficient to state the magnitude of

pressures impacting marine ecosystems over the jurisdiction to which the MSFD applies.

According to what decided during the first steering committee, the assessment the

contribution of existing monitoring programmes to meet MSFD needs reported was

developed within Task 2.1 (rather than within Task 1.3). Albeit the metadataset has not yet

been completed from all MS, a preliminary assessment of existent monitoring platforms and

station was conducted to meet the previously set deadlines (for five countries – Bulgaria,

Greece, Romania, Italy and Turkey). When data will be fully available, Chapter 7 will be

further updated/completed and fully delivered (est. end of month 10).


Summary of the First deliverable

Activity 1 Task Action (Sub-task) Parts of the deliverable

An

alys

is o

f th

e m

on

ito

rin

g p

rog

ram

mes

car

ried

on

th

e fr

amew

ork

of

Eu

rop

ean

/Reg

ion

al/N

atio

nal

leg

isla

tio

n in

rel

atio

n t

o M

SF

D

req

uir

emen

ts

1.Inventory of the monitoring programmes

1a.The inventory Description of the catalogue 7 Excel files – MS monitoring programmes (Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Spain, Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey) (Monitoring Programme Inventory_country.xlsx)

1b. The Database Description of the database 1 Excel file – the (meta) database (meta database_ IRIS_SES A1.xls)

2.Analysis of pressures 1. An inventory and critical assessment of the legislation regulating the marine environment monitoring of Mediterranean and Black Seas, with a focus on supra national legal instruments (EU directives and Regulations, Regional Sea Conventions and their Protocols, other Regional and International Conventions).

1 Excel file (IRIS_SES_Analysis_Pressures_1.2.1.xls), containing two sheets (Regional Convention-Legislation and International Conventions)

2. Gathering and assessing data on human activities and associated pressures and impacts to the marine environment.

Description of the socio-economic assessment of human activities, analysis of current and future environmental pressures, and gap analysis (.docx and .pdf) 1 Excel file (IRIS_SES_AnalysisPressures_1.2.2_1.2.4.xls) containing three sheets (1.2.2) ESA Black & Med Seas; (1.2.3) Env. Pressures,Future Trends; and (1.2.4) Monitoring gaps).

3. Assessing future trends of the human activities leading to future environmental pressures.

4. Considering the need for monitoring data (i.e. addressing data gaps) to support future assessments and managerial actions.

5. Organization of a stakeholder workshop (link with Activity 5) in collaboration with the Mediterranean Action Plan’s EcAp Correspondence

To be organized in the next reporting period


Activity 1 Task Action (Sub-task) Parts of the deliverable

Group on Monitoring (COR-MON).

3. Assess the contribution of existing monitoring programmes to meet the MSFD needs.*

Task integrated to activity 2 after the first Steering Committee decision

Description of the preliminary assessment. Full assessment will be carried out under activity 2, and reported in the second IRIS deliverable

Parts of the deliverable might be subjected to content updates and modifications

throughout the course of the Project, as stated in the Terms of Reference.


1. INTRODUCTION

The present deliverable results mainly from Activity 1 - Analysis of the monitoring

programs carried on the framework of European/Regional/National legislation in relation to

the MSFD requirements of the project «Integrated Regional Implementation Strategy in the

South European Seas (IRIS-SES) », with aims:

- To catalogue the current monitoring programs in the Mediterranean and Black Sea

(SES), in order to assess their contribution to meet the requirements of MSFD. As a

draft, the catalogue will first incorporate the input of the project partners involved

into it, grouped into two Regional Sea Conventions (Barcelona and Bucharest

Conventions) and followed, if possible, with updated information from partners

and other MSs countries (Task 1.1a).

- To design a (meta) database with the information from Task 1a. As a draft, the meta

database will contain the input by the project partners according to Task 1.1a. The

meta database will be updated, if possible, as the project progresses, with

information from partners and other MSs countries (Task 1.1b).

- To analyze the pressures by reviewing the data availability, regarding the range of

pressures and associated human activities (including those under license

requirements) related to the needs for an integrated monitoring of pressures (Task

1.2).

- To assess the contribution of existing monitoring programmes to meet the MSFD

needs. According to the first Steering Committee decision, this task was

integrated in Activity 2 – Integrated scales of monitoring with those processes

that need to be monitored. However, the present deliverable contains preliminary

information based on assessment of the catalogue’s programmes (Task 1.3); the full

assessment will be delivered under activity 2.


2. DESIGN OF THE CATALOGUE

The design of the catalogue took into consideration all MSFD descriptors, which were

monitored only in EU and associate MSs involved in the project. The reporting sheets have

been developed based on DIKE DG/2013/02 revised document “Reporting on monitoring

programmes under MSFD Article 11” prepared by DG ENV D2 and MRAG on 18/06/2013 and

the parameters sheets developed under the HELCOM (MORE project), and modified

according to IRIS-SES needs. The compiled draft sheets were sent to partners for

consultation. After few changes, the final sheets were sent to be filled (early January 2014).

The IRIS-SES project received the following information to compile into the catalogue

and the meta database:

Cyprus France Greece Italy Spain Turkey Bulgaria Romania Turkey

UNEP/MAP BSC

Descriptors 1,4,6 - Birds

Descriptors 1,4,6 - Mammals

Descriptors 1,4,6 - Fish

Descriptors 1,4,6 – Seabed habitats Phytobenthos

Descriptors 1,4,6 – Seabed habitats Zoobenthos

Descriptors 1,4,6 –Water column habitats Phytoplankton

Descriptors 1,4,6 –Water column habitats Zooplankton

D2 – Non Indigenous Species

D3 – Commercial Fish and Shellfish

D5 - Eutrophication

D7 - Hydrographical changes

D8 - Contaminants in water


Cyprus France Greece Italy Spain Turkey Bulgaria Romania Turkey

D8 - Contaminants in sediments

D8 - Contaminants in biota

D9 - Contaminants in seafood

D10 - Marine Litter D11 - Energy&Noise

Experts (other than partners) / Organizations (other than partners) / Projects contacted and

information received to achieve the scope is according to the following table:

Contact person Comments (type of information received , etc.)

HELCOM Maria Laamanen Professional

secretary

Contact person for MORE project

HELCOM

MORE project

Manuel Frias Vega Coordinator Sheets used for the monitoring programs overview in

Baltic Sea

UNEP/MAP Gyorgy Gurban Ecosystem Approach

Project Manager

Secretariat’s Gap Analysis on ongoing Monitoring

Activities - report

Black Sea

Commission

Valeria Abaza PMA officer BSIMAP

Review of information collected by Plan Bleu regarding

Bucharest Convention, its related Protocols and Strategic

Action Plan.

MISIS project Laura Boicenco Coordinator Diagnostic Report II – information about monitoring

programs in Black Sea

EMBLAS

project

Violeta Velikova Expert Discussions about the inclusion of Georgia, Russia and

Ukraine. Due to the specific (related to MSFD) input it was

decided not to include non-EU countries, but to receive

information from EMBLAS regarding monitoring programs

of GE, RU and UK

BALSAM Johanna Karhu Coordinator Information about template for the inventory related to

seabirds


2.1. THE CATALOGUE

The catalogue consists of Excel files for each country (attached xls monitoring

programme inventory per country) from the two RSCs (Barcelona Convention and Bucharest

Convention). Each country file consists of 17 worksheets developed to answer to Art.11

(preparation of monitoring programmes) of the MSFD requirements. Each worksheet is

grouped as follows:

General information columns

RSC Country Organization1 Sub-basin

Area Spatial

coverage2

Type of monitoring

(Pressures or State)

Activities associated

to pressures

Descriptor to adress3

Proposed frequency

4

Frequency in 2012

1) Responsible for monitoring 2) Terrestrial part of MS, transitional waters (WFD), coastal waters (WFD), territorial waters, EEZ, Continental shelf (beyond EEZ), Beyond MS marine waters

3) Other than the reported Descriptor, as displayed in the first table of this chapter. 4) Every 6 years, every 3 years, every 2 years, annually, biannually, quarterly, monthly, fortnightly, weekly, daily, hourly, continual, one-off, as needed, irregularly, unknown

Most of the questions arising in this part were linked to the term “proposed

frequency”. It was developed taking into consideration the mandatory frequencies due to

different legislations or other relevant country obligations.

Parameters columns (see Annex I)

No. Worksheet Variables Description

1. Descriptors 1,4,6 - Birds

Month(s)/Season(s)

Start of data series

Details

Key species

Type of population5

breeding, wintering,

moulting, etc.

N individuals6

X if yes, blank if no N nesting pairs

7



Reproductive success8

Additional variables9

Type/name of additional

variables

2. Descriptors 1,4,6 - Mammals

Month(s)

Species

Details


N individuals6 X if yes, blank if no

N pups/calves6



variables

3. Descriptors 1,4,6 - Fish

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Sampling depth interval

Month

Season

Species/Community


Species level taxonomy5

X if yes, blank if no

Relative abundance6

Length7

Relative biomass8

Sex9

Age10

Maturation age11

Stomach content12



variables

4.

Descriptors 1,4,6 – Seabed

habitats

Phytobenthos

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Month/Season




Species biomass6

Species coverage7

Total biomass8

Total coverage9

Maximum depth distribution of



communities10

Substrate type11


Type/name of additional variables

5.

Descriptors 1,4,6 – Seabed

habitats

Zoobenthos

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Month/Season



X if yes, blank if no Relative abundance

6

Relative biomass7

Size distribution of dominant species8



6.

Descriptors 1,4,6 –Water column

habitats

Phytoplankton

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Month

Season



X if yes, blank if no Relative abundance6

Relative biomass7



7.

Descriptors 1,4,6 –Water column

habitats

Zooplankton

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Month

Season




Relative abundance6

Relative biomass7

Developmental stages8

Sex9



8. D2 – Non Indigenous Species

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Month

Season

Species/ Community


Species level taxonomy5 X if yes, blank if no



Relative abundance6

Relative biomass7

Pathway of spreading 8


9. D3 – Commercial Fish and

Shellfish

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Sampling depth interval

Month

Season

Species/Community




Relative abundance6

Length7

Relative biomass8 Sex

9

Age10

Maturation age

11

Stomach content12



variables

10. D5 - Eutrophication

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Bottom depth

Surface/water column

Month/Season


PO4_FREQ5


TP_FREQ6

DOP_FREQ7

SIO4_FREQ8

TNOx_FREQ9

NO2_FREQ10

NH4_FREQ

11

TN_FREQ12

DON_FREQ

13

POC_FREQ14

DOC_FREQ15

HumicSubs_FREQ

16

Chla_FREQ17

Dissolved Oxygen_FREQ

18

Secchi_FREQ19

Additional

20 Type/name of additional

variables

11. D7 - Hydrographical changes

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Bottom depth



Surface/water column

Month/Season


Tem_FREQ5


Sal_FREQ7

Curr_FREQ9

pH_FREQ11

Alkal_FREQ

13

Additional15


variables

12. D8 - Contaminants in water

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Bottom depth

Sampling depth

PAH5


PCBs6

TBT7

DDT and metabolites8

HCH9

Pb10

Cd

11

Hg12

Additional13


variables

13. D8 - Contaminants in sediments

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Bottom depth

PAH5


PCBs6

TBT7


HCH9

Pb10

Cd

11

Hg12

Additional13


variables

14. D8 - Contaminants in biota

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Bottom depth

Species

Organ

PAH5

X if yes, blank if no PCBs

6

TBT7




HCH9

Pb10

Cd11

Hg12

Effects13

Additional14


variables

15. D9 - Contaminants in seafood

Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Bottom depth

Species

Organ

PAH5


PCBs6

TBT7


HCH9

Pb10

Cd11

Hg12

Legislation1

Additional14


variables

16. D10 - Marine Litter

Amount of beach litter5


Amount of litter in the water6

Amount of litter in the sea bottom7

Distribution of litter8

Litter ingested by marine animals9

Additional10


variables

17. D11 - Energy&Noise

Type of activity5

X if yes, blank if no No. of days6

Duration: short or long lasting7

Additional8


variables


Common information about data

Method1

5 QA16

Platfrom/ Resource17

Sharing resources for JMPs18

Links to other monitoring programmes19

Data policy20

Reported to21

Web links22

Comment23

15) Method of collection, survey, sensors, etc. 16) QA=Quality Assurance as BEQUALM, COMBINE, ICES, IODE-IOC, JGOFSL1, QUASIMEME, regional standard, national standard, other, unknown 17) Ship, sensors, remote sensing, etc.

