Article 17 web tool

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: The area includes inhabitet water area in Teno and Näätämö watersheds and upper reaches of the Tornionionjoki River.The 1x1 grid is measured as inhabitet riverkilometres Teno and Näätämö together 700 km + upper reaches of Tornionjoki 100 km = 800 km. ||
->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: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: Les surfaces d'habitat favorable sont données par grands bassins est correspondent à l’habitat potentiel accessibles ou
qu’il s’avère possible de reconquérir :
- Bassin du Rhin : 112 ha
- Bassins de la région Artois-Picardie : non connu
- Bassins de Normandie (sauf Seine – non connu) : > 100 ha
- Bassins de Bretagne : 342 ha
- Bassin de la Loire : > 358 ha (dont Allier : 228 ha ; Creuse-Gartempe : 99 ha)
- Bassin Garonne-Dordogne : 386 ha (dont Garonne : 184 ha et Dordogne 202 ha)
- Bassin de l'Adour : > 430 ha (dont Nive : 74 ha ; Gave d’Oloron : 230 ha ; Gave de Pau : 126 ha )
- Bassin de la Nivelle : 5,6 ha
- Bassin de la Bidassoa : les habitats fonctionnels se situent en Espagne
(in Projet de plan de gestion du saumon atlantique 2019-2024, plan de mise en oeuvre de NASCO) ||
->Future: En plus de situations compliquées en France, le saumon subit les impacts des changements au niveau océanique (température, courant...) ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
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: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Methodik zur Ermittlung der Populationsgröße in EU-Einheit: Wanderfische - 1. Ermittlung der besiedelten Fließgewässerabschnitte
2. Verschneidung mit dem 1x1km-Raster
3. Ermittlung der besetzten grids1x1 ||
->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: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: The population reported is only the native (and not the released) and therefore it looks like the population size is stable if comparing with the numbers from last report. If all individuals (native+released) were reported the estimate would be closer to 7-12000 individuals. ||
->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: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Se ha producido un reajuste de las cuadrículas con nuevas aportaciones (Galicia y Navarra) a las ya registradas del sexenio anterior (2007-2012). El aumento del rango es por tanto debido a una mejora del conocimiento disponible. ||
->Population: Los stocks salvajes de salmón Atlántico han declinado precipitadamente en muchos ríos españoles en las décadas recientes, particularmente en el Norte, debido a una combinación de sobreexplotación y degradación del hábitat. Un número elevado de poblaciones están próximas a la extinción y muy pocas sostienen un estado de conservación aceptable (WWF, 2001; Barquín et al., 2012).
Las poblaciones de Navarra que se han registrado son las correspondientes a las cuadrículas del río Bidasoa desde su desembocadura hasta Bertiz.
Las estadísticas de la pesquería del salmón a lo largo de las décadas muestran un declive en el número de capturas, de lo cual se infiere un descenso de los efectivos poblacionales de hasta el 65% (Álvarez et al., 2010; Real Asociación Asturiana de Pesca Fluvial, 2019; Dirección Xeral de Conservación da Natureza, 2018). ||
->HabInfo: Si bien el hábitat en ríos salmoneros de Navarra y País Vasco (Bidasoa, Oiartzun, Urumea y Oria) está mejorando la calidad dadas las actuaciones de mejora, como el derribo de obstáculos transversales o las repoblaciones, en otras cuencas del Norte las condiciones del hábitat distan mucho de ser óptimas y viables para la supervivencia de la especie a largo plazo. ||
