Article 17 web tool

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: Flanders has a good habitat mapping programme, but with some knowledge gaps (remaining old fieldwork, amount of the habitat in a polygon with several vegetation types not exactly known, …). We use minimum (= minimum of certain habitat), maximum (maximum of certain habitat + mean of uncertain habitat) and a best single value (mean of certain habitat). ||
->HabCondition: Information on typical species (Red List status) and spatial coherence of the habitat is determined directly on the regional level. As a consequence, this information cannot be integrated in the areas given in field 6.1, but it is used to assess the conclusions on specific structures and functions (field 10.3). The status of typical species and spatial coherence is good. But because there is a heavy presumption based on expert judgment that the status of some of the other indicators is bad, we assess SS&F unfavourable-bad (U2) (see field 10.3). ||
->Future: In the nearby future tidal habitat will be created in the vicinity of the Zwin, Prosperpolder and through the implementation of the Sigma plan the area of 1130 will significantly increase. ||
->Conclusion: see field 6.8 Specific structure and functions (incl. typical species) ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: N/A ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: For the Marine Ranges, we used the Danish cost line to exclude that part of the area that was placed on land in order to only get the marine part of the range. Difference in range from last periode is due to a new coastline maps used. ||
->Coverage: The mapping is limited to a few large sites. ||
->HabCondition: A general lack of biological data in two of three areas. However the estuaries all border areas where nutrient reduction is needed from the freshwater sources ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: Range is evaluated as favourable allthough the actual national mapping og 1130 is incomplete. However no estuaries in DK have been diked and no estuaries have been cut of by cluises in the last 25 years or more. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: N/A ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: N/A ||
->HabCondition: La mise en place de la surveillance DCE dans les estuaires (eaux de transition) apparait inachevée et pour le moment s'est limitée aux algues opportunistes et aux communautés de poissons. Elle ne recouvre pas l'ensemble des estuaires, en particulier ceux des petits fleuves côtiers qui remplissent pourtant des fonctions essentielles aux écosystèmes marins. Un nouvel indicateur basé sur les communautés benthiques vient d'être proposé, il devrait permettre au prochain exercice de préciser l'état de santé des estuaires en particulier de ceux de taille modeste, probablement soumis à de moins fortes contraintes que les grands estuaires.
L’absence de synthèse et de données historiques rend la mise en évidence de tendances temporelles délicates.
Néanmoins les estuaires sont les écosystèmes marins qui bien que de surface réduite concentrent le maximum d'activités humaines. Leur surface a été fortement réduite au cours des siècles passés et même si elle est freinée leur artificialisation se poursuit via les modifications morphologiques (en
particulier la réduction des surfaces d'estrans pour la construction d'aménagements portuaires ou
industriels). Mais également via la constance des apports de polluants issus de l'activité humaine sur les bassins
versants (pollutions organiques (HAP et biocides), pollutions métalliques et substances pharmaceutiques). Les mesures de gestion visant à restaurer les fonctions de petits estuaires viennent contrecarrer ces constatations. Mais semblent aujourd’hui trop limitées pour permettre de proposer une autre évaluation. ||
