Article 17 web tool

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Observations of grey seals are kept in a database. The available data are heterogeneous (effort-related surveys at sea with few observations, higher number of non-effort related sightings reported by the public). The species occurs in low numbers in Belgian waters, with frequent sightings close to shore and in ports. The number of stranded animals shows a long-term increasing trend. No colonies exist in Belgium. The number of grey seals colonies and numbers of animals in these colonies in neighbouring countries have increased. ||
->Population: POPULATION SIZE: population of grey seals is usually measured at the colony level: number of moulting individuals or number of pups and extrapolation (no colonies in Belgium). See also OSPAR (2017).
The data in this reporting are entirely based on expert judgement.

The given SHORT TERM TREND is a relative trend based on experts’ judgement: “increase” based on the number of observations of individuals reported (no effort-related data) and on number of stranded animals.

CHANGE IN POPULATION SIZE is related to increase in populations in neighbouring countries, mainly UK – see OSPAR IA 2017 (OSPAR, 2017). ||
->HabInfo: Short- and long-term trends: it is doubtful that colonies of grey seals were ever present along the coast of what is currently Belgium. If they were present, this was at least many centuries ago. There seem no realistic possibilities to establish colonies (hence the entries for 7.1.), given the current human occupation of the coastline and the absence of islands. However, food availability and water quality are good, and as such the foraging habitat for the species is of good quality. This is a stable situation that cannot be considered as a trend in habitat for the species. ||
->Future: The future prospect is based on the assessment of the species over the range of its population (see OSPAR, 2017). The habitat of the species is good for what concerns foraging opportunities, but there is no possibility to establish a colony (but given historical data, this does not seem as required), a key part of the habitat requirements in the species’ life history ||
->Conclusion: The OSPAR IA 2017 is comprehensive is the assessment of habitat and of population in the North Sea (OSPAR, 2017) ||
->JustificationThreshold: not relevant ||
->Other: none

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Methodik zur Ermittlung der Populationsgröße in EU-Einheit: Übernahme aus DE-Einheit ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: I ref to 6.9: abundance in 2007 was approx. 5 individuals equal to an increase
of 10000%
and in 6.13: abundance in 1994 was approx. 3 individuals equal to an increase
of 15000% ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: The grey seal in the marine Baltic region has very limited range and abundance of
breeding animals, an annual maximum of 3 pups has been registered during the
reporting period.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: The species’ natural range in Irish waters has been shown to be part of its wider range in the waters of western Europe, particularly those of neighbouring states the UK and France (e.g. Vincent et al., 2002; Matthiopoulos et al., 2004; Cronin, 2011; ICES, 2012), with offshore movements primarily occurring in waters overlying the continental shelf and upper continental slope.
The range map provided consists of its recorded and likely predominant natural range based on recent data (2001-2018) and expert judgement. It consists of a block of contiguous 10km x 10km grid cells distributed in Irish coastal and marine waters up to 1,000m deep including shallow coastal bays and estuaries and excluding the eastern margin of the Rockall Bank.
Over the last two decades records of the occurrence of this species around Ireland have increased considerably in parallel with more active surveillance and assessment (see Cronin et al., 2004; Ó Cadhla et al., 2008) and continued seal population monitoring since 2005-06 (Ó Cadhla & Strong, 2007; NPWS, 2018 - unpublished data).
The accurate assessment of grey seal occurrence at sea presents significant challenges, however, particularly when attempting to work at a regional or population scale and offshore. Sighting records may be obtained incidentally during ship-based surveys (e.g. Pollock et al., 2000; Wall et al., 2013) but in general seals are not easily detected and identified in the open sea except at close range and such data may be recorded erratically (Baines & Evans, 2009), introducing uncertainty into the assessment of true distribution.
Knowledge of grey seal distribution in Ireland is therefore concentrated on records gathered at haul-out sites within the current and previous reporting periods (i.e. 2001-2012) including during the annual moult (Ó Cadhla & Strong, 2007), breeding (Ó Cadhla et al., 2008; Ó Cadhla et al., 2013; NPWS, 2018 - unpublished data) and summer seasons (Cronin et al., 2004; Duck & Morris, 2012a, 2012b; Morris & Duck, 2019).