18) Yes/No, If YES what resource and spatial coverage 19) Bathing Water Directive, Common Fisheries Policy-Data Collection framework, Habitats Directive, Birds Directive, Nitrates Directive, UUTW Directive, WFD, Shellfish Directive, Barcelona Convention, Bucharest Convention, Other (specify) 20) Availability of data

21) EIONET, RSC, etc.

22) Links to web pages with relevant information 23) Nature of data (raw, processed, products, models) any other relevant comments for the purpose of the MSFD needs

So far, the catalogue provides a detailed list of monitoring programmes undertaken

by some Member States (Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Spain, Bulgaria, Romania) and one candidate

state (Turkey) in the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea, related to all descriptors of the

MSFD. The catalogue considers all the information relevant to the MSFD Αrt.11 reporting.


2.2. DESIGN OF THE DATABASE

The aim here is to create a meta database with information from

national/international monitoring programmes, and different EU projects (PERSEUS, MISIS,

ODEMM, DEVOTES etc.). Through the information collected in the meta database, the IRIS-

SES project aims to identify regions/sub-regions where countries can collaborate and/or

create integrated monitoring programmes. Additionally, with the aid of the meta database,

each country’s monitoring programmes having different needs could be combined into one,

in order to achieve integration and better resource efficiency.

The meta database is planned to be compatible with the larger

oceanographic/environmental databases like SeaDataNet and EMODNET through the use of

INSPIRE and SeaDataNet standards. This way related information can be imported from the

mentioned databases, and provide a better opportunity for increased resource efficiency.

During the creation of the meta database, the WG DIKE recommendations for the

implementations of the monitoring under MSFD are used as a guide, as well for the

formation of the Inventories. However, these recommendations focus mainly on data rather

than metadata (Table 2.1). Therefore, the meta database includes more information than the

DIKE recommendation, while it summarizes the Inventory sheets discussed in the Catalogue

section above.


Table 2.1: METADATA as defined in WG DIKE Monitoring under MSFD recommendations for

Implementation Report (May, 2013)1.

The Meta database can be utilized in several ways, filtering the dataset/programmes

under different regions or parameters, as well as according to the descriptors or EC Directives

which it serves. To be able to determine the transboundaries or possible common

implementations, the bounding boxes will serve as the initial intersection for programmes.

Once identified that/if the programmes carry common monitoring locations, then the

project will proceed to other monitoring requirements, which can be matched/modified, so

that an integrated monitoring programme between several member states can be

implemented.

1 Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) Common Implementation Strategy, Working Group on Data, Information and Knowledge Exchange (WG DIKE). DIKE DG/2013/02.

Directive Directive text

Questions for reporting Art. 12 criterion

Ab

ou

t

[METADATA]

Question 4 Metadata about each programme:

Programme name, reference code

Description

Year started (or due to start); year ended (if appropriate)

Geographical coverage via a GIS polygon or grid (as per reporting on assessment areas for Art. 8) and by reference to the four zones in Table 1 of the "concept paper"

Which organization within the MS is responsible for the establishment and the implementation of the programme in that country


2.3. THE META DATABASE

The meta database content columns and their description /explanation are reported

in details below (see xls meta database attached):

Database Column Description Relation to

standards

Identifier Unique identifier for the record INSPIRE

Region / Sub-region / Sea Region, sub-region or sea where the metadata is identified INSPIRE

Country Country of origin INSPIRE (member state)

Responsible Organization Responsible organization holding the datasets INSPIRE

RSC Regional Sea Convention Additional

Related Descriptor(s)

Descriptors related to the dataset Additional

Related Directive(s)

EC Directives related to the dataset in the end that will serve towards which directives

Additional

Parameter Groups Parameters monitored in the dataset Additional

Start Date Start date of the monitoring programme INSPIRE/SDN (Temporal Extent)

End Date End date of the monitoring programme INSPIRE/SDN (Temporal Extent)

Frequency Frequency of the monitoring Additional

Westbound Longitude West boundary of the bounding box INSPIRE (Bounding box)

Eastbound Longitude East boundary of the bounding box INSPIRE (Bounding box)

Southbound Latitude South boundary of the bounding box INSPIRE (Bounding box)

Northbound Latitude North boundary of the bounding box INSPIRE (Bounding box)

Spatial Coverage The spatial domain covered with the datasets providing information for WFD or MSFD related regions

Additional

Programme Status Continuity of the programme

Topic Category (INSPIRE Theme)

INSPIRE Theme of the dataset INSPIRE


Database Column Description Relation to standards

Monitoring Activity Rationale

Why the monitoring is conducted SDN

Pressures Associated Associated pressures that can be determined through the dataset

Additional

Data Access Policy Policy to access to the datasets SDN


3. ANALYSIS OF PRESSURES

3.1. Introduction

The analysis of pressures is scheduled in IRIS-SES under Activity 1 – Task 2 (Task 1.2).

In the view of designing joint monitoring programmes (JMP) under the framework of the

MSFD, the present task aims to develop a review of the available data on pressures exerted

on marine and coastal ecosystems of the Mediterranean and Black seas. Furthermore, it

intends to provide an analysis of the main human activities (including those under license

requirements), which affect the marine and coastal environments, by reference to the needs

for an integrated monitoring of pressures.

Several subtasks have been defined to undertake this analysis:

1.2.1 An inventory and critical assessment of the legislation regulating the marine

environment monitoring of the Mediterranean and Black Seas, which focuses

on supra national legal instruments (EU directives and Regulations, Regional

Sea Conventions and their Protocols, other Regional and International

Conventions).

1.2.2 Gathering and assessing data on human activities and associated pressures in

the coastal and marine environment and the impacts in them.

1.2.3 Assessing future trends of the human activities leading to future

environmental pressures.

1.2.4 Considering the need for monitoring data (i.e. addressing data gaps) to

support future assessments and managerial actions.

1.2.5 Organization of a stakeholder workshop (linked with Activity 5) in connection

with the Mediterranean Action Plan’s EcAp Correspondence Group on

Monitoring (COR-MON).

All these subtasks are part of the deliverable (see below) and they could be subjected to

content updates and modifications throughout the course of the Project, as stated in the

Terms of Reference.


3.2. INVENTORY AND CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF INTERNATIONAL AND

REGIONAL REGULATIONS

The work (under subtask 1.2.1) is developed under two excel worksheets (named:

Regional Convention-Legislation and International Conventions), which include the review of

the significant regional and international regulatory bodies that may contain monitoring

obligations, and which may be linked to monitoring programmes already implemented by

the countries beneficiaries of the IRIS-SES Project (see xls IRIS

_SES_Analysis_Pressures_1.2.1.xls attached). Therefore, their requirements concerning

monitoring of pressures on marine ecosystems and the reporting obligations envisaged,

when existing, are to be identified and collected for each legislation body.

The analysis of the regulatory bodies is carried out as follows: The first columns A-J

presented in Table 3.1 refer to general information describing each regulatory text, including

its name and its scope of application (e.g. MAP countries, BSC countries, European, regional

or international) as well as its status (signature, ratification, entry into force) with an

exclusive focus on the countries considered under the IRIS-SES Project (i.e. Bulgaria, Cyprus,

France, Greece, Italy, Romania, Spain and Turkey) and, if possible, another MS countries (i.e.

Croatia, Malta and Slovenia).

Table 3.1: Inventory and critical assessment of international and regional regulations (A-J)

A B C D E F G H I J

Legislation name Scope of

application Status

Monitoring reference

If Y, Article

ref.

Extract of

article

Provision for reporting or related procedures

Acronym Full name Text Status Countries* Y / N Text Text Y / N Ref. Articles/ Key words

Subsequent columns (Table 3.2) provide details on the monitoring programmes as

envisaged in the reviewed regulatory texts. Information and extracts concerning references

to the monitoring or to the establishment of monitoring programmes appearing in the texts


are reported. In addition, provisions for monitoring reporting and organizations in charge of

compiling monitoring reports (when existing) are also identified.

Table 3.2: Inventory and critical assessment of international and regional regulations (K-A)

K L M & N O P Q R S

If Y, Organization in charge of reporting / Repository for

reporting

Critical assessment of reporting (effective or

not)

Type of Monitorin

g (Pressure or State)

Associated MSFD descriptors

Associated EcAp EOs

Activities associated

to pressures

Comments

Text, URL

Other developed legislation

Text Key words Key words Key words Text Text

Finally, the following columns (Table 3.2) are associated to the MSFD descriptors –

and to the EcAp’s Ecological Objectives where appropriate, which are related with the object

of the regulations. Human activities, which may be exerting pressures on the marine

ecosystem components subject of the regulatory bodies, are listed as well, according to

Annex 4 of the Commission Staff Working Paper (Relationship between the Initial

Assessment of Marine Waters and the Criteria for GES )2.

The following texts have been considered and examined:

Regional Sea

Conventions

The Barcelona Convention, its 7 complementary Protocols, and related Guideline

documents.

The Bucharest Convention, its 3 complementary Protocols and its Strategic Action Plan.

European Directives Water Framework Directive and subsequent amendments (Decision 2455/2001/EC,

Directive 2008/32/EC)

Environmental Quality Standards Directive

Habitats Directive

Birds Directive

Bathing Waters Directive

Urban Waste Water Directive

Nitrates Directive

Common Fisheries Policy: Council Regulation Nº199/2008 and Commission Decision

2003/93/EU

2 Commission Staff Working Paper, Relationship between the Initial Assessment of Marine Waters and the Criteria for GES, 2011.


Invasive Alien Species Directive Proposal

ICZM and MSP Directive Proposal

International

Conventions

The Convention on Biological Diversity and complementary Protocols (Cartagena and

Nagoya Protocols)

United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea

United Nations Fish Stocks Agreement

London Convention and Protocol on Marine Pollution and Dumping on Wastes and Other

Matter

International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and

Sediments

MARPOL Convention

Bonn Convention

International Convention on the Control of Harmful Antifouling Systems on Ships

Regional Conventions European Landscape Convention

ACCOBAMS Agreement

Contact and consultation have been envisaged and made in relation with Regional

Activity Centers for the Mediterranean Action Plan (REMPEC, RAC-SPA) as well as, with the

MedPol Programme, both responsible for the implementation of several of the Protocols for

the Barcelona Convention. Similarly, in the framework of the Bucharest Convention of the

Black Sea, contact has been made with the Black Sea Commission.

An extract of the results is available in Table 3.3 and Table 3.4, corresponding to the

review and analysis of texts of the Barcelona Convention and the Bucharest Convention,

respectively. Full analysis of the results is presented in the attached xls (IRIS

_SES_Analysis_Pressures_1.2.1.xls).

24

Table 3.3: Inventory and critical assessment of Regional regulations: the Barcelona Convention.


application Status

Monit. ref.

If Y, Article

ref. Extract of article or text

Provision for reporting or related

procedures

If Y, Organism in

charge of collecting reporting / Repository

for reporting


Critical assessment of

reporting (effective or not)

Type of Monitoring (Pressure or State)

MSFD descriptor

s

EcAp EOs

Activities associated to pressures

Acronym Full name Free text Status Countries* Y / N Text Free text Y / N

Ref. Articles/ Key words

Text, URL Text Y / N

Text Key words Key words Key words

Barcelona Convention

Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea Against Pollution, 1976 - amended 1995

Med. Sea Area

In force in Feb 1978 and July 2004.