->Future: La reconnaissance de l'importance du rôle joué par les estuaires dans le bon fonctionnement de la zone côtière va croissant. Aujourd'hui si l'évaluation de l'état de santé (et de conservation) des estuaires reste un sujet complexe et parfois controversé, le développement et la calibration de multiples indicateurs devrait permettre à terme de mieux mesurer les impacts afin de cibler des mesures de gestion propres à restaurer les fonctions essentielles des estuaires. Il serait possible dès lors d'envisager sur le long terme une amélioration de l'état de conservation des estuaires via une décroissance des pollutions originaires de bassins versants. Il faut noter cependant qu'une restauration pleine et entière des fonctions des estuaires passe par un regain des surfaces perdues via les aménagements de toute sorte, ce qui suppose des mesures de gestion fortes incluant, là où c'est possible, un retour au milieu naturel. ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Range was estimated based on partial data with some extrapolation and/or modelling.
The Range Map for this habitat is the intersection of the polygon generated through the mapping of the habitat feature with a 10 x10 km grid generated on Irish National Grid. The intersection of this transformed ING grid was used to intersect with the 10 km2 LAEA grid.
There is no evidence of any genuine change to the range of this habitat feature in Ireland since the last reporting period.
FRR was considered to be the same as the current range as there is no evidence of decline since the Directive came into force. ||
->Coverage: No impacts with the potential to lead to a change in the area of the Estuary habitat have been identified since the last reporting period. ||
->HabCondition: 433km2 of the total resource of 761km2 of the Estuary habitat within 11 Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) around the coast of Ireland were surveyed to assess the Structure and functions of this habitat during the current reporting period. This represents 56.9% of the total national resource for this habitat.
The overall site-based conservation assessment was recorded as Unfavourable-Inadequate at three sites (Lough Swilly SAC, Dundalk Bay SAC and Lower River Shannon SAC). This amounted to 33,190ha or 76.6% of the area surveyed, but only accounts for 27.3% of the sites surveyed.
The remaining eight sites (Castlemaine Harbour SAC, Blackwater River (Cork/Waterford) SAC, Ballymacoda (Clonpriest & Pillmore) SAC, Bannow Bay SAC, Slaney River Valley SAC, West of Ardara/Maas Road SAC, Tralee Bay & Magharees Peninsula, West to Cloghane SAC and River Barrow & River Nore SAC) were assessed as Favourable. This amounted to 10,154ha or 23.4% of the area sampled but represents 72.7% of the sites surveyed. Using the Structure and functions criteria in the Annex E evaluation matrix would result in the habitat being assessed as Unfavourable-Bad. However, this does not accurately reflect the conditions at a site level and highlights the difficulties in using area to assess Structure and functions in an aquatic environment. For this habitat therefore, the more accurate assessment of Structure and functions was deemed to be Unfavourable-Inadequate.
Two SACs (Dundalk Bay SAC and Lower River Shannon SAC) failed to meet Favourable Conservation Status due to changes to the sediment composition in one MCT within each site. In each of these cases an increase in the proportion of fine sediment grain size classes was recorded. It is considered highly likely that the recorded changes in sedimentology over the reporting period have resulted from increased rates of sedimentation. Estuaries surrounded by urban settlements are vulnerable to the impact of run-off from storm water and may also be impacted by on-going discharge of inadequately treated water.
At Lough Swilly SAC an increase in the negative indicator species Pacific oyster Magallana gigas (syn. Crassostrea gigas) was recorded at three intertidal stations and was associated with samples that also contained the reef-building polychaete Sabellaria alveolata.
A number of pressures listed in section 7.1 are known to act on the sites and are considered to be responsible for some of the changes recorded. ||
->Future: Short-term trend direction of Range is assessed as Stable.
Current range is equal to Favourable Reference Range.
Conservation status of Range is therefore Favourable.
Future trend of Range is assessed as Stable, as no change in Range is expected as the physical and geological nature of the habitat makes a change in range unrealistic.
Future prospects of Range are therefore Good.