Change in range since the last report is due to slight mapping differences at the jurisdictional boundary with the UK. ||
->Population: The minimum and maximum population sizes provided are based on pup production estimates from the seven most important breeding areas for grey seals in Ireland (i.e. c. 84% of the total breeding population according to a comprehensive assessment in 2005; Ó Cadhla et al., 2008). These areas were subject to renewed aerial surveillance over three breeding seasons (2009 – east/southeast, 2011 – west/southwest, 2012 – west/northwest) and surveillance effort has continued periodically since then.
The resultant pup production figures for all seven areas were combined with pupping data from 2005 for sites of lesser importance on national/regional scales, to yield a total Irish production estimate (P) of 2,081 pups. This figure was then scaled up to minimum and maximum all-age population estimates using standard multipliers (3.5x[P] and 4.5x[P], respectively) that have been applied consistently in Irish studies.
For further details concerning grey seal population estimation, previous studies in Ireland and the breeding sites concerned, see Ó Cadhla et al. (2008) and Ó Cadhla et al. (2013).
While some inter-annual variability in grey seal pup production is commonplace, the overall population figures are considered a representative sample at the commencement of the current reporting period. An assumption is made that the breeding sites of lesser importance (c. 16% of the 2005 total) have not seen nationally/regionally significant increases or declines in pup production since they were last surveyed.
Given more recent information from annual surveillance (NPWS, 2018 unpublished data) that suggests continued growth in pup production at the seven main breeding colonies during the period 2013-2018, the population figures presented here are considered to be minimum estimates for the 2013-2018 reporting period.
Since estimates for grey seal population size, derived from data on the principal breeding colonies, are periodic and variable figures depending on the year of coverage, and they represent a small number of samples of such abundance estimates, a realistic FRP since the Directive came into force remains difficult to determine. However, based on the estimates provided in this assessment along with previous abundance information, the FRP is considered to be less than the minimum population estimate provided here. ||
->HabInfo: Use of the range descriptor and range surface area calculation as proxies for habitat and habitat area are judged appropriate for this wide-ranging coastal and offshore species.
The habitat used by grey seals in Ireland is diverse and dynamic, from coastal and estuarine waters close to human activity and undisturbed offshore islands, to deeper Atlantic shelf waters and shallow seas shared with adjacent member states.
Current information broadly indicates that grey seals of all ages move freely about this diverse habitat and, based on the population size and distribution data available and knowledge of its population ecology, all indications are that sufficient high quality habitat is available to support the maintenance and/or expansion of the species in Ireland into the future. Consequently the habitat quality is considered good.
Long-term trends in habitat for grey seal remain uncertain due to insufficient accurate data for this species throughout its range in Ireland prior to 2000. However, with improved surveillance and numerous ongoing records of grey seals in the last 18 years, the short-term trend indicates (a) the continued existence of sufficient quality habitat for the species and (b) an expansion in haul-out distribution around the island of Ireland, based on comparison with previous nationwide assessments and the results of repeated aerial surveillance (Morris & Duck, 2019). ||
->Future: Based on current available information a number of pressures have been identified. While the effect of these pressures may act on a temporary and/or regional scale and some are likely to continue to act as pressures into the future, based on current information none is considered to be of sufficient magnitude to be causing an adverse impact on the population of grey seal in Ireland. The available evidence, as supported by ongoing surveillance, indicates continued growth in the species’ breeding population size and its distribution around the coastline.
Ongoing threats as listed or identified into the future via surveillance will be managed appropriately. Hence the Future prospects for the species are considered Favourable. ||
->Conclusion: Based on the assessments for Range, Population, Habitat and Future prospects parameters, the conservation status of the species is assessed as Favourable and the overall trend is demonstrating an on-going increase. There were no qualifiers for Favourable assessments in 2013. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Het precieze aantal hokken is 25 hokken hoger dan in de vorige rapportage (van 703 naar 728). Dit kan echter gezien worden als een fluctuatie, niet als een werkelijke verandering. ||
->Population: The harbour seal (Phoca vitulina) and grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) in the Wadden Sea are surveyed each year to support the management of and policies for both populations. This monitoring is carried out pursuant to the EU Habitats Directive and the trilateral agreements on the Wadden Sea and, for the harbour seal, as part of the ‘Agreement’ under the Bonn Convention (CMS). Each year the seals on the sand banks in the Wadden Sea are counted. These annual counts are carried out for the Ministry of Agriculture, Nature and Food Quality by Wageningen Marine Research (WMR) and are part of the Statutory Research Tasks for Nature and the Environment.