->Future: Las perspectivas de futuro para las poblaciones de salmón en Galicia y Asturias son negativas, mientras que para Navarra y País Vasco quizás se pueda esperar una mejora del hábitat y una ampliación del área de distribución del salmón en los ríos donde se realizan actuaciones de restauración fluvial. A nivel general, dada la tendencia muy negativa de las capturas del salmón en el Norte de España, se espera que continue el declive generalizado y posiblemente la extinción en varios de sus ríos salmoneros principales. El cambio climático también puede ser un factor que produzca un aumento de las temperaturas de los ríos atlánticos y por tanto un empeoramiento de la calidad del hábitat requerido por esta especie. ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: Esta ficha incluye la información de la región Alpina, en evaluación conjunta con la región Atlántica. La proporción en la distribución de la especie en cada región es del 99,03% para la región Atlántica y del 0,97% para la región Alpina.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: Les surfaces d'habitat favorable sont données par grands bassins est correspondent à l’habitat potentiel accessibles ou
qu’il s’avère possible de reconquérir :
- Bassin du Rhin : 112 ha
- Bassins de la région Artois-Picardie : non connu
- Bassins de Normandie (sauf Seine – non connu) : > 100 ha
- Bassins de Bretagne : 342 ha
- Bassin de la Loire : > 358 ha (dont Allier : 228 ha ; Creuse-Gartempe : 99 ha)
- Bassin Garonne-Dordogne : 386 ha (dont Garonne : 184 ha et Dordogne 202 ha)
- Bassin de l'Adour : > 430 ha (dont Nive : 74 ha ; Gave d’Oloron : 230 ha ; Gave de Pau : 126 ha )
- Bassin de la Nivelle : 5,6 ha
- Bassin de la Bidassoa : les habitats fonctionnels se situent en Espagne
(in Projet de plan de gestion du saumon atlantique 2019-2024, plan de mise en oeuvre de NASCO)
||
->Future: En plus de situations compliquées en France, le saumon subit les impacts des changements au niveau océanique (température, courant...) (rapport CIEM 2018) ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: The range in the previous reporting period 2000-2012 was reported as “63,200 km2”. The apparent minor decrease in range in this reporting period is likely to be from some different sampling sites being visited and the resulting output of the range tool.
This is further supported by the NASCO rivers database, originally published in 2005 and recently resubmitted in 2018 for 2019 publication, which identifies no extirpation of any populations in designated Irish Atlantic salmon rivers between the original and updated database.
The Favourable Reference Range has been set as approximately equal to the current range. The current range is considered to be large enough to ensure the long-term survival of the species.
Short-term trend was assessed as stable over the period 2007-2017 and this is assumed also to be valid for the default trend period of 2007-2018. ||
->Population: The 1x1 km grid was not used for salmon in the last reporting period assessment and a comparison is inadequate to estimate trends as the distribution data depend somewhat on sampling regime during each period. It would be preferable for Ireland to use adult returns which are calculated by the ICES Working Group on North Atlantic Salmon each year back to 1971. Linear trends in these data show 74.8% decrease in returns of adult salmon to Irish river systems in the period 1994-2017 and a 12.2% decrease in such returns from 2007 to 2017 (these trends are assumed to be valid over the default long- and short-term trend periods also). However there has been an encouraging 12.2% increase in returns from 2013 to 2017. These data have been submitted to the NPWS. ||
->HabInfo: Wetted area (i.e. fluvial accessible habitat) is the key measure of available salmon spawning habitat in Ireland since it was first calculated in 2002 (McGinnity et al. 2003). New wetted areas were derived in 2012 based on a more robust statistical approach and these were also incorporated into the salmon stock assessment from year 2013 to date (see McGinnity et al. 2012) and are still used by the TEGOS for their annual stock assessments and calculation of salmon conservation limits.
There is insufficient information available to comprehensively assess or comment on long-term trends in habitat availability before 2002. However, it is considered that there have not been any significant, gross changes to salmon habitat availability from a national perspective since 1994. Despite the pressures listed below, the quality of the habitat is not considered to compromise the survival of the species. ||
->Future: a) Range:
Based on expert judgement and information on salmon stocks from fish counter, catchment-wide electrofishing and angling and commercial catch records, the current range of salmon in Ireland is very unlikely to change in the next 12 years.