All IRIS-SES Med countries

Y Art. 12.

1. The CPs shall endeavour to establish, in close cooperation with the international bodies which they consider competent, complementary or joint programmes including, as appropriate, programmes at the bilateral or multilateral levels, for pollution monitoring in the Mediterranean Sea Area and shall endeavour to establish a pollution monitoring system for that Area. 2. For this purpose, the CPs shall designate the competent authorities responsible for pollution monitoring within areas under their national jurisdiction and participate as far as practicable in international arrangements for pollution monitoring in areas beyond national jurisdiction. 3. The CPs undertake to cooperate in the formulation, adoption and implementation of such

Y

Not specifically set for monitoring in the Convention text. "The CPs shall transmit to the Organization reports on the measures adopted in implementation of this Convention and of Protocols to which they are Parties, in such form and at such intervals as the meetings of CPs may determine" (Art. 20).

Organization (UNEP-MAP Secretariat)

Decision IG. 19/4 Testing MAP Effectiveness Indicators: "To provide information on the status of the implementation of Article 12 at the regional level on public awareness and participation as an important tool to achieve effective implementation of the Convention and its Protocols (by adopting several indicators and targeted trends): 6) Ratio of the number of the CPs that publish assessment reports or data regarding the state of environment of the Mediterranean sea area, including its coastal zone over the total number of CPs - Targeted trend : increase". Decision IG 17/3 Reporting Format for the Implementation of

Y

UNEP-MAP Secretariat and Centres.

Pressure / State: Pollution monitoring in the Mediterranean Sea Area

5, 8, 9 5, 9

Food Production: Aquaculture Extraction of non-living resources: Marine mining; Dredging; Desalination/ water abstraction. Energy Production: Marine-based renewable energy generation; Marine hydrocarbon extraction; Transport: Shipping; Waste disposal: Solid waste disposal incl. dredged material; Storage of gasses; Military: Dumping of unwanted munitions; Land-based activities/ industries: Coastal, riverine and atmospheric inputs from land: - industrial discharges and emissions - agricultural and forestry run-off and emissions - municipal waste water discharge.

25


application Status

Monit. ref.

If Y, Article


Provision for reporting or related

procedures

If Y, Organism in


for reporting


Critical assessment of

reporting (effective or not)

Type of Monitoring (Pressure or State)

MSFD descriptor

s

EcAp EOs


Acronym Full name Free text Status Countries* Y / N Text Free text Y / N

Ref. Articles/ Key words



annexes to this Convention as may be required to prescribe common procedures and standards for pollution monitoring.

the Barcelona Convention and its Protocols (Almeria, 2008)

26

Table 3.4: Inventory and critical assessment of International regulations: the Bucharest Convention.

Legislation name Scope of applicati

on Status

Monit Ref.

If Y, Article


Provision for reporting or

related procedures

If Y, Organism in


for reporting


Critical assessment of reporting

(effective or not)

Type of Monitoring

(Pressure or State)

MSFD descriptor

s

EcAp EOs


Acronym Full name Free text Status Countries Y / N Text Free text Y / N

Ref. Art/ Key words



Bucharest Convention

The Convention on the Protection of Black Sea Against Pollution, 1992

Black Sea Area

In force in Jan-March 1994

All IRIS-SES BS countries

Y Art. 15

Scientific and technical cooperation and monitoring 3. The CPs shall, inter alia, establish through the Commission and, where appropriate, in cooperation with international organizations they consider to be competent, complementary or joint monitoring programmes covering all sources of pollution and shall establish a pollution monitoring system for the Black Sea including, as appropriate, programmes as bilateral or multilateral level for observing, measuring, evaluating and analyzing the risks or effects of pollution of the marine environment of the Black Sea. 7. Each Contracting Party shall designate the competent national authority responsible for scientific activities and monitoring.

N Black Sea Commission

Black Sea Commission, Secretariat (Art. 18)

Pressure and State: "…covering all sources of pollution (pressures) (...) evaluating and analyzing effects of pollution in the marine environment (state).

5, 8, 9, 10, 11

NA

Extraction of living resources: Fisheries including recreational fisheries; Seaweed and other sea-based food harvesting; Extraction of genetic resources/ bioprospecting/ maerl. Food Production: Aquaculture Man-made Structures (incl. construction phase): Coastal defence, land claim; Port operations; Placement & operations of offshore struct. (other than energy); Submarine cables and pipelines. Extraction of non-living resources: Marine mining; Dredging; Desalination/ water abstraction. Energy Production: Marine-based renewable energy generation; Marine hydrocarbon extraction; Transport: Shipping; Waste disposal: Solid waste disposal incl. dredge material; Storage of gasses; Tourism and recreation: Tourism and recreation incl. yachting; Research and survey: Marine research, survey and educational activ. Military: Defence - recurring defence operations; Dumping of unwanted munitions;

27

Legislation name Scope of applicati

on Status

Monit Ref.

If Y, Article


Provision for reporting or

related procedures

If Y, Organism in


for reporting


Critical assessment of reporting

(effective or not)

Type of Monitoring

(Pressure or State)

MSFD descriptor

s

EcAp EOs


Acronym Full name Free text Status Countries Y / N Text Free text Y / N

Ref. Art/ Key words



Land-based activities/ industries: Coastal, riverine and atmospheric inputs from land: - Industrial discharges and emissions - agricultural and forestry run-off and emissions - municipal waste water discharge.


3.3. SOCIO-ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT OF HUMAN ACTIVITIES, ANALYSIS

OF CURRENT AND FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL PRESSURES, AND

GAP ANALYSIS

Subtasks 1.2.2 – 1.2.4 are directly related to the driver-pressure-impact analysis in

the context of the marine environment of the EU Member States and the EU Candidate

State, as considered in the Project. The objective is to provide assessment of the current

available data regarding the activities, which are directly or indirectly linked to the marine

environment and, thus, applying pressure on marine ecosystems and having an impact on

them. The driver-pressure-impact assessment is presented under a three-sheet Excel file

that can be part of the Project’s database/data collection.

3.3.1. Socioeconomic characterization of the principal human

activities influencing marine ecosystems among Mediterranean

and Black Sea countries

The first Excel sheet (subtask 1.2.2) ESA Black & Med Seas in IRIS-

SES_Analysis_Pressures_1.2.2_1.2.4.xls, being in the deliverables second part, includes an

“Economic and social assessment of the Mediterranean and Black Sea drivers”.

The objective of this subtask is to provide information on the status quo of human

activities – drivers - impacting on the coastal and marine ecosystems of the IRIS-SES

beneficiary countries, which border to the eastern and southern Black Sea and the

Mediterranean northern and eastern rim. At this point, official descriptive data and

indicators characterizing the main socioeconomic activities have been gathered and

presented.

The information collected intends to reflect the socioeconomic context of the two

basins. Firstly, in order to give an insight of the magnitude of the activity, a series of

descriptive indicators are provided, such as sector’s production and infrastructure.

Furthermore, indicators on the sector’s economic performance (production value and gross


added value) are included. Finally, in order to characterize social impacts of economic

activities, indicators on employment are shown. Where available, trends regarding the

recent evolution of each activity are provided. The main information sources are the Initial

Assessments that have been delivered to the EC during 2012 and 2013 by EU Member

States. Although the information is generally available (and shown) at national scale,

occasionally division of the data into geographical sea sub-basins (only in the case of the

Mediterranean Sea) has been possible. Details on the structure of the collected information

are provided in Table 3.5 and 3.6.

Table 3.5: Economic and social assessment of the Mediterranean and Black Seas drivers (A-K)

A B C D E F G H I J K

Country (1)

Sub-Basin (2)

Activity (3)

Infrastructure (4)

Trend Production

(4) Trend

Text Text Text Figures Year Trend Period Figures Year Trend Period

(1) and (2) Some of the socioeconomic data are only compiled at the national scale.

However, where possible, the sub-basin scale has been considered, since the higher

geographical/spatial scales share common environmental features and may be more

relevant from the physical, chemical and even ecological perspective.

(3) According to Annex 4 of the Commission Staff Working Paper.

(4) Data on sector’s infrastructure and production, as well as on recent trends observed

(when available).

Table 3.6: Economic and social assessment of the Mediterranean and Black Seas drivers (L-X)

L M N O P Q R S T U V W X

Production value (M. Euro)

5 Trend

Value Added (M. Euro)

5 Trend

Employment (nº) 6

Trend Source/ Ref.

Figures Year Trend Period Figures Year Trend Period Figures Year Trend Period Text

(5) Data on sector’s economic indicators (production value and value added), together

with observed recent trends (when available).


(6) Data on the sector’s social impact (employment) and observed recent trends (when

available).

Results:

An extract of the analysis of current socioeconomic activities (drivers) is presented in

Tables 3.7 and 3.8 in the case of Italy and Romania, respectively. The analysis has been

carried out for the following countries: Bulgaria, Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy, Romania

Slovenia, and Spain, according to the MSFD Initial Assessment delivered to the EC. On the

contrary, data are lacking for Malta, Croatia and Turkey, regarding the analysis of economic

activities influencing their marine environment. The socioeconomic section of Malta’s IAs is

still not publicly available. Croatia, which recently accessed the EC, will join the second cycle

of the MSFD. Finally, Turkey, as an EU candidate state, has no reporting obligations

regarding the European directives.

31

Table 3.7: Economic and social assessment of the Mediterranean and Black Seas MSs. The Case of Italy.

Country Sub-Basin Activity Infrastructure Trend Production Trend Prod.value ( M. Euro)

Trend Value Added (Million Euro)

Trend Employment

(nº employees) Trend

Text Text Text Figures Year Trend Period Figures Year Trend Period Figures Year Trend Period Figures Year Trend Period Figures Year Trend Period

Italy Adriatic Sea Fisheries decreasing 2000-2010

470 2010 fluctuant - decreasing

2008-2010


2008-2010 10 000 2010 increasing 2008-2010

Italy Ionian Sea and Central Med

Fisheries decreasing 2000-2010


2008-2010


2008-2010 8 000 2010 2008-2010

Italy Western Mediterranean

Fisheries decreasing 2000-2010


2008-2010


2008-2010 11 000 2010 2008-2010

Italy Total country Industry

2500 companies reporting to the national PRTR

register

2007-2009

stable Industrial

production index 88,4

2011 increasing 2009-2011

Italy Western Mediterranean / Ionian Sea

Offshore Gas

Extraction

1 offshore gas platform

2011 Re-gasification

capacity 3.5 Gscm

2011 stable 2008-2011

35 2011 decreasing 2009-2011

74 2011

Italy Adriatic Sea Offshore

Gas Extraction

1 offshore gas platform

2011 Re-gasification

capacity 8 Gscm 2011 stable

2008-2011

125 2011

Italy Offshore Oil Extraction

Adriatic: 110 offshore oil

platforms (103 active)

Ionian: 19 offshore oil platforms

2012 640 000 tons oil 2011 stable 2008-2011

403 2011 12 000 2011

Italy Total country Ports 534 commercial

ports 2010 8 200 2009 increasing

2007-2009

3 000 2009 increasing 2007-2009 44 000 2009

Italy Total country Shipping

490 million tons cargo

87 million passengers

2010 decreasing 2009-2010

11 000 2009 4 000 2009 78 500 2009

Italy Total country Shipbuilding 16 000

companies 2010 stable

2009-2010

4 400 2009 1 150 2009 12 000 2009

Italy Total country Aquaculture 642 seawater

farms 2009

120 000 tons seawater sp (105 000 t shellfish)

2010 stable 2005-2010

475 2009 fluctuant 2007-2009

6 900 2007

Italy Adriatic Sea Aquaculture 490 seawater

plants 2008

Italy Western Mediterranean

Aquaculture 50 seawater

plants 2008

Italy Total country Agriculture 1 600 000 farms 2010 decreasing 2002-2010

39 000 2010 increasing 2002-2010

22 000 2010 stable 2008-2010 950 000 2010 stable 2002-2010

32

Country Sub-Basin Activity Infrastructure Trend Production Trend Prod.value ( M. Euro)


Trend Employment



Italy Total country Tourism increasing 2002-2008

4 000 2007 500 000 2006

Italy Total country Recreational

boating 3 400 2010 decreasing

2008-2010

800 2010 decreasing 2008-2010 20 000 2010 decreasing 2008-2010

Table 3.8: Economic and social assessment of Mediterranean and Black Seas MSs. The case of Romania.