Short-term trend direction of Area is assessed as Stable
The potential for a significant change (increase or decrease) in the area is considered highly unlikely in the medium term.
Conservation status of Area is therefore Favourable.
Future trend of Area is assessed as Stable, as no change in area is expected based on the current threats, conservation measures and the physical structure of the habitat.
Future prospects of Area are therefore Good.

Short-term trend direction of Structure and functions is Decreasing.
An assessment of Unfavourable-Inadequate was recorded at two SACs. The failure of this habitat within the Lower River Shannon SAC was a significant contributing factor to the failure of the habitat to meet Favourable Conservation Status at a national level.
Future prospects of Structure and functions are therefore Poor. ||
->Conclusion: The overall conservation status of Estuaries has been assessed as Unfavourable-Inadequate.
479km2 of the total resource of 761km2 of the Estuary habitat within 11 Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) around the coast of Ireland were surveyed to assess the Structure and functions of this habitat during the current reporting period. This represents 56.9% of the total national resource for this habitat. The overall assessment of Structure and functions was Unfavourable-Inadequate.
The principal reason for the failure of the habitat to meet Favourable Conservation Status was a change in sediment composition. The large area of the total national resource of the Estuary habitat within Lower River Shannon SAC, where a change in sediment composition was recorded, was a significant factor in the overall failure of the habitat to meet Favourable Conservation Status. The presence of negative indicator species was the reason for the failure at one site (Lough Swilly SAC).
It is considered highly likely that the pressures recorded have resulted from increased sedimentation. Estuaries surrounded by urban settlements are vulnerable to the impact of run-off from storm water; they are also impacted by waste water discharge in these areas in Ireland. Those surrounded by, and down-stream of, areas of intensive agriculture and/or commercial forestry operations are frequently impacted by the increased sediment input caused by this activity.
The Overall trend was considered to be improving in 2013, this was based on expert judgement rather than field-based survey and analysis. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Distribution map based on habitat maps of the coastal region. For marine habitats 1110 to 1170 both the delivered maps and reported range are based upon data in ETRS co-ordinates. ||
->Coverage: No reliable new data on area available ||
->HabCondition: The habitat as a whole has been assessed as being not in good comndition, but still, overall there is a negative trend in conditions. ||
->Future: Future prospects are bad, because no large scale restoration of range and area of estuaries is foreseen in the near future ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: 10% decrease/increase is used as threshold for all trends, due to uncertainty in data; a formula with 75%/25%-thresholds is used for conservation status of Structure & Function and Typical species. ||
->Other: Report by Tom Ysebaert (WMR)

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: N/A ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: The favourable reference range is expected to be the same as the current value and the short term trend stable, as there are no signs of decline or loss of habitat. The current value of range have changed due to changes in the new range tool, which calculate the range differently and the national boarders used in the tool are slightly different from last reporting. This resulting in new numbers of range for the habitat in the biogeographical region. There have also been a mapping project of the habitat along the Swedish coastline, however this have not changed the surface area estimates of the habitat in the MATL region. ||
->Coverage: Favourable reference area is set to be the same as current value, and the trend stable. There is no change from last reporting. However, there has been a national mapping project of the habitat, which results confirmed the previous numbers (Marine Monitoring 2018). ||
->HabCondition: The national Swedish monitoring of some commercial fish species (Havs och vattenmyndigheten , 2018) indicates that the populations of the typical species fish for Estuaries 1130 Matl being monitored (e.g. Platichthys flesus and Salmon trutta) along the Swedish West Coast are stable. The information on Salmon trutta are limited due to lack of knowledge, but the population is considered as stable after measures been taken for decreasing different pressures (e.g. facilitating river migration). Due to the national bird monitoring, no specific trends are seen along the typical species of birds (Gren et al. 2018).

There are several studies that indicate that the loss in large carnivorous fish populations (e.g. cod, but also pike and perch and pikeperch) within Swedish marine waters have significant impact on the ecological status of coastal ecosystems. The cause of the loss has primarily been the fishing pressure. For cod along the Swedish West Coast has the commercial fishing being contributed with the largest pressure both offshore and in inshore areas. Regulations for restricting the fishing pressure has been implemented, but the populations have still not recovered for uncertain reasons, why ecological regime shifts and/or high predation pressure has been suggested but more knowledge are needed (Aarts et al).

The national monitoring of fish health status (Mustamääki et al, 2018) with long time series (1992-2017) on Zoarces viviparous health indicators from the Fjällbacka area, considered as a low impacted reference area, reveals significant increase in EROD and GR activity this together with affected metabolism, lower fat content in muscle (lower bodyweight and condition) and an elevated rate of dead juveniles in females do clearly indicate an overall negative trend in health status. The cause of this deteriorating status is still unclear but the unknown contaminants has been suggested. The status of the health of Z. viviparous can probably be considered as an indication on current fish health along the Swedish West coast, but more knowledge is preferable.
Two typical species are red listed; Zostera noltii (VU (Area and area quality decreasing, Parvicardium hauniense (VU (small population)) and the former red listed Zoarces viviparus is now considered (LC) (ArtDatabanken, 2015).

The analysis of the physical disturbances during the reporting period (Törnquist et al. In prep; Törnqvist personal com/PM.), show that about 38 % of the area of estuaries within the Marine Atlantic region is significantly or highly (sum of the two highest classes of disturbance within the analysis class 3 (significant) and class 4 (high)) effected by physical disturbances (e.g. exploitation, dredging, swelling etc.). The choice of using only the highest classes of disturbance is due to the need for further analysis on the actual impact on habitat biota (Näslund and Nyström Sandman. Pers. com. (PM)). If all three classes indicating some or higher disturbances, 44 % of the habitat area are affected. This indicate that large areas of the habitat are modified and the impact on ecosystem functions are considerable.