b) Population:
The survival of salmon during the marine phase of its lifecycle (i.e. marine survival) has been identified as the key determinant of trends in population size in natal rivers not only in Ireland, but also throughout the global range of the species (ICES 2018). Known factors which influence marine survival to homewaters include exploitation at sea in commercial fisheries including those at West Greenland and formerly at the Faroe Islands, and interceptory fisheries in coastal waters (ICES 2018). The impact of salmon aquaculture through increased sea lice-induced mortality on out migrating wild fish and predation pressure have also been identified as regional and local factors in marine survival (Gargan et al. 2012; Krkosek et al. 2012; Shephard and Gargan 2017). In addition, the influence of climate change and concomitant negative effects on food prey structure and abundance have increasingly been attributed to the declines observed in stocks at sea (Friedland et al. 2014; ICES 2017). Within river systems, variation in individual stock abundance can be influenced by a variety of factors, notably, alterations in physical habitat, water quality, environmental factors, predation, and angling and commercial fisheries exploitation pressure.
The ICES Working Group on North Atlantic Salmon (WGNAS) undertook a salmon stock forecast (2017 to 2021) (ICES 2018). For the southern North-Eastern Atlantic Commission (NEAC) stock complex, of which Ireland is a constituent jurisdiction, for maturing one-sea-winter stocks the Pre-Fisheries Abundance (PFA) is forecast to fall below the Spawner Escapement Reserve (SER) for all forecasted years (to 2021). The PFA for non-maturing one-sea-winter stocks (i.e. multi-sea-winter fish) is forecast to fall below the SER in 2018 and 2019. This essentially predicts that there will not be enough fish in the southern NEAC stock complex as a whole to meet combined national conservation limits for constituent jurisdictions such as Ireland. In addition, corresponding PFA forecasts specifically related to Irish stocks show that both stock components will be below the SER in the forecasted period (ICES 2018). This also predicts that there will not be enough Irish one-sea-winter or multi-sea-winter salmon present in the ocean to meet our national CL during this period (ICES 2018) and such stocks are below reproductive capacity or at risk of being below reproductive capacity. Therefore, Future prospects for the Population parameter are considered to remain poor in the next 12 years.

c) Habitat of the species
Habitat for species has been assessed as "Good" because there is considered to be sufficient habitat in Ireland as a whole to support a viable salmon population. A continuing focus on a broad range of conservation measures and actions (see Irish annual progress report to the 2018 meeting of the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation (NASCO 2018) supports this assessment.
However, water quality in Irish freshwaters continues to remain a concern and Ireland continues to face major challenges to achieve water quality targets set for 2021 and 2027 as required by the Water Framework Directive (RBMP 2018; NASCO 2018). ||
->Conclusion: There is no evidence of a decline in range since the Directive came into force. The current range is considered sufficient for the long-term survival of the species. Therefore Range has been assessed as Favourable.
Increasing trends have been noted in salmon population size in the last 5 years. However the current population estimate is 78% of the Favourable Reference Population. Therefore Population has been assessed as Inadequate.
There is sufficient available habitat and ongoing pressures linked with habitat quality are not considered to be compromising the viability of the species. Therefore Habitat for the species has been assessed as Favourable.
Population estimates are unlikely to reach Favourable status in the next 12 years. Therefore Future prospects have been assessed as Inadequate.
The overall conservation status has been assessed as Inadequate with a stable trend. Although a short-term negative trend is reported for this species, the trend has reversed in the last 5 years. Therefore an overall stable trend is reported. ||
->JustificationThreshold: Although a short-term negative trend is reported for this species, the trend has reversed in the last 5 years. Therefore an overall stable trend is reported. ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Nederland is doortrekgebied voor zalmen die in de Rijn en in de Maas bovenstrooms van Nederland paaien.