Country Sub-Basin

Activity Infrastructure Trend Production Trend Prod.value ( M. Euro)


Trend Employment



Romania Black Sea Fisheries 338 tons 2011 descreasing 2005-2010

1 2011 stable 2009-2011

0,23% total PIB

decreasing 2004- 633 2005 decreasing 2005-2011

Romania Black Sea Seaweed and other Seafood

4 areas shellfish production

218 2011

Romania Black Sea Ports 4 Ports 45 million tons 2010 increasing 2009-2010

400 (only Constanta harbour);

2012? decreasing 2009-2012

Romania Black Sea Shipping 19 000

passengers 2010 fluctuant

2007-2010

13 000

(Black Sea Profile)

Romania Black Sea Shipbuilding 3 shipyards 790 2010 decreasing 2007-2010

20 000

Romania Black Sea Tourism 14 touristic resorts 3 milion hotel

overnight stays 2011

decreasing since 2007

2006-2011

540 2009 decreasing 2009-2011 7 800 2010 stable 2006-2010

Romania Black Sea Coastal Industry

5 industrial sectors (chemical ind., oil

ind., energy) increasing

2008-2010

1 180 2010 decreasing 2008-2010 52 000 2010 decreasing 2008-2010

Romania Black Sea Urban

development

15 urban centres (>2000 and < 150

000 eq)

Romania Black Sea Offshore HC explotation

4 offshore platforms

330 000 tons oil 1 140 000 smc

gas 2011

increasing (oil);

fluctuant (gas)

2006-2011

160 2011 increasing 2006-2011


3.3.2. Future trends in human activities, current and future pressures

resulting from human activities in the Mediterranean and Black

Seas

The second Excel sheet (subtask 1.2.3) Env. Pressures, Future Trends, in IRIS-

SES_Analysis_Pressures_1.2.2_1.2.4.xls, included in the second part of the deliverable,

concerns future trends expected for socioeconomic activities in the Mediterranean and Black

Seas, as well as current and future expected environmental pressures, in correlation with the

relevant impacts.

The present analysis intends to address expected future trends for "drivers" in the

beneficiary countries. A few Mediterranean and Black Sea countries have provided

indications on economic activities in their IA reports. Therefore, information regarding future

trends are based on available prospective analysis and forecasting scenarios.

In the present assessment, only the “Business-as-Usual Scenario” (BAU) has been

considered. The BAU scenario proposed acknowledge the most recent tendencies in both

basins connected to the economic crisis, which has provoked an arrest to the cohesion

objectives aimed by the EU in recent years. It assumes a loosening of economic coherence

among EU member States (including Romania and Bulgaria in Black Sea area) and towards

the countries of the neighboring zone, surrounding the Mediterranean. Turkey will keep on

affirming its political, economic and demographic strength in both basins. This fact goes at a

same pace having slowed down a process of coherence and strong engagement of the EU in

terms of environmental policies. These are still on-going, but the economic recovery has

received a higher priority, and is assumed to be achieved at the expense of the conservation

of the ecosystems. Following the turmoil of the Arab spring, northern African and eastern

Mediterranean economies are slowly recovering, and the reconstruction of economies after

the collapse of the former Soviet Union is still a task to be completed. Issues of protection of

the ecosystem services receive little attention, either because of processes already started

throughout the previous periods, or because of the creation of situations being manifest and

perceived as unsustainable. There are a number of different disputes going on between


coastal states in the Mediterranean and Black Seas. Some of them are longstanding; in

others, the gradual extension of sovereignty over the maritime space has given rise to new

disputes, as a consequence of an overlapping of jurisdictions and the creation of new

boundaries.

Future trends are to be considered in the development of future joint monitoring

programmes, since they may help identify future pressures (increased, decreased or

stabilized) on coastal and marine ecosystems and, therefore, potential needs for monitoring.

In view of the increasing efforts that are being deployed to decouple environmental

pressures and impacts from human activities, the BAU Scenario also takes into consideration

currently implemented and/or planned environmental measures to address any future

pressures. The MSFD, the MAP’s Ecosystem Approach Initiative (EcAp) as well as the

Integrated Maritime Policy (IMP), are comprehensive tools, which allow the implementation

of coordinated management of diverse uses and activities affecting the Mediterranean and

Black Seas.

The analysis is structured in two parts. The first one (Table 3.9), corresponds to the

linkage between human activities - as categorized in Annex 4 of the Commission Staff

Working Paper3 - to the environmental pressures and impacts on the coastal and marine

ecosystems, as listed in Annex III of the MSFD. Environmental pressures have, in turn, been

associated to MSFD descriptors, criteria and pressure indicators as developed in Annex II of

the Commission Staff Working Paper. These linkages allow identifying pressures for which

indicators have already been defined; and checking which pressures are currently being

monitored.

On the other hand, the second part of the assessment (Table 3.10) involves the

examination of future trends – according to BAU Scenario - regarding main socioeconomic

activities that have been objected to prospective studies. In addition, consideration on the

efforts that are being done at the regional and international levels (i.e. directives, other type

of regulations, initiatives, etc.) is included to provide indications of the expected future

pressures in the Mediterranean and Black Seas.

3 Commision Staff Working Paper, Relationship between the initial assessment of marine waters and the criteria for GES, 2011.


Table 3.9: Human Activities and links with the MSFD Pressure Indicators

A B C D E F G H I

Activity theme

Activity Pressures (current)

Impacts (current)

Pressure Indicator (according to MSFD)

MSFD Descriptor

EcAp EO

Key words Key words Key words Key words Criterion Description (MSFD)

P: Pressure I: Impact

Key words Key words

Table 3.10: Human Activities, Future Trends and Future Pressures

A B J K L M N O P Q

Activity theme

Activity Trends

BAU Scenario Measures Future Pressures Future Pressures

Key words

Key words

Black Sea

Mediterranean Sea Black Sea

Mediterranean Sea

Trends Black Sea Trends Mediterranean Sea

Results:

General categories of human activities appear listed, i.e. Land-based activities and

industries; Tourism and recreation; Extraction of non-living resources; Man-made structures;

Maritime Transport; Energy production; Extraction of living resources; Food production;

Waste disposal; and Military activities. Associated environmental pressures and impacts have

been listed correspondingly, and linkages between environmental pressures and the MSFD

pressure indicators are also presented. An extraction of the final output is shown in Table

3.11.

Environmental pressures for which pressure indicators have been defined appear in

bold. Among all indicators listed under the MSFD for assessing the status of the marine

environment, only 15 rigorously correspond to the “pressure indicators” and might directly

address environmental pressures originating from human activities (Table 3.12). Neither

Descriptor 1 (Biological diversity) nor Descriptor 4 (Food webs) and D6 (Seafloor integrity) are

addressed by pressure indicators.

However, for Descriptor 6, an impact indicator has been gathered, namely: “6.1.2.

Extent of the seabed significantly affected by human activities for the different substrate

type”, as it concerns spatial distribution of the seafloor impacts and may provide indication

on the spatial distribution of pressures. In addition, a similar indicator regarding Descriptor 7


taking into account the spatial distribution of alterations (impacts), “7.1.1. Extent of the area

affected by permanent alterations”, is considered as a pressure indicator.

Table3.11: MSFD Criteria and Indicators regarding Environmental Pressures

MSFD Descriptor


Key words Criterion Description (MSFD) P: Pressure I: Impact

1 Na P

2 2.1 Abundance and state characterization of non-indigenous species, in particular invasive species

2.1.1.Trends in abundance, temporal occurrence and spatial distribution in the wild of non-indigenous species, particularly invasive non-indigenous species, notably in risk areas, in relation to the main vectors and pathways of spreading of such species

P

3 3.1 Level of pressure of the fishing activity 3.1.1.Fishing mortality (F) P

3 3.1 Level of pressure of the fishing activity 3.1.2.Ratio between catch and biomass index (catch/biomass ratio) P

4 na

5 5.1 Nutrients level Nutrient load P

5 5.1 Nutrients level 5.1.1.Nutrient concentration in water column P

5 5.1 Nutrients level 5.1.2. Nutrient rations (Si:N:P) P

6 6.1 Physical damage, having regard to substrate characteristics

6.1.2.Extent of the seabed significantly affected by human activities for the different substrate types

I

7 7.1 Spatial characterisation of permanent alterations

7.1.1.Extent of area affected by permanent alterations P

8 8.1 Concentration of contaminants 8.1.1. Concentration of contaminants in the relevant matrix (biota, sediment, water) ensuring comparability with WFD.

P

8 8.2 Effects of contaminants 8.2.2.Occurrence, origin, extent of significant acute pollution events and their impact on biota physically affected by this pollution

P/I

9 9.1 Levels, number and frequency of contaminants

9.1.1.Actual levels of contaminants that have been detected and number of contaminants which have exceeded maximum regulatory levels

P/I


9.1.2.Frequency of regulatory levels being exceeded P/I

10 10.1 Characteristics of litter in the marine and coastal environment

10.1.1.Trends in the amount of litter washed ashore and/or deposited on coastlines, incl. analysis of its composition, spatial distribution and source (where possible)

P


10.1.2.Trends in the amount of litter in the water column (incl. floating at the surface) and deposited on the seafloor, incl. analysis of its composition, spatial distribution and source (where possible)

P


10.1.3.Trends in the amount, distribution and, where possible, composition of micro-particles (in particular micro-plastics)

P

11 11.1 Distribution in time and place of loud, low and mid frequency impulsive sounds

11.1.1. Proportion of days and their distribution within a calendar year over areas of a determined surface, as well as their spatial distribution, in which anthropogenic sound sources exceed levels that are likely to entail significant impact on marine animals measured as Sound Exposure Level (in dB re 1uPa2.s) or as peak sound pressure level (in dB re 1uPapeak) at on metre, measured over the frequency band 10 Hz to 10 kHz.

P

11 11.2 Continuous low frequency sound

11.2.1.Trends in the ambient noise level within the 1/3 octave bands 63 and 125 Hz (centre frequency) (re 1uPa RMS: average noise level in these octave bands over a year) measured by observation stations and/or with the use of models if appropriate

P

Future trends according to BAU Scenario for the principal socioeconomic activities

directly or strongly linked to the marine environments are subsequently detailed. These are

provided for: Agriculture and forestry run-off; Coastal urbanization and development;

Damming (Human demand for water resources); Tourism frequency and yachting;

Desalination/ water abstraction; Land claim, coastal defense; Port operations; Submarine


cable and pipeline operations; Shipping; Hydrocarbon extraction; Marine-based renewable

energy generation; Fisheries and Aquaculture; Marine Research and Survey.

To estimate future trends, socioeconomic trends are taken into account, together

with currently implemented legislation in the area (EU Directives and Regional Conventions,

Action Plans, Protocols and Initiatives) as well as planned legislation. In this sense, it is

understood that even if a socioeconomic activity presents higher development rates,

environmental pressures may be slightly decoupled, provided that legislation or mitigating

measures are in place or planned. In the Black Sea, transposition of more strict European

legislation by Bulgaria and Romania may result in environmental benefits on the coastal and

marine ecosystems.

38

Table 3.12: Future trends in human activities, current pressures and future pressures resulting from human activities in the Mediterranean and

Black Seas. Land-based activities/ industries. Agriculture and Forestry run-off.