Due to implemented measures for decreasing the pressure of the anthropogenic nutrient load to marine waters the inshore coastal water quality indicates improvement and is considered to be high (Skagerrak) or moderate status (Kattegat) along the Swedish west coast. Some water parameters (e.g. DIN, tot-N, chlorophyll, water transparency) indicates also improving trends while others just are stable (DIP, tot-P) (WISS 2018; Havsmiljöinstitutet, 2016, Ejhed et al, 2016). The trend for the temperature is increasing while salinity is stable (Havsmiljöinstitutet, 2016). The overall trend for water quality for the inshore coastal Skagerrak and Kattegat is a slight improvement. However, the specific habitat, the estuaries, are considered slightly different due to them being directly impacted by polluted and enriched loads from riverine outlets. For example; to Kattegat two thirds of the nitrogen load and over 90% of the phosphorus is originating from riverine outlet (Ejhed et al, 2016). Point sources from sewage plants (Kattegat) and also diffuse sewer leakage from individual households and summer cottages due to substandard sewage treatment is problematic in certain coastal areas causing nutrient (nitrogen) load causing decreased light penetration affecting macrophytic production. On the biogeographical level 25% of the anthropogenic nitrogen load and 34% of the anthropogenic phosphorus is originated residential and recreational sewage in total (Ejhed 2016). For estuaries, being highly exploited within the region, this kind of load may have a high and direct effect on habitat condition. ||
->Future: - The Future prospects of structures and functions for the Estuaries 1130 MATL is set to Bad.
The assessment is due to the continuous high pressure from physical disturbances (coastal modification), residential and recreational activities (e.g. anthropogenic nutrient load and pollution) and also the continuous moderate pressure from fishing (recreational and commercial) and shipping. ||
->Conclusion: Despite initiative taken for the development of monitoring methods (e.g. visual monitoring with underwater video: fish recruitment; physical disturbance) and a program for biogeographical data collection it has, except for the physical disturbance, so far not been implemented. No monitoring data except for the analysis of physical disturbances has therefore been biogeographically generated within the Estuaries 1130 in MATL. Therefore the conservation status of the structures and functions has been set mainly by expert assessment and extrapolation based on a limited amount of data.