In addition, both seal species are surveyed annually in the Delta area, in the southwestern part of the Netherlands. These counts are carried out for Rijkswaterstaat.

Ad 6.2. Om een populatieschatting te maken worden zeehonden die op de kant liggen vanuit een vliegtuig gefotografeerd en vanaf foto’s geteld. Voor de grijze zeehond is geen correctiefactor bekend voor dieren die zich in het water bevinden tijdens de telling. Voor de huidige rapportage periode (2012-2017) zijn de daadwerkelijk getelde minimum en maximum aantallen respectievelijk 2731 dieren en 5534 dieren. Het gaat hier om de laagste en hoogste jaarmaximum wat is geteld in de afgelopen 6 jaar. Afgerond is dit dan een min. van 2700 en een max. van 5500 grijze zeehonden. Het Nederlands deel van de populatie tijdens de vorige rapportage periode in 2012 bedroeg: minimum 3900; maximum 3900 grijze zeehonden: er is dus sprake van een populatiegroei, ook door migratie (Brasseur et al. 2017). ||
->HabInfo: Naar aanleiding van de vorige beoordeling (inadequate) is er de afgelopen jaren onderzoek gedaan naar de vraag of er voldoende habitat van voldoende kwaliteit is (Brasseur et al. 2015). Nu wordt ingeschat dat habitat voldoende is voor long-term survival.

Grijze zeehonden krijgen jongen in de winter (in tegenstelling tot gewone zeehonden in de zomer). Het meest kritische habitat voor grijze zeehonden is de pupping habitat, waar de jongen ter wereld komen en een aantal weken blijven. Elk jaar worden er op de 5 belangrijkste locaties in de Waddenzee zo’n 400 jongen geboren. Door stormen kunnen de jongen van de laag gelegen zandplaten afspoelen en neemt de kans op overleving af. Grijze zeehonden kunnen echter ook in de duinen of op andere hoger gelegen locaties jongen krijgen. Het onderzoek liet zien dat op basis van de geomorfologie die locaties te voorspellen zijn. Ze omvatten o.a. delen van de Waddeneilanden, zoals de duinen van Vlieland waar tegenwoordig ook jongen geboren worden. Gebruik van nieuwe maar ook bestaande locaties wordt mogelijk belemmerd door menselijke verstoring (Brasseur et al., 2015). Het probleem voor verdere groei van de populatie is daarom mogelijk een tekort aan geschikte pupping-habitats (Brasseur et al., 2015).
Nederland draagt internationaal een grote verantwoordelijkheid voor grijze zeehonden, aangezien Nederland 70% van de pups en 80% van de aantallen grijze zeehonden in ‘continentaal’ Europa herbergt. ||
->Future: In Cremer et al. (2017) wordt gezegd dat er waarschijnlijk nog wel genoeg zandbanken over zijn om groei op te kunnen vangen, maar verstoring is een probleem en een tekort aan gesloten gebieden. Niet duidelijk is verder in hoeverre voldoende pupping habitats beschikbaar zijn voor groei van de populatie. Ook het leefgebied in de Noordzee wordt in de periode tot 2030, maar ook daarna door zeer grootschalige bouw van windmolenparken mogelijk ingeperkt, terwijl uit zenderonderzoek blijkt dat zeehonden een groot deel van hun tijd in de Noordzee doorbrengen. Het is onbekend wat het effect van deze grootschalige bouw is op zeehonden. Wel is aangetoond dat zeehonden verstoord worden door heigeluiden tot op 50 km afstand. Het vooruitzicht van een significante vermindering van het habitat van de dieren is een zorg, temeer omdat dat die gebieden waren waar geen of minder andere activiteiten waren. Het habitat van de grijze zeehond wordt daarom voor de toekomst beoordeeld als ‘poor’. ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: This is just a small part of the North sea population, hence the development of the population in the Swedish MATL zone is completely dependent on external factors. The increase in range is mostly related to the use of a new Range-tool. ||
->Population: There is just a few individuals from the north sea population going into the area. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: Just a fringe of the North sea population, it´s development determines the fate of theese few seals. ||
->Conclusion: Fringe population that are totally dependent on the larger north-sea population at the moment. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Range estimated for the current period matches the range given in the 2013 reporting round (excluding analytical differences). This range is considered sufficient and includes all significant ecological variations to ensure survival of the species. Areas within the range are utilised to a lesser or greater extent. ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: These results are based on the current conservation status for each parameter combined with the future trend for each parameter. The future trend is an estimate of how the parameter is likely to progress into the future, using the current trend as a baseline and considering the balance between threats and measures to assess how these are likely to affect that trend over the next two reporting cycles (12 years). For grey seal, the future trend of Range is assessed as Overall Stable. As the current conservation status for Range is Favourable for this species, the future prospects are considered Good.