Activity theme

Activity Pressures (current)

Impacts (current)


MSFD Descripto

r

EcAp EO

Trends BAU Scenario

Measures Future Pressures Future Pressures

Key words Key words Key words Key words Criterion Description (MSFD) P / I Key words

Key words

Black Sea Mediterranean Sea

Black Sea Mediterranean Sea

Trends

Black Sea Trend

s Mediterranean Sea

Land-based activities/ industries

Agriculture and forestry run-off

Introduction of synthetic and non-synthetic substances and compounds

Contamination of marine ecosystem components by hazardous substances

8.1 Concentration of contaminants

8.1.1. Concentration of contaminants in the relevant matrix (biota, sediment, water) ensuring comparability with WFD.

P

8, 9 9

Slow recovery in the agricultural sector, although with lower impacts than before 1989 Strong agronomic potential for Romania. Romania and Bulgaria relevant as major exporters of agricultural products to the Black Sea region.

Expansion in the North of a highly technology- and capital-based ‘precision’ agriculture, while sustainable development policies remain insufficient Decreasing/ more efficient use of fertilizers Overexploitation of water resources for irrigation

EU MSFD; EU WFD; BEP regarding pesticides; Ban on dangerous pesticides; Black Sea SAP

EU MSFD; EU WFD; BEP regarding pesticides; Ban on dangerous pesticides; MAP LBS Protocol

- / ?

BEP may help reducing inputs to marine environments of pesticides and dangerous compounds from agriculture; However, increase and development of the agriculture sector may involve pressure rising.

-

BEP may help reducing inputs of pesticides from agriculture

8.2 Effects of contaminants

8.2.2.Occurrence, origin, extent of significant acute pollution events and their impact on biota physically affected by this pollution

P/I

9.1 Levels, number and frequency of contaminants


P/I

9.1.2.Frequency of regulatory levels being exceeded

P/I

Inputs of nitrogen and phosphorous-rich substances and organic matter

Nutrient and organic matter enrichment - Eutrophication

5.1 Nutrients level

Nutrient load P

5 5

Best Environmental Practices regarding fertilizers; Black Sea SAP and LBSA Protocol.

Best Environmental Practices regarding fertilizers; MAP LBS Protocol

- -

5.1.1.Nutrient concentration in water column

P

5.1.2. Nutrient rations (Si:N:P)

P

Reduction of freshwater and sediment inflows

Changes in hydrological regimes

7.1 Spatial characterisation of permanent alterations

7.1.1.Extent of area affected by permanent alterations

P 7 7 ++ ++


3.3.3. Considerations on the need for monitoring data to support future

assessments and managerial actions.

The present subtask 1.2.4 aims to identify data gaps and to highlight monitoring needs

regarding environmental pressures, in order to guide any monitoring efforts and support the

development of coherent future joint monitoring programmes. The assessment of data

gaps/monitoring needs has been carried out in the last Excel sheet of the deliverable 1.2.4 named

"monitoring gaps" in IRIS-SES_Analysis_Pressures_1.2.2_1.2.4.xls.

The analysis on the monitoring gaps and needs has been based on the work conducted by

Zampoukas et al. (2012)4, a comparative review regarding relevant MSFD monitoring parameters

(listed in Annex III, MSFD) and monitoring parameters already measured in the framework of

ongoing European monitoring programmes of the Regional Seas. In this case, since the analysis is

focused on environmental pressures, only the MSFD pressure indicators identified in subtask 1.2.3

have been considered. These are associated to the appropriate corresponding monitoring

parameters listed in Annex III of the MSFD (Columns A-E, Table 3.13).

Table 3.13: Monitoring gaps and needs according to the ongoing surveillance programmes

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O

MSFD Descriptor


Monitoring Parameters

Related Pressure Monitored Parameters (ongoing monitoring programmes)

Existing monitoring Black Sea

Existing monitoring Mediterranean Sea

Clarification

Key words Criterion Description (MSFD)

P / I MSFD Birds Directive

Env. Quality Standards Directive

Habitats Directive

CFP

WFD Transitional/ Coastal

Marine Transitional/ Coastal

Marine Key words

On the other hand, in order to evaluate whether the ongoing monitoring programmes are

satisfying any of the MSFD requirements concerning the monitoring activities on the

environmental pressures, specific parameters that are measured under other implemented

monitoring programmes of the Mediterranean and Black Seas, have been reviewed and reported

(Columns F-J). These monitoring programmes are considered to rely in the framework of several

EU Directives (Birds, Habitats, EQS, WFD and CFP).

4 Zampoukas N., Piha H., Bigagli E., Hoepffner N., Hanke G. and Cardoso AM. (2012) Monitoring for the Marine Strategy Framework Directive: Requirements and Options, European Commission – Joint Research Center, Scientific and Technical Research Reports.


Finally, the ongoing monitoring activities together with the monitoring gaps have been

summarized, both in coastal and in marine areas (according to WFD governance boundaries), for

the Mediterranean and Black seas (Columns K-O).

Results:

Monitoring gaps regarding the environmental pressures are in line with what has been

observed for most of the data gaps on the impacts and states of the marine environments in the

Mediterranean and Black seas. Most of the MSFD Descriptors and the related pressure indicators

appear at least partially described/addressed by one or more parameters measured in ongoing

monitoring programmes. However, the partial description appears insufficient to state the

magnitude of pressures impacting in the marine ecosystems under the jurisdiction to which the

MSFD applies. An extract of the last analysis is shown in Tables 3.14 and 3.15, for three MSFD

Descriptors (D2, D8, D9).

In this sense, the geographical gap is one of the most evident gaps regarding monitoring,

since most of the parameters are only being measured in coastal waters, as they have been a

subject of other European legislations (e.g. WFD), which are already being monitored. In particular,

the WFD has allowed to develop relatively complete monitoring programmes among EU Member

States. Monitoring programmes under the WFD allow to address several MSFD Descriptors (D2, D5,

D6, D7, D8) through several parameters.

However, while the WFD applies in coastal waters (i.e. to 1 nm from the baseline), the

MSFD is to be applied to marine waters under the jurisdiction of EU Member State. In some

European countries bordering the Mediterranean and Black seas which have enforced Economic

Exclusive Zones (EEZ) or other maritime jurisdictions, this may extend to 200 nm.

Therefore, deeper waters remain mostly uncovered, in particular regarding environmental

pressures, both for the Mediterranean and Black Sea basins. Deeper (marine) areas are covered by

some parameters included in the surveillance programmes of the Common Fisheries Policy and the

Commission Regulation 1881/2006. The first is principally related to commercially exploited

species, although several parameters take into account the characterization of the non-indigenous

species. Commission Regulation 1881/2006 sets up maximum levels of contaminants on foodstuff,

and is directly linked to Descriptor 9 (contaminants in fish and other seafood). On the other hand,


only a few pressure indicators are not covered at least by one parameter measured in ongoing

monitoring programmes. Among these, are the "Marine litter" from Descriptor 10, and the

“Underwater noise/Energy” from Descriptor 11, which are considered as “immature Descriptors”

since they are not addressed in any surveillance system. Full analysis of the results is presented in

the attached xls file: IRIS _SES_Analysis_Pressures_1.2.2_1.2.4.xls.

42

Table 3.14: Monitoring needs for D2

MSFD Descripto

r


MSFD Monitoring Parameters Related Pressure Monitored Parameters Existing monitoring

Black Sea Existing monitoring Mediterranean Sea

Clarifications

Key words Criterion Description (MSFD) P / I MSFD

Birds Direct.

EQS Direct.

Habitats Direct.

CFP WFD Transitional/ Coastal


Marine Key words

2

2.1 Abundance and state characterisation of non-indigenous species, in particular invasive species

2.1.1.Trends in abundance, temporal occurrence and spatial distribution in the wild of non-indigenous species, particularly invasive non-indigenous species, notably in risk areas, in relation to the main vectors and pathways of spreading of such species

P

2. Angiosperms sp. composition and its annual/ seasonal variability 3. Fish abundance 5. Fish distribution 11. Introduction of non-indigenous sp. 12. Invertebrate bottom fauna biomass and its annual/ seasonal variability 13. Invertebrate bottom fauna sp. composition and its annual/ seasonal variability 14. Macro-algae biomass 15. Macro-algae sp. composition 20. Non-indigenous or exotic sp. abundance 21. Non-indigenous or exotic sp. occurrence 22. Non-indigenous or exotic sp. spatial distribution 27. Phytoplankton sp. compositions and its geographical and seasonal variability 37. Translocations of non-indigenous sp. 38. Zooplankton sp. compositions and its geographical and seasonal variability

N N N

14. Species (data from fisheries-independent research surveys) 24. Discards of sp. (based on observer trips)

2. Angiosperms Composition 6. Benthic Invertebrate Fauna Composition 14. Macro-algae Sp. Composition 18. Phytoplankton Composition

WFD, CFP CFP WFD, CFP CFP

Limitations: Monitoring obligations only for some species.

43

Table 3.15: Monitoring needs for D8 and D9

MSFD Descriptor


MSFD Monitoring Parameters

Related Pressure Monitored Parameters Existing monitoring

Black Sea Existing monitoring Mediterranean Sea

Clarification

Key words Criterion Description (MSFD) P/ I MSFD Birds Directive Env. Quality Standards Directive

Habitats Directive

CFP WFD Transitional/ Coastal


Marine Key words

8 8.1 Concentration of contaminants

8.1.1. Concentration of contaminants in the relevant matrix (biota, sediment, water) ensuring comparability with WFD.

P 42. Concentration of contaminants

N 1. Specific synthetic pollutants for sediment and/or biota

N N

20. Specific synthetic pollutants 21. Specific non-synthetic pollutants

WFD, EQS N WFD, EQS, MAP

MAP

8 8.2 Effects of contaminants

8.2.2.Occurrence, origin, extent of significant acute pollution events and their impact on biota physically affected by this pollution

P/I 41. Biological effects of contaminants

11. Adverse effect of chemical pollution on population levels or birds species

2. Specific non-synthetic pollutants for sediment and/or biota

N N

20. Specific synthetic pollutants 21. Specific non-synthetic pollutants

WFD, BD N WFD, BD N Birds Directive: only for protected bird species



P/I 42. Concentration of contaminants

N N N N N N N N N


9.1.2.Frequency of regulatory levels being exceeded

P/I 42. Concentration of contaminants

N N N N N EC EC EC EC Commission Regulation 1881/2006


4. ASSESSMENT OF THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE EXISTING

MONITORING PROGRAMMES TO MEET THE MSFD NEEDS

4.1. Introduction

The key objective of the MSFD is to achieve "good environmental status" (GES) for all

marine waters by 2020 (Article 1(1)). GES is laid down only in general terms in the Directive

(Appendix 1) by making reference to 11 descriptors. More specific criteria are set out in

Decision 2010/477/EU5. In accordance with the Article 9, it is ultimately for the Member

States to determine the characteristics of GES and therefore define the precise specifications

of this central MSFD objective. By 15 July 2012, Member States had to provide information

on the initial assessment (article 8 of the directive), on the determination of good

environmental status (GES - article 9) and on the establishment of environmental targets and

associated indicators (article 10). The EEA press release on the 14th of February 2014:

“Europe's seas: A valuable asset that must be used sustainably” concluded that “The current

way we use the sea risks irreversibly degrading many of the ecosystems” and that “Species

surveys have found that 'good environmental status' can be applied to less than a fifth of

species and a similar proportion of habitats”. To see a real improvement in our marine

environment, the briefing recommends a two-fold approach:

Member States need to implement the MSFD in a more consistent and

coherent manner that allows progress towards good environmental status to be monitored

across regions.

Reducing environmental pressures will require us to shift our economies and

our values to a more sustainable ways of living, producing and consuming, in order to comply

with the vision of 'living well within the limits of our planet' contained in the 7th

Environmental Action Programme, which sets out Europe's environmental policy priorities.

The key tool for the achievement of the MSFD goals is the Programme of Measures

(PoMs) (Article 13), which must be established by 2015, following two preparatory steps:

5 COMMISSION DECISION of 1 September 2010 on criteria and methodological standards on good environmental status of marine waters 2010/477/EU


firstly, the initial assessment, GES and targets, and secondly the preparation of monitoring

programmes (Article 11). All these elements form part of the marine strategies (Article 5). As

a result, the MSFD implementation is a step-by-step process in which each step builds upon

the previous one.