Overall assessment:
- The condition of habitat is assessed mainly on extrapolation from a limited amount of data.
- The condition of habitat has not been classified by the county boards.
- The short-term trend of habitat condition is set as stable
- The condition of habitat structure and functions and typical species is set as: bad U2
- The assessment is set due to the condition of the typical species, their population status and development and their health condition, as indicators on the ecological function of the habitat. The assessment of the Estuaries 1130 MATL is also set in line with habitat quality conditions caused by continuous riverine load after considering the measures taken and decrease in anthropogenic load. The large area being significantly or highly physical disturbed is, however, of major concern for the assessment of the structure and functions
- The Future prospects of structures and functions for the Estuaries 1130 MATL is set to Bad.
The assessment is due to the continuous high pressure from physical disturbances (coastal modification), residential and recreational activities (e.g. anthropogenic nutrient load and pollution) and also the continuous moderate pressure from fishing (recreational and commercial) and shipping.
-In comparison with last reporting there is a change in the guidelines for the Conservation Status assessment according the definition and assessment of pressures and threats, which have had significant impact on the assessment. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: 4.1 - Estuaries are physiographic features and so their range is determined primarily by geomorphological and hydrographic processes occurring over geological time-scales and is not related to biological communities or processes supported by communities. Therefore, the range was considered equivalent to the surface area of the habitat.
4.3- Estuaries are physiographic features and so their range is determined primarily by geomorphological and hydrographic processes occurring over geological time-scales and is not related to biological communities or processes supported by communities. Therefore, the range was considered equivalent to the surface area of the habitat. While the surface area of some of these individual habitats may have declined due to localised pressures, the geographic spread and distribution of features is not thought to have been reduced.
4.11- As a result of improved mapping of the habitat, the surface area of range in UK Estuaries is larger than the figure that was reported in 2013.
For more information on the approach taken please refer to the JNCC website for the 2019 UK Approach Document. ||
->Coverage: 5.1 - The data sources used to produce the surface area map ranged from 1988 to 2016.
5.4- The 2013 UK Article 17 surface area data for Annex I Estuaries was revised at a UK level by the JNCC following updates submitted by the UK Country Agencies. For further details see JNCC website (JNCC 2018a) and the 2019 UK Approach Document.
5.6 - Expert judgement was used to determine the short-term trend direction at the UK-level. The largest proportion of this resource is in England inshore waters. Here, the overall trend of the habitat is uncertain, however, there have been reported losses due to sea-level rise, realignment and coastal developments. The trend is reported as stable in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
5.14- As a result of improved mapping of the habitat, the surface area UK Estuaries is larger than the figure reported in 2013.
For more information on the approach taken please refer to the JNCC website for the 2019 UK Approach Document. ||
->HabCondition: 6.1-The area of habitat in 'good' (favourable) 'not good (unfavourable) and unknown condition was assessed in each of the four countries and the results were summed. 25% of the habitat is in unfavourable (not good) condition, 51% of the habitat is in favourable (good condition) and 24% of the habitat is in unknown condition. The structure and functions conservation status is, therefore, unfavourable-bad, it was also unfavourable-bad in 2013.
6.4-The short-term trend of habitat in good condition was assessed by the four countries and the results were aggregated (see 2019 UK Approach Document). England has the largest proportion of UK Estuaries and reported a decreasing short-term trend as a result of coastal squeeze. The short-term trend was also decreasing in 2013.
The approach taken to assess habitat condition and trends in condition is outlined on the JNCC website in the 2019 UK Approach Document and in country-level reporting information. ||
->Future: Future trends for each parameter were selected by the four countries and then aggregated to give a future trend for the UK (see 2019 UK Approach Document). Table 32 in the EU Guidelines was used to bring the future trend and conservation status of each parameter together to conclude on future prospects.
9.1a)- Future prospects are bad because the future trend is very negative and the conclusion for the parameter is Unfavourable-bad. Future prospects were also bad in 2013.
9.1b)-Future prospects are poor because the future trend is negative and current conservation status of the parameter is unknown. Future prospects were unknown in 2013.
9.1c)- Future prospects are bad because the future trend is very negative and current conservation status of the parameter is unfavourable-bad. Future prospects were also bad in 2013.
For further details on the approach taken to identify future prospects please refer to JNCC website for the 2019 UK Approach Document and country-level reporting information. ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: N/A ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: The national mapping of estuaries is not complete. For the Marine Ranges, we used the Danish cost line to exclude that part of the area that was placed on land in order to only get the marine part of the range. Difference in range from last periode is due to a new coastline maps used.

The favorable reference range is equal to the real distribution of the habitat today, although the figure is still not correctly reflected in this range analysis. ||
->Coverage: The mapping is limited to one sites and the method has changed. The area mapped as estruary 1130 also include elements of 1140 and 1150. Formerly areas covered with several habitat types could not be recorded as the full area but had to split the area.
The favorable reference area is equal to the real distribution of the habitat today, although the figure is still not correctly reflected in this area analysis. ||
->HabCondition: A general lack of biological data from this habitat