Oosterschelde en Grevelingen zijn nu niet meer meegeteld in de range, daarom is het aantal hokken iets afgenomen ten opzichte van de vorige periode. Dit is geen werkelijke verandering. ||
->Population: Trends in doortrekkende zalmen worden verkregen met een zalmsteekmonitoring in de Waal en Maas. In Rijn sinds jaren 80 en meer recent in Maas zijn herintroductieprogrammas van start gegaan. Hierbij worden tot op heden jonge zalm uitgezet in de bovenstroomse delen van Rijn en in mindere mate Maas. De huidige cumulatieve sterfte vanaf vertrek van de opgroeiplaatsen als smolts tot aan terugkeer als volwassen zalm is te hoog om een levensvatbare populatie te vormen. Wanneer er gestopt wordt met uitzetten zal de populatie in de huidige situatie verdwijnen.
Vorige keer in individuen gerapporteerd, nu in km-hokken. ||
->HabInfo: De Nederlandse rivieren worden alleen als corridor (trekroute) gebruikt. De kwaliteit hiervan wordt voornamelijk bepaald door de passeerbaarheid. In de Maas en Neder-Rijn zijn vistrappen aangelegd in de periode voor 2005. Haringvliet en Afsluitdijk vormen nog barrieres, die door Kierbesluit en o.a. Vismigratierivier verbeterd gaan worden. De cumulative sterfte die zalm ondervindt tijdens de periode van smolt die wegtrekken uit de opgroeigebieden naar volle zee en oceaan tot aan terugkeer als volwassen zalmen naar de paaiplaatsen is momenteel te hoog voor een zichzelf in stand houdende populatie. Als de uitzettingen stoppen zal de zalm met de huidige cumulatieve sterfte vervolgens in aantal achteruitgaan en op termijn weer verdwijnen. ||
->Future: Het voorkomen van de zalm in Rijn en Maas wordt momenteel ondersteund door grootschalige uitzet in de bovenstroomse delen van het Rijnstroomgebied en in mindere mate ook in het Maasstroomgebied. De Nederlandse rivieren worden alleen als corridor (trekroute) gebruikt. Haringvliet en Afsluitdijk vormen nog barrieres, die door Kierbesluit en o.a. Vismigratierivier verbeterd gaan worden. Echter de cumulative sterfte die zalm ondervindt tijdens de periode van smolt die wegtrekken uit de opgroeigebieden naar open oceaan tot aan de terugkeer als volwassen zalmen naar de paaiplaatsen is momenteel te hoog voor een zichzelf in stand houdende populatie. Als de uitzettingen stoppen zal de zalm met de huidige cumulatieve sterfte vervolgens in aantal achteruitgaan en op termijn weer verdwijnen. Factoren die bijdragen aan deze te hoge mortaliteit lijken met name visserij (bijvangst) of gericht op volle oceaan, waterkrachtcentrales en migratiebarrieres. ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
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: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: The current range surface area calculation does not represent the real range surface area. Change in availability of underpinning mapping data has resulted in an apparent decrease in range area compared to 2013, but this is not due to genuine change. Expert opinion considers the trend in range to be stable. The real range surface area is considered to be the range in 2013 - 180,057.75km2. The FRR in 2013 was 163,132km2. The FRR has been changed to an operator 'approximately equal to current' to reflect this. For further information see the 2019 Article 17 UK Approach document. ||
->Population: This species exhibits large inter-annual fluctuations in population size. The short-term trend in population is declining. There are also underlying issues in population age structure which are considered strongly deviating from normal. ||
->HabInfo: At a UK scale there is considered to be sufficient occupied and unoccupied habitat combined, but there are continuing problems in certain parts of the UK with regard to poor water quality and the existence of historical physical barriers impinging migration. ||
->Future: Future trend of Range is Positive - increasing <=1% (one percent or less) per year on average; Future trend of Population is Negative - decreasing <=1% (one percent or less) per year on average; and Future trend of Habitat for the species is Positive - increasing <=1% (one percent or less) per year on average. For further information on how future trends inform the Future Prospects conclusion see the 2019 Article 17 UK Approach document. ||
->Conclusion: Conclusion on Range reached because: (i) the short-term trend direction in Range surface area is increasing; and (ii) the current Range surface area is not less than the Favourable Reference Range.