The present Report aims to the assessment of the contribution of existing monitoring

programmes in the Mediterranean and Black Sea (SES) to cover MS requirements relevant to

MSFD implementation. This is done through the analysis of compliance to existing EU

Directives, coverage of MSFD Descriptors, in Ecosystem Components and Habitats. Finally, it

will identify major gaps and areas at risk of not achieving GES, as a basis for further

development of a strategy for improved integrated monitoring program.

4.2. Context and sources of information

The assessment is based on the following sources of information:

Catalogue matrices filled by each Project partner.

MS Initial Assessment Reports;

Recent outputs (Deliverables) of current Projects (PERSEUS, MISIS, DEVOTES)

relevant to monitoring programs assessments (publicly available)

The “In-Depth Assessment of the EU Member States’ Submissions for the Marine

Strategy Framework Directive under articles 8, 9 and 10”, prepared by JRC and the

“The reports prepared for DG ENV” by Milieu Ltd (consultant's reports) for the

article. 12 assessment. Additionally, the MS' paper reports were also consulted.

4.3. Analysis of MSFD related monitoring programs

For the analysis of the monitoring programs the catalogue data base information has

been reviewed ("MORE" Project approach) for:

correspondence to and coverage of Ecosystem components:

biological (from plankton to mammals),

environment quality (hydrographic and nutrients) and


disturbance (hazardous substances, marine litter and noise). The

biological disturbance (descriptor 2, Alien Species) is included in the biological

components

habitats (both the water column and the sea-bed)

compliance to existing EU Directives (descriptor/member state)

This way the monitoring programs comparability among countries and within SES

regional seas could be assessed.

Preliminary results

Presently, the dataset has been completed for 5 countries (Bulgaria, Greece, Italy,

Romania, Turkey). This analysis does not take into consideration datasets that have been

partially completed. (see Tables 4.3.1 – 4.3.14). The full assessment, as stated above, will be

carried out under Activity 2 and will be presented in the next reporting period.


Table 4.3.1: Monitoring Programmes coverage of the MSFD biological components (D1, D2,

D3, D4, D6) by MS.

Descriptor Parameter Habitat Bulgaria Greece Italy Romania Turkey

D1, D4, D6 N individuals Biocenosis ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 N pups/calves Biocenosis ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Structure Biocenosis ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 N individuals Birds ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 N nesting pairs Birds ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Reproductive Success Birds ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Age Fish ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Length Fish ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Fish ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Fish ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Sex Fish ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Species level taxonomy Fish ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Age Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Length Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Sex Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Species biomass Phytobenthos ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Species coverage Phytobenthos ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Species level taxonomy Phytobenthos ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Substrate type Phytobenthos ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Total Biomass Phytobenthos ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Total coverage Phytobenthos ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Phytoplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Phytoplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Species level taxonomy Phytoplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Zoobenthos ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Zoobenthos ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Species level taxonomy Zoobenthos ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Developmental Stages Zooplankton ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Zooplankton ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Zooplankton ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Sex Zooplankton ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Species level taxonomy Zooplankton ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗


D2 Relative Abundance Non indigenous species ✗ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗

D2 Relative Biomass Non indigenous species ✗ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗

D2 Species level taxonomy Non indigenous species ✗ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗

D3 Age Pelagic and Benthic Commercial Fish and Shellfish ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D3 Length Pelagic and Benthic Commercial Fish and Shellfish ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D3 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic Commercial Fish and Shellfish ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D3 Relative Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Commercial Fish and Shellfish ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D3 Relative Biomass Pelagic and Benthic Commercial Fish and Shellfish ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D3 Sex Pelagic and Benthic Commercial Fish and Shellfish ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D3 Species level taxonomy Pelagic and Benthic Commercial Fish and Shellfish ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Stomach Content Pelagic and Benthic Commercial Fish and Shellfish ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

Notes: ✔- parameter monitored for the indicated descriptor/matrix; ✗ - parameter not

monitored for the indicated descriptor/matrix.


Table 4.3.2: Monitoring Programmes coverage of nutrients, hydrographic, contaminants,

marine litter, energy and noise indicators (D5, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) by MS.

Descriptor Parameter Matrix Bulgaria Greece Italy Romania Turkey

D5 Chla Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D5 Colour Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D5 DO Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D5 DOC Sea Water ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔

D5 DON Sea Water ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔

D5 DOP Sea Water ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔

D5 NH4 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D5 NO2 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D5 pH Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D5 PO4 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D5 POC Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✔

D5 Salinity Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D5 Secchi Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✔

D5 SiO4 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔

D5 Temperature Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D5 TN Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔

D5 TNOx Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D5 TP Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

D5 TSS Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D5 Turbidity Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D7 Alkalinity Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D7 pH Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D7 Salinity Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D7 Temperature Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D8 Cd Biota ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✔

D8 DDT and Metabolites Biota ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗

D8 HCH Biota ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗

D8 Hg Biota ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✔

D8 PAH Biota ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✔

D8 Pb Biota ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✔

D8 PCB Biota ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✔

D8 TBT Biota ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗

D8 Cd Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗

D8 DDT and Metabolites Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗

D8 HCH Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗

D8 Hg Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗

D8 PAH Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗

D8 Pb Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗

D8 PCB Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗

D8 TBT Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗

D8 Cd Sediment ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✔

D8 DDT and Metabolites Sediment ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗

D8 HCH Sediment ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗

D8 Hg Sediment ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✔

D8 PAH Sediment ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✔

D8 Pb Sediment ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✔

D8 PCB Sediment ✔ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✔

D8 TBT Sediment ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗

D9 Cd Biota ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


Descriptor Parameter Matrix Bulgaria Greece Italy Romania Turkey

D9 DDT and Metabolites Biota ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D9 HCH Biota ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D9 Hg Biota ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 PAH Biota ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D9 Pb Biota ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D9 PCB Biota ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D10 Amount of beach litter Other ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✔

D10 Am. litter in the sea bottom Other ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✔

D10 Distribution of litter Other ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D11 Type of activity Other ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D11 No. of days Other ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D11 Duration Other ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

Notes: ✔- parameter monitored for the indicated descriptor/matrix; ✗ - parameter not

monitored for the indicated descriptor/matrix.



existing EU Directives and RSC - Bulgaria

Bulgaria

Descriptor Parameter Habitat Bucharest

Convention WFD MSFD HD BWD BD ND

UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D1, D4, D6 N individuals Biocenosis ✗ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 N pups/calves Biocenosis ✗ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Structure Biocenosis ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 N individuals Birds ✗ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 N nesting pairs Birds ✗ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Reproductive Success

Birds ✗ ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Age Fish ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Length Fish ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Fish ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Fish ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Sex Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Species level taxonomy

Fish ✗ ✗ ✔

✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Age Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Length Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Sex Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Species biomass Phytobenthos ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Species coverage Phytobenthos ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Phytobenthos ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Substrate type Phytobenthos ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Total Biomass Phytobenthos ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Total coverage Phytobenthos ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Phytoplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Phytoplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Phytoplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Zoobenthos ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Zoobenthos ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Zoobenthos ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Developmental Stages

Zooplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Zooplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Zooplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D1, D4, D6 Sex Zooplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Zooplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

NA NA

D2 Relative Abundance Non indigenous species ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D2 Relative Biomass Non indigenous species ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D2 Species level taxonomy

Non indigenous species ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

NA

D3 Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm

Fish Shellfish ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D3 Length Pelagic and Benthic Comm ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Bulgaria



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

Fish Shellfish

D3 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm


D3 Relative Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Comm


D3 Relative Biomass Pelagic and Benthic Comm


D3 Sex Pelagic and Benthic Comm


D3 Species level taxonomy

Pelagic and Benthic Comm Fish Shellfish

✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D3 Stomach Content Pelagic and Benthic Comm


Notes: BIOCENOSIS = Mammals, Tursiops truncatus ponticus, Delphinus delphis ponticus,

Phocoena phocoena relicta. NA = Not applicable



noise indicators (D5, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) in compliance to the existing EU Directives

and RSC- Bulgaria

Bulgaria



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D5 Chla Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D5 Colour Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D5 DO Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D5 DOC Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D5 DON Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D5 DOP Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D5 NH4 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D5 NO2 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D5 pH Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D5 PO4 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D5 POC Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D5 Salinity Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D5 Secchi Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D5 SiO4 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D5 Temperature Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D5 TN Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D5 TNOx Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D5 TP Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D5 TSS Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA D5 Turbidity Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

NA D7 Alkalinity Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D7 pH Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D7 Salinity Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA D7 Temperature Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✔ NA

NA

D8 Cd Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 DDT and

Metabolites Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 HCH Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Hg Biota ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PAH Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Pb Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PCB Biota ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 TBT Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Cd Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 DDT and

Metabolites Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 HCH Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Hg Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PAH Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Pb Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PCB Sea Water ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 TBT Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Cd Sediment ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 DDT and

Metabolites Sediment ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Bulgaria



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D8 HCH Sediment ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Hg Sediment ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PAH Sediment ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Pb Sediment ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PCB Sediment ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 TBT Sediment ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

NA

D9 Cd Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 DDT and

Metabolites Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 HCH Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 Hg Biota ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 PAH Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 Pb Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 PCB Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D10 Amount of beach

litter Other ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D10 Amount of

litter/sea bottom Other ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D10 Distribution of

litter Other ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

NA

D11 Type of activity Other ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D11 No. of days Other ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D11 Duration Other ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

Notes: BIOTA = Mytilus galloprovincialis; Sprattus sprattus, Gobiidae, Trachurus

mediterraneus, Alosa immaculata, Mugil cephalus, Mullus barbatus, Pomatomus saltatrix,

Scophthalmus maeoticus, Belone belone. NA = Not applicable


Table 4.3.5: Monitoring of the biotic components descriptors (D1, D2, D3, D4, D6) in

compliance to the existing EU Directives and RSC - Greece

Greece



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D1, D4, D6 N individuals Biocenosis NA ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 N pups/calves Biocenosis NA ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Structure Biocenosis NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 N individuals Birds NA ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 N nesting pairs Birds NA ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Reproductive

Success Birds

NA ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✔ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Age Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Length Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Sex Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Species level

taxonomy Fish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Age Pelagic and Benthic Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Length Pelagic and Benthic Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Pelagic and Benthic Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Sex Pelagic and Benthic Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Species biomass Phytobenthos NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Species coverage Phytobenthos NA ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔


taxonomy Phytobenthos

NA ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Substrate type Phytobenthos NA ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Total Biomass Phytobenthos NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Total coverage Phytobenthos NA ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Phytoplankton NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Phytoplankton NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔


taxonomy Phytoplankton

NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Zoobenthos NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Zoobenthos NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


taxonomy Zoobenthos

NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Developmental

Stages Zooplankton

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Zooplankton NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Zooplankton NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Sex Zooplankton NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


taxonomy Zooplankton

NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

NA

D2 Relative Abundance Non indigenous species NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D2 Relative Biomass Non indigenous species NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D2 Species level

taxonomy Non indigenous species

NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

NA

D3 Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm Fish Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Length Pelagic and Benthic Comm Fish Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


Greece



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D3 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm Fish Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Relative Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Comm Fish Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Relative Biomass Pelagic and Benthic Comm Fish Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Sex Pelagic and Benthic Comm Fish Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Species level

taxonomy Pelagic and Benthic Comm Fish Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Stomach Content Pelagic and Benthic Comm Fish Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

Notes: BIOCENOSIS = Mammals, Tursiops truncatus ponticus, Delphinus delphis ponticus, Stenella coeruleoalba, Grampus griseus, Physeter macrocephalus, Ziphius cavirostris, Monachus monachus, Ziphius cavirostris, Balaenoptera physalus. NA = Not Applicable




Greece

Greece

Descriptor Parameter Matrix Bucharest


UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D5 Chla Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 Colour Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D5 DO Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 DOC Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 DON Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 DOP Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 NH4 Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 NO2 Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 pH Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D5 PO4 Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 POC Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D5 Salinity Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D5 Secchi Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D5 SiO4 Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 Temperature Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D5 TN Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 TNOx Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 TP Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 TSS Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D5 Turbidity Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