For the one specific habitat within a N-2000 area (Flasken) there is a target to reduce nutrient level in the area according to VFR. For this reason the area is judged as "not good" ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: Range is evaluated as favourable allthough the actual national mapping og 1130 is incomplete. However no estuaries in DK have been diked and no estuaries have been cut of by cluises in the last 25 years or more. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: N/A ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Previously used point data were replaced by delineating the habitat features in a workshop by Metsähallitus and ELY centres in 2017. ||
->Coverage: The boundaries for each estuary in Finland, considered to belong to the habitat 1130, were delineated for this reporting. The previous locations of the estuaries did not change and some new habitat features were added. The area covered by the habitat became larger than in the previous reporting in 2013 due to new spatial data. ||
->HabCondition: The minimum area in not-good condition was based on spatial data on known human activities occuring within the habitat. If either the human activities or the use of coastline or a combination of these exceeded 20% of the habitat coverage, the whole habitat feature was assessed to be in bad condition. The maximum area in not-good condition was assessed based on the areal coverage of the habitat having other than good ecological status as reported under the EU Water Framework Directive. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: As explained in the reporting guidelines (p. 85) trend magnitudes should be considered. In this case the decreasing trend of structure and functions is so minor that it does not justify the overall trend to be D. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: N/A ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: Łączna powierzchnia siedliska została podana na podstawie wyliczonej
powierzchni 11 stanowisk tego siedliska monitorowanych w raportowanym okresie z znanych 15 stanowisk. ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: The favourable reference range is expected to be the same as the current value and the short term trend stable, as there are no signs of decline or loss of habitat. The current value of range have changed due to improved knowledge of the occurrence of the habitat. There have been a national mapping of the habitat along the coastline of Sweden, which have improved the distribution map. Also, the new range tool calculate the range differently and the national boarders used in the tool are slightly different from last reporting. This resulting in new numbers of range for the habitat in the biogeographical region. ||
->Coverage: Favourable reference area is set to be the same as current value and the trend stable. The change in favourable reference area is due to a change in current value. The current value of area have changed due to improved knowledge of the occurrence of the habitat. There have been a national mapping of the habitat, which have improved the distribution map (Marine Monitoring 2018). ||
->HabCondition: The national monitoring on commercial fish stocks (Havs- och vattenmyndigheten, 2018; Olsson 2019) indicate that the populations of some of the typical species fish such as pike, Esox lucius, that is suffering from high fishing pressure and predation from sticklebacks; also the pikeperch, Sander lucioperca is heavily targeted by recreational fishing and are decreasing despite benefitting from higher temperatures and eutrophication (Olsson, 2019). However, the populations of perch, Perca fluviatilis, which is also benefitting from increased temperatures and decreased salinity, are considered as sufficient. The populations of Platichthys flesus, are stable or increasing in inshore areas. The population of A. anguilla is not sustainable managed which is complicated by reduced recruiting capacity.

There are several studies that indicate that the loss in large carnivorous fish populations (e.g. cod, but also pike and perch and pikeperch) within Swedish marine waters have significant impact on the ecological status of coastal ecosystems. The cause of the loss has primarily been the fishing pressure. In the Baltic there is a further need for decreased fishing pressure and increase in restricted/protected areas (Bergström et al, 2016; Helcom 2018, Olsson et al, 2019). For the offshore cod population the commercial fisheries causes a significant pressure, but for the inshore coastal populations it is the recreational fishing that have the largest impact, but also local predation from seals and cormorants (more knowledge needed) and other fish (e.g. Sticklebacks on pike and perch), and loss of recruiting habitat (Hansen et al, 2018; Sundblad & Bergström 2014) may impact on population development (Hansson et al, 2017; Bergström et al 2016). Estuaries in the Baltic are considered as important fish habitat especially for migrating fish but also for species depending on vegetated bottoms (for more information see below).

The national monitoring of fish health status with long time series (1992-2017) on Zoarces viviparous and Perca fluviatilis health indicators from the three different areas in along the Swedish Baltic coast (Holmöarna, Torhamn, Kvädö), reveals significant increase in EROD and GR activity this together with affected metabolism, lower fat content in muscle (lower bodyweight and condition) and an elevated rate of dead juveniles in females do clearly indicate an overall negative trend in health status (Mustamääki et al, 2018a-c). The cause of this deteriorating status is still unclear but the unknown contaminants has been suggested, despite decreased concentrations of monitored contaminants. The status of the health of Z. viviparous and P fluviatilis can probably be considered as an indication on current fish health along the Baltic, but more knowledge is preferable for strengthening the effects on the specific habitat.
One of the typical species is red listed; Parvicardium hauniense (VU (small population).
Typical species birds have no or positive trends. The annual average have been increasing during the period of 1998-2017 for both Podiceps cristatus (3.9 %) and Sterna hirundo (2.2%) (Gren et al. 2018).