Conclusion on Population reached because: (i) the short-term trend direction in Population size is decreasing by 1% per year or less; and (ii) the current Population size is not more than 25% below the Favourable Reference Population.
Conclusion on Habitat for the species reached because: (i) the area of occupied 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 of habitat is increasing.
Conclusion on Future prospects reached because: (i) the Future prospects for Range are good; (ii) the Future prospects for Population are poor; and (iii) the Future prospects for Habitat for the species are good.
Overall assessment of Conservation Status is Unfavourable-inadequate because one or more of the conclusions are Unfavourable-inadequate.
Overall trend in Conservation Status is based on the combination of the short-term trends for Range - increasing, Population - decreasing, and Habitat for the species - increasing.
Overall assessment of Conservation Status has not changed since 2013.
Overall trend in Conservation Status has not changed since 2013.
||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: A lot of work has been done on opening rivers to salmonids (dam removals and fish passes built). ||
->Population: https://www.envir.ee/sites/default/files/akp_lohe_ja_meriforell_2017.pdf ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: The improvement of all aspects of future prospects is related to opening of the Sindi dam (2018), which grants the access to more than 2500 km of river habitats of Pärnu river basin. ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: In south-eastern Finland there is a very small river area with landlocked salmon that has its main distribution on the Russian side. ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: Improved fish ladders are build up, habitat restorations in some areas. ||
->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: "Salmo salar"
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: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: New founds. In previous reporting period in salmon distribution range some migration obstacles were not taken in to account, they limit salmon distribution significantly. Only river stretches where species detected in test fishing included in species distribution range. Distribution range reduced by hydropower infrastructure in 1970's without possibility for renewal. During the reporting period no hydropower construction have taken place that could threaten species distribution range.
FRR is main salmon river stretches accessible or partly accessible for migration and where reproduction occurs. ||
->Population: Restocking organized in some of rivers to increase population size. Solely wild populations mainly in seven rivers.
For FRP 1 x 1 km grids are used, which includes river stretches where Salmo salar is detected in test fishing in the rivers and suitable and accessible river stretches. ||
->HabInfo: Habitat quality have decreased mainly due to damming and natural causes in relation to climate changes. There is a tendency for habitat siltation and overgrowing. ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: Improved fisheries regulations. Work on reducing mortality and habitat quality improvement. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Previous reference value 87900, based on current value 2013 assumed to equal 1995; difference between 2013 and 2018 due to new method & better knowledge. ALP is included in BOR since AALP is marginal. ||
->Population: LC on national red list 2015, To estimate popsize in km2 the predicted occurrence is restricted to rivers > 6m (Fastighetskartan), Population size for Salmo salar in BOR region was estimated from the assessment for spawner numbers including sum of all rivers per year and average of the period 2013-2017. Current state of Salmo salar in BOR region is 187 107 spawners. Population size for Salmo salar in ALP has been assumed to be the same as in 2013 10 000 ind. BOR and ALP region are reported together so the sum is the current state of Salmo salar in BOR and ALP which is 188 107.