NA

D7 Alkalinity Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗




D8 Cd Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 DDT and

Metabolites Biota

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 HCH Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Hg Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 PAH Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Pb Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 PCB Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 TBT Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Cd Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 DDT and

Metabolites Sea Water

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 HCH Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Hg Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 PAH Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Pb Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 PCB Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 TBT Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Cd Sediment NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 DDT and

Metabolites Sediment

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 HCH Sediment NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Hg Sediment NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


Greece



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D8 PAH Sediment NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Pb Sediment NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 PCB Sediment NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 TBT Sediment NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

NA

D9 Cd Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 DDT and

Metabolites Biota

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 HCH Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 Hg Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 PAH Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 Pb Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 PCB Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D10 Amount of beach

litter Other

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D10 Amount litter sea

bottom Other

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D10 Distribution of litter Other NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

NA

D11 Type of activity Other NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D11 No. of days Other NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D11 Duration Other NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

Notes: NA = Not applicable



existing EU Directives and RSC –Italy

Italy



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D1, D4, D6 N individuals Biocenosis NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 N pups/calves Biocenosis NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


D1, D4, D6 N individuals Birds NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 N nesting pairs Birds NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


Success Birds

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Age Fish NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Length Fish NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Fish

NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass

Fish NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Sex Fish NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


taxonomy Fish

NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗




D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Fish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


Pelagic and Benthic Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


D1, D4, D6 Species biomass

Phytobenthos NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Species coverage

Phytobenthos NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗



NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Substrate type Phytobenthos NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


D1, D4, D6 Total coverage Phytobenthos NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Phytoplankton

NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


Phytoplankton NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗



NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Zoobenthos

NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


Zoobenthos NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


taxonomy Zoobenthos

NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


Stages Zooplankton

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Zooplankton

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


Italy



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)


Zooplankton NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗




NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D2 Relative

Abundance Non indigenous species

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D2 Relative Biomass

Non indigenous species NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D2 Species level


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Age Pelagic and Benthic

Comm. Fish and Shellfish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Length Pelagic and Benthic


D3 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic


D3 Relative

Abundance Pelagic and Benthic


D3 Relative Biomass

Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Sex Pelagic and Benthic


D3 Species level

taxonomy Pelagic and Benthic


D3 Stomach Content


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

Notes: BIOCENOSIS= Not monitored. NA = Not applicable



noise indicators (D5, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) compliance to existing EU Directives and RSC-

Italy

Italy



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)







Success Birds

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Age Fish NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Fish

NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


Fish NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Sex Fish NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


taxonomy Fish

NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗




D1, D4, D6 Relative


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


Pelagic and Benthic Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


D1, D4, D6 Species biomass

Phytobenthos NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


Phytobenthos NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗



NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗




D1, D4, D6 Relative


NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


Phytoplankton NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗



NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative


NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


Zoobenthos NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


taxonomy Zoobenthos

NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


Stages Zooplankton

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


Italy



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D1, D4, D6 Relative


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


Zooplankton NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗




NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

NA

D2 Relative


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D2 Relative Biomass

Non indigenous species NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D2 Species level


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

NA

D3 Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and

Shellfish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Length Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Relative

Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Relative Biomass


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Sex Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Species level

taxonomy Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Stomach Content


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

Notes: BIOTA = Not monitored, NA = Not Applicable



existing EU Directives and RSC –Romania

Italy



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)







Success Birds

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Age Fish NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Fish

NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Fish NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Sex Fish NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


taxonomy Fish

NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗




D1, D4, D6 Relative


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗




D1, D4, D6 Species coverage Phytobenthos NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗



NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗




D1, D4, D6 Relative


NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Phytoplankton NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗



NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative


NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Zoobenthos NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


taxonomy Zoobenthos

NA ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔ ✗


Stages Zooplankton

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Zooplankton NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗



Italy



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)



NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D2 Relative


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D2 Relative Biomass Non indigenous species NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D2 Species level


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Length Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Relative

Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Relative Biomass Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Sex Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Species level

taxonomy Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


D3 Stomach Content Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish and


Notes: BIOCENOSIS = Delphinus delphis ponticus, Tursiops truncatus ponticus, Phocoena

phocoena relicta. NA = Not applicable




Romania

Romania

Descriptor

Parameter Matrix Bucharest


UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D8 Cd Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 DDT and Metabolites Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 HCH Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Hg Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PAH Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Pb Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PCB Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 TBT Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Cd Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 DDT and Metabolites Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 HCH Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Hg Sea Water ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PAH Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Pb Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PCB Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA



D8 DDT and Metabolites Sediment ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 HCH Sediment ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Hg Sediment ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA




D8 TBT Sediment ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 Cd Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 DDT and Metabolites Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 HCH Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 Hg Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 PAH Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 Pb Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 PCB Biota ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D10 Amount of beach litter Other ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D10 Amount of litter in the sea

bottom Other ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D10 Distribution of litter Other ✗ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA





Notes: BIOTA = Mytilus galloprovincialis. NA = Not Applicable


Table 4.3.11: Monitoring of biotic components descriptors (D1, D2, D3, D4, D6) compliance

to existing EU Directives and RSC –Turkey/Black Sea

Turkey-Black Sea



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D1, D4, D6 N individuals Biocenosis ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 N pups/calves Biocenosis ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Structure Biocenosis ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 N individuals Birds ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 N nesting pairs Birds ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Success Birds ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Age Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Length Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Sex Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


taxonomy Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Age Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Length Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Sex Pelagic and Benthic Fish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Species biomass Phytobenthos ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Phytobenthos ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


taxonomy Phytobenthos ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Substrate type Phytobenthos ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Total Biomass Phytobenthos ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Total coverage Phytobenthos ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Phytoplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Phytoplankton ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


taxonomy Phytoplankton ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Zoobenthos ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Zoobenthos ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


taxonomy Zoobenthos ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Stages Zooplankton ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Relative

Abundance Zooplankton ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA



Zooplankton ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D1, D4, D6 Sex Zooplankton ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


taxonomy Zooplankton ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D2 Relative

Abundance Non indigenous species ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D2 Relative Biomass

Non indigenous species ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D2 Species level

taxonomy Non indigenous species ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D3 Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm.

Fish/Shellfish ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D3 Length Pelagic and Benthic Comm.


D3 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm.


D3 Relative

Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Comm.


D3 Relative Biomass

Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish/Shellfish

✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D3 Sex Pelagic and Benthic Comm.


D3 Species level

taxonomy Pelagic and Benthic Comm.


D3 Stomach Content

Pelagic and Benthic Comm. Fish/Shellfish

✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

Notes: BIOCENOSIS = Not monitored. NA =Not Applicable



noise indicators (D5, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) compliance to existing EU Directives and RSC

– Turkey/Black Sea

Turkey-Black Sea



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D5 Chla Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 Colour Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 DO Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 DOC Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 DON Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 DOP Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 NH4 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 NO2 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 pH Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 PO4 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 POC Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 Salinity Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 Secchi Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 SiO4 Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 Temperature Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 TN Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 TNOx Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 TP Sea Water ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 TSS Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D5 Turbidity Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D7 Alkalinity Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D7 pH Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D7 Salinity Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D7 Temperature Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Cd Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 DDT and Metabolites Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 HCH Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Hg Biota ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PAH Biota ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Pb Biota ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PCB Biota ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 TBT Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Cd Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 DDT and Metabolites Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 HCH Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA


Turkey-Black Sea



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D8 Hg Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PAH Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Pb Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 PCB Sea Water ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA



D8 DDT and Metabolites Sediment ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 HCH Sediment ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D8 Hg Sediment ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA




D8 TBT Sediment ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 Cd Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 DDT and Metabolites Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 HCH Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 Hg Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 PAH Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 Pb Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D9 PCB Biota ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D10 Amount of beach litter Other ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D10 Amount of litter sea

bottom Other ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA

D10 Distribution of litter Other ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ NA




Notes: BIOTA = Mytilus galloprovincialis. NA = Not Applicable


Table 4.3.13: Monitoring of biotic components descriptors (D1, D2, D3, D4, D6) compliance

to existing EU Directives and RSC –Turkey/Aegean/Mediterranean Sea

Turkey-Aegean/Mediterranean



UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)







Success Birds

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Age Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Length Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Sex Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


taxonomy Fish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗




D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Fish NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗




D1, D4, D6 Species coverage Phytobenthos NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔



NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Substrate type Phytobenthos NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗


D1, D4, D6 Total coverage Phytobenthos NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Phytoplankton NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Phytoplankton NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗



NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Zoobenthos NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Zoobenthos NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔


taxonomy Zoobenthos

NA ✔ ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔


Stages Zooplankton

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Abundance Zooplankton NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D1, D4, D6 Relative Biomass Zooplankton NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗




NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗





UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D2 Relative


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D2 Relative Biomass Non indigenous species NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D2 Species level


NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm.Fish/Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Length Pelagic and Benthic Comm.Fish/Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Maturation Age Pelagic and Benthic Comm.Fish/Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Relative

Abundance Pelagic and Benthic Comm.Fish/Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Relative Biomass Pelagic and Benthic Comm.Fish/Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Sex Pelagic and Benthic Comm.Fish/Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Species level

taxonomy Pelagic and Benthic Comm.Fish/Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D3 Stomach Content Pelagic and Benthic Comm.Fish/Shellfish

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

Notes: BIOCENOSIS = Not monitored. NA = Not Applicable



noise indicators (D5, D7, D8, D9, D10 and D11) compliance to existing EU Directives and RSC

– Turkey/Aegean/Mediterranean Sea




UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D5 Chla Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 Colour Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D5 DO Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 DOC Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 DON Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 DOP Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 NH4 Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 NO2 Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔


D5 PO4 Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 POC Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔


D5 Secchi Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 SiO4 Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔


D5 TN Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 TNOx Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 TP Sea Water NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D5 TSS Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D5 Turbidity Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D7 Alkalinity Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗




D8 Cd Biota NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D8 DDT and

Metabolites Biota

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 HCH Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Hg Biota NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D8 PAH Biota NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D8 Pb Biota NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D8 PCB Biota NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D8 TBT Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Cd Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 DDT and

Metabolites Sea Water

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗





UNEP-MAP (Barcelona

Convention)

D8 HCH Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Hg Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 PAH Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Pb Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 PCB Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 TBT Sea Water NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Cd Sediment NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D8 DDT and

Metabolites Sediment

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 HCH Sediment NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D8 Hg Sediment NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D8 PAH Sediment NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D8 Pb Sediment NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D8 PCB Sediment NA ✔ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D8 TBT Sediment NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 Cd Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 DDT and

Metabolites Biota

NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 HCH Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 Hg Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 PAH Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 Pb Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D9 PCB Biota NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D10 Amount of beach

litter Other

NA ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D10 Amount of litter/sea

bott. Other

NA ✗ ✔ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✔

D10 Distribution of litter Other NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D11 Type of activity Other NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D11 No. of days Other NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

D11 Duration Other NA ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗ ✗

Notes: BIOTA = Upenous pori, Mullus barbatus, Mulus surmuletus, Mytilus galloprovincialis.

NA = Not Applicable

.


Currently, the preliminary analysis covers 5 countries (Italy, Bulgaria, Greece,

Romania, Turkey). Examples are set in pie charts of parameters used per matrix and main

descriptor coverage in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea presented in Figures 4.3.1 and

4.3.2, respectively. In these figures the MSFD parameters used are those monitored by

partner countries in the Mediterranean and Black Seas. The number of parameters

considered per each matrix (water, sediment, biota, other) are expressed as percentage of

total number of parameter considered (left side of figures), while, the number of indicators

per each descriptor are expressed as percentage of the total number of indicators used (right

side of figures).

Additionally, in Figure 4.3.3 the number of indicators per biodiversity component and

its status is presented for the Mediterranean and the Black Sea.

The analysis of the data-base information will be further complemented by relevant

information available as output of current MSFD related projects.





Mediterranean Sea.





Black Sea.