The analysis of the physical disturbances during the reporting period (Törnquist et al. In prep; Törnqvist personal com/PM.), show that about 20 % of the area of estuaries within the Marine Baltic region is significantly or highly (sum of the two highest classes of disturbance within the analysis class 3 (significant) and class 4 (high)) effected by physical disturbances (e.g. exploitation, dredging, swelling etc.). The choice of using only the highest classes of disturbance is due to the need for further analysis on the actual impact on habitat biota (Näslund and Nyström Sandman. Pers. com (PM)). If all three classes indicating some or higher disturbances, 25 % of the habitat area are affected. This indicate that moderate areas of the habitat are modified and the impact on ecosystem functions are considerable.

As the major part (81%) of the habitat area is situated within the inshore Bothnian Sea and Bay the water quality of the habitat have been assessed regarding its geographical distribution. Due to the classification within WISS the water quality status are at least good considering DIN and DIP, and moderate considering Tot N, Tot P and transparency. The trend is generally stable, however, for the Bothnian Sea the trend for phosphorus is somewhat decreasing probably due to the internal load.

High amount of the nutrient load to the sea is originating from inland point sources through the riverine outlets. For example of the overall anthropogenic nitrogen load to the MBAL region 38% is originating from industrial and sewage plant point sources (Ejhed 2016) through riverine outlets. Being the direct recipient of major riverine outlets the Baltic estuaries are impacted.

The shortage of carnivorous fish are considered in the Baltic to lead to deteriorating habitat quality especially due to an increase in filamentous algae competing with important macrophytes, such as Zostera, caused by a trophic cascade (Östeman, et al, 2016 Eriksson et al, 2011; Donadi et al. 2017). This is especially the case on shallow and vegetated softbottoms such as the estuaries. ||
->Future: - The future prospects of structure and functions for Estuaries 1130 MBAL is set as Bad.
The assessment is set due to the continuous high pressure from agricultural, residential or recreational activities (generating nutrient load and pollution), the shortage of carnivorous fish and the continuous medium pressure from physical disturbances and deteriorating fish health. ||
->Conclusion: Overall assessment:
- The condition of habitat is assessed mainly on extrapolation from a limited amount of data.
- The condition of habitat has not been classified by the county boards.
- The short-term trend of habitat condition is set as Stable
- The condition of habitat structure and functions is set as: inadequate U1.
- The assessment of the condition and trend is set due to the condition of the typical species, their population status and development and their health conditions, as indicators on the ecological function of the habitat. The assessment is also set in line with habitat quality conditions. For estuaries 1130 MBAL is the conditions caused by the continuous riverine load also after considering the measures taken and decrease in anthropogenic load. The considerable area being significantly or highly physical disturbed are of significant concern for the assessment of the structure and functions
- The future prospects of structure and functions for Estuaries 1130 MBAL is set as Bad.
The assessment is set due to the continuous high pressure from agricultural, residential or recreational activities (generating nutrient load and pollution), the shortage of carnivorous fish and the continuous medium pressure from physical disturbances and deteriorating fish health.
-In comparison with last reporting there is a change in the guidelines for the Conservation Status assessment according the definition and assessment of pressures and threats, which have had significant impact on the assessment. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: N/A ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: N/A ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Peu de données récentes disponibles. ||
->Coverage: Compte tenu qu'à l'exception des Petit et Grand Rhône, la tendance est plutôt vers l'aménagement des estuaires et le développement de ceux déjà aménagés, on ne peut guère espérer une amélioration sensible de l'Habitat dans l'ensemble de la façade méditerranéenne française. ||
->HabCondition: pas de données récentes sur l'évolution des populations ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: Aucun commentaire. Jugement d'expert ||
->JustificationThreshold: aucun commentaire possible ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: N/A ||
->HabCondition: Assumption: 20% of habitat area is estimated to be in not-good condition. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: Most of the collected data regarding habitat type 1130 status across Greece result from the HCMR Monitoring activities under the article 8 of the Water Framework Directive.

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: N/A ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Coverage: The estimate of habitat area is based on an extrapolation method or expert based judgement, using when appropriate the techniques suggested by the ETC. Such methodologies may have a degree of uncertainty that cannot be quantified; for this reason, the values included in the report are to be considered approximate estimates. Estimate of surface area reported here refers to the area of habitat inside the Natura 2000 Network. Surface area of this habitat outside the N2k network is not currently available. ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Information provided in the field 2.7.5: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: The area is smaller due to the change the state border. More accurate data used. ||
->Coverage: More accurate data used. ||
->HabCondition: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report