The future trend for the Population parameter is assessed as Positive - increasing 22641% (one percent or less) per year on average largely due to the current trajectory of the population and no indication of any increase in threats. As the current conservation status of this parameter is Favourable, the future prospects are assessed as Good for this species.
The future trend for the Habitat parameter is assessed as Overall Stable indicating a balance between measures and threats; as the current conservation status for Range is Favourable for this species, the future prospects are considered Good.
||
->Conclusion: Conclusion on Range reached because: (i) the short-term trend direction in Range surface area is stable and (ii) the current Range surface area is approximately equal to the Favourable Reference Range.
Conclusion on Population reached because: (i) the short-term trend direction in Population size is increasing and (ii) the current Population size is greater than the Favourable Reference Population.
Conclusion on Habitat for the species reached because: (i) the area of habitat is sufficiently large and (ii) the habitat quality is suitable for the long-term survival of the species; and (iii) the short-term trend in area and quality of habitat is stable.
Conclusion on Future prospects reached because: (i) the Future prospects for Range are good; (ii) the Future prospects for Population are good; and (iii) the Future prospects for Habitat for the species are good.
Overall assessment of Conservation Status is Favourable because all of the conclusions are Favourable.
Overall trend in Conservation Status is based on the combination of the short-term trends for Range - stable, Population - increasing, and Habitat for the species - stable.
The conclusion reached on the Overall trend is as prescribed within the rules of the EU guidelines. The grey seal continues to be in favourable conservation status with good future prospects and an increasing population trend. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Methodik zur Ermittlung der Populationsgröße in EU-Einheit: Übernahme aus DE-Einheit ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: I ref to 6.9: abundance in 2007 was approx. 40 individuals equal to an increase of 2500%
and in 6.13: abundance in 1994 was approx. 10 individuals equal to an increase of 10000% ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: The grey seal in the marine Baltic region has very limited range and abundance of breeding animals, an annual maximum of 10 pups has been registered during the reporting period.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: 111900 km2 is the Finnish sea area. As a mobile species grey seals may use the whole sea area from the open sea to bays and river mouths during the year. However, different habitats are used in breeding, moulting and other phases of their life-history. ||
->Population: An average population size has stayed quite stabile, altought there is light increase in numbers. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Species distribution shown in http://www.helcom.fi/baltic-sea-trends/data-maps/biodiversity/seals ||
->Population: Population size is given as minimum and estimate is based on internationally coordinated HELCOM monitoring method, covering all known haul-outs where Grey seals are countable. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: Grey seals observed in territorial waters of Latvia are part of common Baltic sea population. Probably there is no any grey seal permanently inhabiting territorial waters of LV as individuals do seasonal migrations. Territorial waters of LV are used mainly as foraging ground. As Latvia has no any marine island there are no any haul-out sites of seals in territorial waters of LV. Therefore Natura 2000 sites are not designated for this species.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Zasięg wyliczony za pomocą range tool na podstawie mapy rozmieszczenia opracowanej w oparciu o wyniki Monitoringu gatunków i siedlisk morskich (liczenie fok w czasie linienia i rozrodu) i ekstrapolacji na polskie obszary morskie oraz z zastosowaniem gap distance 90 km. ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Halichoerus grypus"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: The increase we see in the range is mostly related to the new range tool. ||
->Population: For seals the data quality is generally high, but there is still a lot of uncertainty when it comes to dividing the populations between countries, espacially as this is a wide ranging species. For the trends, the submitted population trend is what can be considered an average, there are different trends in different parts of the MBAL zone. The population is estimated using a multi year mean approach, with the minimum and maximum respectevely as the lowest and highest estimate during the period. The latest values with uncertainty are shown as alternative values. ||
->HabInfo: Since the population is growing, we assume the habitat quality to be ok. ||
->Future: We have some indications that there may be problems with the fat-levels on females, however it is hard to tell the exact processes at the moment. Also retracting sea ice is not an advantage for the species. ||
->Conclusion: There are some questions surrounding the future developement of the species surrounding fat reserves on females and how much the reduction in sea ice will affect them. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report