To estimate current population size in the required reporting format (km2) the following procedure was done in ArcGIS. First a Range Map is constructed using the Range Tool, then a layer displaying water occurrences is applied (From SMHI, For freshwater:  surface areas for lakes (object ID 50), dams (Object ID 51) and larger watercourses (Object ID 60), and lines for rivers (Object ID 10,11) and channels (Object ID 30,31); for Baltic Sea the SMHI water basin map). Finally a grid with 1km2 squares is applied and for all biogeographic regions the number of 1 km2 squares that is within the species range and contains water is counted. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: ETC’s (2018) range tool is used to generate a standardized grid map and to calculate the range. The distribution is based on verified reports from several datasources in Analysportalen (https://www.analysisportal.se; excerpt made in 2018), complimented with commercial landings in 2017 for Vendace and whitefish in MBAL, and adding previous reported range for all species when expert judgement (Reference group for fishes; Mikael Svensson, SLU artdatabnken, Erik Degerman SLU Aqua, Zeynep Peckan Hekim, SLU Aqua, Ann-Britt Florin SLU Aqua, Micael Söderman, Sportfisheries organisation) deemed that the species most probably where still in the area although nobody had reported it during the last assessment period since there had been no monitoring in the area. The short term trend was estimated comparing size of range in 2013 report and current report. For fish only populations reproducing within the biogeographical region and within Sweden’s territorial boundaries are counted. This means that for MBAL only the populations in the coastal area is counted. Furthermore for anadromous fish only the part of the population migrating into rivers for spawning is counted. This means that salmon in the Skagerrak/Kattegat area is assessed in the BOR and CON region and not in MBAL or MATL.

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
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: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Because we have increased information about current and previous distribution of atlantic salmon, the range for period 2007-2012 was enlarged according the current knowledge. There are no actual changes in range and therefore range surface has been evaluated as stable. ||
->Population: Because we have increased information about current and past distribution of atlantic salmon, the population size for last reporting period (2007-2012) was recreated according the current knowledge. The population size for previous reporting period was assessed as 31 grids 1x1 km and 13 grids 10x10 km.
The data shows decreasing trend, which is mostly result of lower number of records of migrating adult salmons in Labe and Ohře River. However, the total numbers of returning individuals remains in general the same, only most of them are recorded mainly in River Kamenice. The numbers of stocked juveniles by reintroduction program remain comparable for both reporting periods as well and therefore the reason for change in population size short-term trend is assessed as stable. ||
->HabInfo: Even within the current occurrence range of atlantic salmon there are many migration barriers like weirs and small hydropower plants and only a few are equipped with functioning upstream fish passage. Probably none of them is considered for downstream migrating smolts that can be lethal in case of hydropower plants but even the fall over the weirtop can cause serious injury. ||
->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: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: Methodik zur Ermittlung der Populationsgröße in EU-Einheit: Wanderfische - 1. Ermittlung der besiedelten Fließgewässerabschnitte
2. Verschneidung mit dem 1x1km-Raster
3. Ermittlung der besetzten grids1x1 ||
->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: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: In the last report Range was 104 whereas now it is 0. The reason for this change is that Salmo salar in the continental region has been introduced to the systems and is therefore not genetically original and if reproducible, only marginally. After correspondence with DTU Aqua we have decided not to include the individuals of Salmo salar in this region. If we only considered the individuals which have not been introduced the range should have been 0 last time (in 2013), and therefore we have reported a stable trend. ||
->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: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: N/A ||