Water45%

Sediment16%

Biota39%

TurkeyBlackSeaParametersusedpermatrix


Figure 4.3.3: Number of indicators per biodiversity component in ascending order and the

indicator status: A) - Black Sea and B) Mediterranean (Source: http://www.devotes-

project.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/D3-1_Existing-biodiversity-indicators.pdf)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Pelagicinvertebrates

Rep les Birds Microbes Marinemammals

Cephalopods Angiosperms Fish Zooplankton Macroalgae Phytoplankton Benthicinvertebrates

opera onal underdevelopement conceptual nostatus

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Microbes

Pelagicinvertebrates

Birds

Cephalopods

Reples

Marinemam

mals

Zooplankto

n

Phyto

plankton

Macroalgae

Angiosperms

Benthicinvertebrates

Fish

opera onal underdevelopement conceptual nostatus


4.4. Analysis of scales of monitoring

The aim of this analysis is to assess the geographical coverage of the existing

monitoring programs, location of the sampling sites and the periodicity of sampling.

4.4.1. Mapping of existent monitoring stations and frequencies

4.4.2. Rasterization. The existing monitoring stations and frequencies

distributions will be plotted on a raster map. The scales that are considered in this

preliminary phase are: the density of the sampling stations (number of stations within each

cell), the frequency of the sampling (average frequency of the stations within each cell) and

the sampling effort (number of stations x average frequency of sampling). At present state,

an arbitrary grid is used with a uniform mesh size of 0.5 decimal degrees. For future and

more accurate estimations, it is planned to use differential grids with appropriate mesh size

for the typology of the monitored habitat (e.g. coarse grid for offshore sampling, finer for

near-shore, very fine for ecologically relevant or threatened areas.) If needed, data in grids

could be interpolated to obtain continuous response surface (useful to predispose for future

model applications).

4.4.3. Gap analysis. ’Ideal’ raster maps, similar to those described in the

previous point, will be produced on the basis of the information collected in Activity 2 and

will be compared with the existing stations maps, in order to identify gaps or overlaps in all

sampling density, frequency and effort.

Preliminary results

Currently, the dataset is completed for 4 countries (Bulgaria, Greece, Romania,

Turkey). In this analysis, dataset that have been partially completed are not considered, with

the exception of Italy, in which the Puglia’s monitoring sites are taken into account.

Hereby, two examples of output about descriptors "Seabed habitats, phytobenthos"

and "Water column habitats, phytoplankton" (D1, D4, D6) (Figures 4.4.1 and 4.4.2) are

demonstrated.


Figure 4.4.1: Water column habitats, phytoplankton: A) Maps of monitoring stations, B)

Density of sampling (number of stations within each grid cell), C) Frequency of sampling

(average frequency of the stations within each cell) and D) Sampling effort (number of

stations X average frequency of sampling){tc "1 Water column habitats, phytoplankton. Maps

of existent monitoring sites" \f f}


Fig.4.4.2: Seabed habitats, phytobenthos. A) Maps of monitoring stations, B) Density of

sampling (number of stations within each grid cell), C) Frequency of sampling (average

frequency of the stations within each cell) and D) Sampling effort (number of stations X

average frequency of sampling){tc "1 Water column habitats, phytoplankton. Maps of

existent monitoring sites" \f f}


4.5. Assessment of optimal strategies

The assessment of optimal strategies will be based on the research of the literature,

the implemented directives, and the experts view. This will be performed in order to identify

the relevant spatial and temporal scales that need to be monitored, to assess the optimal

parameters needed to be measured and the relevant laboratory procedures.

To each of the MS will be asked to indicate the areas requiring a more intensive

sampling (i.e. particularly valuable or threatened areas).

An optimal sampling map (based on the same grid of the interpolated surface) will be

produced from information collected during the previous phase. Existent and optimal

strategy maps can be directly compared to identify under- or over-sampled areas.

4.6. Gap analysis

The analysis of the information provided in the tables and figures will be used to

identify major gaps in the monitoring activities and the compliance to MSFD requirements

related to the availability of GES descriptors, biodiversity components, habitats and

pressures, frequency of sampling and spatial coverage. The capability of monitoring

programs for integrated monitoring (synchronized monitoring of state/pressure indicators)

will be included.

The gap scores by Descriptors elaborated by the PERSEUS Project (Table 4.6.1) will be

revised as some partners have not been included in the assessment (e.g. Turkey), as well as

the SWOT analysis produced by the DEVOTES Project6.

6https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260310076_SWOT_Analysis_of_Monitoring_Networks_in_Europe


Table 4.6.1: Descriptors gap scores (0 – no gap, 0.5 – partial gap, 1 = major gap) 7

D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 D11

A - Common understanding 0,5 0 0 0 0 0,5 1 0 0 0 0,5 2,5

B - Operational methodologies available 0,5 1 0 0 0 0,5 1 0,5 0 0 1 4,5

C - Methodologies under development 0,5 0 0 0 0 0,5 0 0 0 0 0,5 1,5

D - Harmonized methodologies 1 1 0,5 1 0,5 1 1 0,5 0,5 0,5 1 8,5

E - Thresholds available 1 1 0,5 1 0,5 1 1 0,5 0,5 1 1 9

F - Quality classification methods available 0,5 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0,5 1 1 8

G - Sufficient data 0,5 1 0,5 1 0,5 0,5 1 0,5 0,5 1 1 8

H - Sufficient knowledge 0,5 1 0 1 0,5 0,5 1 0,5 0,5 0,5 1 7

=> gap score 5 6 2,5 5 2 5,5 7 2,5 2,5 4 7

4.7. Recommendation for filling the gaps

Once gaps and overlaps have been identified, they can be filled/eliminated by

adapting the existing monitoring plans (i.e. by increasing or decreasing the sampling effort

for area/time, by measuring more or less environmental parameters, by coupling the

collection of several measurements). New technologies (e.g., remote sensing, hydrodynamic

3d modeling, underwater acoustics, underwater video and imagery, Continuous Plankton

Recorders, moorings, drifters, Argo floats, gliders, XBTs, ships of opportunity/FERRYBOX) can

be integrated in the current monitoring methodologies to maintain an acceptable

benefit/cost ratio. Within the MFSD framework, focused expert meetings should be

organized to set the state-of-art on the advances in the marine and coastal monitoring and to

assess how they can be used to improve the extension and quality and to reduce the costs of

actual monitoring plans.

7 http://www.perseus-net.eu/assets/media/PDF/Press%20Releases/Fact%20Sheets/560.pdf


5. RELATIONSHIPS WITH OTHER DELIVERABLES AND WORK PACKAGES WITHIN IRIS-SES

According to project’s Description of Work, Activity 1 is directly linked to other

activities as follows:

Activity 2 - Integrating scales of monitoring with those of processes to be monitored

The information gathered in the Activity 1 will be used to achieve all the tasks as follows:

Task 2.1 – assessing the opportunities to develop multidisciplinary programmes, Task 2 –

integration across descriptors and indicators and Task3 – Identification of emerging

monitoring needs and gaps.

Activity 3 - Adaptation and development of intelligent tools

Task 2 of the Activity 2 is developed based on the Inventory sheets from Greece and Romania

and will be delivered to the activity 3.

6. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE FIRST DELIVERABLE

- Updates of the catalogue and, accordingly, of the meta database with the information

gathered from the partners and any other sources.

- Updates on the analysis of pressures

- According to what decided during the first steering committee the assessment will be

fully developed under Activity 2. A preliminary assessment of existent monitoring

programmes was conducted; when data will be fully available, the assessment will be

completed and delivered under the second reporting period

86

ANNEX I. Header rows of each sheet used for the inventory of the monitoring programmes

Descriptors 1,4,6 - Birds

Month(s)/Season(s)


Details Key

species

Type of populatio

n5

N individual

s6

N nesting pairs7

Reproductive

success8

Additional

variables9

Descriptors

1,4,6 - Mammals Month(s) Species Details


N individual

s5

N pups/calv

es6

Additional

variables7

Descriptors

1,4,6 - Fish Station

LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Sampling

depth interva

l

Month Season Species/

Community


Species level

taxonomy5

Relative

abundanc

e6

Length7

Relative biomas

s8

Sex9 Age1

0

Maturation

age11

Stomach content12


Descriptors

1,4,6 – Seabed

habitats

Phytobenthos

Station LAT__DEC

_D LON__DE

C_D

Month/seaso

n


Species level

taxonomy5

Species biomass6

Species coverag

e7

Total biomass

8

Total coverage9

Maximum

depth distribution

of communities10

Substrat

e type

11

Additional

variables12

Descriptors

1,4,6 – Seabed

habitats

Zoobenthos

Station LAT__DEC

_D LON__DE

C_D

Month/seaso

n


Species level

taxonomy5

Relative abundanc

e6

Relative biomass7

Size distribution of

dominant

species8

Additiona

l variables9

87

Descriptors

1,4,6 –Water

column habitats

Phytoplankton

Station LAT__DEC

_D LON__DE

C_D Month Season


Species level

taxonomy5

Relative abundan

ce6

Relative biomass

7

Additiona

l variables8

Descriptors

1,4,6 –Water

column habitats

Zooplankton

Station LAT__DEC

_D LON__DE

C_D Month Season


Species level

taxonomy5

Relative bundanc

e6

Relative biomass

7

Developmental stages8

Sex9

Additional

variables10

D2 – Non

Indigenous

Species

Station LAT__DEC

_D LON__DE

C_D Month Season

Species/ Communi

ty


Species level

taxonomy5

Relative abunda

nce6

Relative

biomass7

Pathway of

spreading 8

Additional

variable

s9

D3 –

Commercial

Fish and

Shellfish

Station LAT__DEC

_D LON__DE

C_D

Sampling

depth interva

l

Month Season Species/

Community


Species level

taxonomy5

Relative

abundanc

e6

Length7

Relative biomas

s8

Sex9 Age1

0

Maturation

age11

Stomach content12


D5 -

Eutrophication

Station LAT__DEC_D

LON__DEC_D

Bottom depth

Surface/water

column

Month/Season


PO4_FREQ5

TP_FREQ6

DOP_FRE

Q7

SIO4_FREQ8

TNOx_FREQ9

NO2_FREQ10

NH4_FREQ11

TN_FREQ12

DON_FREQ13

POC_FREQ14

DOC_FREQ15

HumicSubs_FREQ16

Chla_FREQ17

Dissolved Oxygen_F

REQ18

Secchi_FREQ19

Additional20

D7 -

Hydrographical

changes

Station LAT__DEC

_D LON__DE

C_D Bottom depth

Surface/ water

column

Month/Season


Tem_FREQ5

Sal_FREQ7

Curr_FRE

Q9

pH_FREQ11

Alkal_FREQ13

Additional15

88

D8 -

Contaminants in

water

Station LAT__DEC

_D LON__DE

C_D Bottom depth

Sampling depth

PAH5 PCBs6 TBT7

DDT and

metabolites8

HCH9 Pb10 Cd11 Hg12 Additional13

D8 -

Contaminants in

sediments

Station LAT__DEC

_D LON__DE

C_D Bottom depth

PAH5 PCBs6 TBT7 DDT and metaboli

tes8 HCH9 Pb10 Cd11 Hg12

Additional13

D8 -

Contaminants in

biota

Station LAT__DEC

_D LON__DE

C_D Bottom depth

Species Organ PAH5 PCBs6 TBT7

DDT and

metabolites8

HCH9 Pb10 Cd11 Hg12 Effects1

3

D9 -

Contaminants in

seafood

Station LAT__DEC

_D LON__DE

C_D Bottom depth

Species for

consumption

Organ PAH5 PCBs6 TBT7

DDT and

metabolites8

HCH9 Pb10 Cd11 Hg12 Legislation13

Additional14

D10 - Marine

Litter

Amount of beach

litter5

Amount of litter in

the water6

Amount of litter in

the sea bottom7

Distribution

of litter8

Litter ingested

by marine animals9

Additional10

D11 -

Energy&Noise

Type of activity5

No. of days6

Duration: short or

long lasting7

Additional8

integrated regional monitoring implementation...

Documents