->HabInfo: Les surfaces d'habitat favorable sont données par grands bassins est correspondent à l’habitat potentiel accessibles ou
qu’il s’avère possible de reconquérir :
- Bassin du Rhin : 112 ha
- Bassins de la région Artois-Picardie : non connu
- Bassins de Normandie (sauf Seine – non connu) : > 100 ha
- Bassins de Bretagne : 342 ha
- Bassin de la Loire : > 358 ha (dont Allier : 228 ha ; Creuse-Gartempe : 99 ha)
- Bassin Garonne-Dordogne : 386 ha (dont Garonne : 184 ha et Dordogne 202 ha)
- Bassin de l'Adour : > 430 ha (dont Nive : 74 ha ; Gave d’Oloron : 230 ha ; Gave de Pau : 126 ha )
- Bassin de la Nivelle : 5,6 ha
- Bassin de la Bidassoa : les habitats fonctionnels se situent en Espagne
(in Projet de plan de gestion du saumon atlantique 2019-2024, plan de mise en oeuvre de NASCO)
||
->Future: En plus de situations compliquées en France, le saumon subit les impacts des changements au niveau océanique (température, courant...) (Rapport CIEM 2018) ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Historically present species in many larger rivers, extinct prior to entry into force of the Habitats Directive;
Data provided during former reporting periods derived from restocking initiatives of the species, but no natural occurrences have been recorded ||
->Population: Historically present species in many larger rivers, extinct prior to entry into force of the Habitats Directive;
Data provided during former reporting periods derived from restocking initiatives of the species, but no natural occurrences have been recorded ||
->HabInfo: As a migratory anadromous species, barriers between marine and reproduction habitats have to be removed before recolonisation of Luxembourg ||
->Future: As long as major migration barriers (dams or other human-made obstructions) between sea and spawning sites are not passable, future prospects must be evaluated as bad for the salmon ||
->Conclusion: Historically present species in many larger rivers, extinct prior to entry into force of the Habitats Directive; as a migratory anadromous species, barriers between marine and reproduction habitats have to be removed so that the salmon could re-establish a population in Luxembourg ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: N/A

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: Pomimo realizowanych prac restytucyjnych łosoś atlantycki został stwierdzony tylko jednorazowo podczas prac monitoringowych (w roku 2015, na stanowisku na rzece Słupi). Z danych niepublikowanych wynika jednak, że w latach 2010 – 2018 dorosłe łososie były sporadycznie obserwowane lub odławiane przez wędkarzy w rzekach: Parsęta, Płociczna, Drawa, Wierzyca, Drwęca, Reda, Wieprza i Gowienica. W kilku przypadkach obserwowano też osobniki młodociane pochodzące z naturalnego tarła. Ze względu na to, że projekt restytucji gatunku ciągle jeszcze znajduje się w początkowej fazie realizacji, to ocena trendów rozmieszczenia i zasięgu jest niepewna.
Do obliczenia całkowitej powierzchni zasięgu w regionie biogeograficznym użyto standardowego algorytmu IT-tool. ||
->Population: Według aktualnych danych pochodzących z prowadzonego monitoringu oraz obserwacji efektów programu restytucji nie można jeszcze stwierdzić aby populacja łososia odrodziła się trwale, nawet w formie zaczątkowej. Obserwacje migrujących na tarło pojedynczych łososi na zaporach, sporadyczne odłowy wędkarskie, obserwacje tarła i naturalnego narybku to pozytywne symptomy dające nadzieję, że gatunek założy ponownie samorozradzającą się populację. Tym bardziej nie daje to podstaw do oceny trendu populacji.
Liczbę zajętych pól siatki 1x1 km ustalono zliczając wszystkie pola takiej siatki, które znalazły się wewnątrz dużego pola 10x10 km z warstwy ilustrującej rozmieszczenie gatunku, w których znajduje się rzeka lub jezioro. Uwzględniono wyłącznie pola 1x1 km leżące w granicach Polski.
Ze względu na skąpość danych określenie referencyjnej wielkości populacji nie jest jeszcze możliwe. ||
->HabInfo: Ocena parametrów siedliska oraz związanych z nim trendów nie jest możliwa ze względu na niewystarczające dane. Efekty programu restytucji w odniesieniu do siedliska będą mogły być oceniane w przypadku zakładania się lokalnych trwałych populacji gatunku, czego jeszcze nie można potwierdzić. ||
->Future: Perspektywy ochrony wszystkich parametrów oceniono jako złe. W okresie objętym dotychczasowymi raportami oraz pracami monitoringowymi nie nastąpiły żadne jednoznacznie pozytywne zmiany w tym zakresie. Realizowany program restytucji nie przyniósł jeszcze uchwytnych pozytywnych wyników, a tylko symptomy, że może skończyć sukcesem. ||
->Conclusion: Stan zły U2 bez zmian od poprzedniego raportu. Ogólny kierunek – nieznany (na pewno jednak nie poprawa, jak to określono w poprzednim raporcie).
Naturalne polskie populacje łososia atlantyckiego wymarły w latach osiemdziesiątych XX w. Współcześnie spotykane osobniki tego gatunku pochodzą wyłącznie z zarybień prowadzonych w ramach programu restytucji. Nie powstały jednak jeszcze samorozradzające się populacje choć obserwowane były sporadyczne akty tarła na nielicznych stanowiskach w rzekach północno-zachodniej Polski, jak również narybek pochodzący z naturalnego tarła. ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: Naturalne polskie populacje łososia atlantyckiego wymarły w latach osiemdziesiątych XX w. Współcześnie spotykane osobniki tego gatunku pochodzą wyłącznie z zarybień prowadzonych w ramach programu restytucji. Nie powstały jednak jeszcze samorozradzające się populacje choć obserwowane były sporadyczne akty tarła na nielicznych stanowiskach w rzekach północno-zachodniej Polski, jak również narybek pochodzący z naturalnego tarła.
Zasięg i rozmieszczenie:
Pomimo realizowanych prac restytucyjnych łosoś atlantycki został stwierdzony tylko jednorazowo podczas prac monitoringowych (w roku 2015, na stanowisku na rzece Słupi). Z danych niepublikowanych wynika jednak, że w latach 2010 – 2018 dorosłe łososie były sporadycznie obserwowane lub odławiane przez wędkarzy w rzekach: Parsęta, Płociczna, Drawa, Wierzyca, Drwęca, Reda, Wieprza i Gowienica. W kilku przypadkach obserwowano też osobniki młodociane pochodzące z naturalnego tarła. Ze względu na to, że projekt restytucji gatunku ciągle jeszcze znajduje się w początkowej fazie realizacji, to ocena trendów rozmieszczenia i zasięgu jest niepewna.

Populacja:
Zgodnie z przyjętą metodyką wielkość populacji wyrażona jest liczbą pól siatki 1x1 km. Według aktualnych danych pochodzących z prowadzonego monitoringu oraz obserwacji efektów programu restytucji nie można jeszcze stwierdzić aby populacja łososia odrodziła się trwale, nawet w formie zaczątkowej. Obserwacje migrujących na tarło pojedynczych łososi na zaporach, sporadyczne odłowy wędkarskie, obserwacje tarła i naturalnego narybku to pozytywne symptomy dające nadzieję, że gatunek założy ponownie samorozradzającą się populację. Tym bardziej nie daje to podstaw do oceny trendu populacji.

Wartości referencyjne (zasięg i populacja):
Ze względu na skąpość danych określenie referencyjnych wartości zasięgu i populacji nie jest jeszcze możliwe.

Siedlisko gatunku:
Ocena parametrów siedliska oraz związanych z nim trendów nie jest możliwa ze względu na niewystarczające dane. Efekty programu restytucji w odniesieniu do siedliska będą mogły być oceniane w przypadku zakładania się lokalnych trwałych populacji gatunku, czego jeszcze nie można potwierdzić.

Perspektywy ochrony:
Perspektywy ochrony wszystkich parametrów oceniono jako złe. W okresie objętym dotychczasowymi raportami oraz pracami monitoringowymi nie nastąpiły żadne jednoznacznie pozytywne zmiany w tym zakresie. Realizowany program restytucji nie przyniósł jeszcze uchwytnych pozytywnych wyników, a tylko symptomy, że może skończyć sukcesem.

Ocena ogólna: Stan zły U2 bez zmian od poprzedniego raportu. Ogólny kierunek – nieznany (na pewno jednak nie poprawa, jak to określono w poprzednim raporcie).

Open Original Report  

Scientific name used in original MS report if different than recommended: "Salmo salar"
Information provided in the field 2.8.2: Reported additionnal information: ||
->Range: N/A ||
->Population: LC on national red list 2015, To estimate popsize in km2 the predicted occurrence is restricted to rivers > 6m (Fastighetskartan), Population size for Salmo salar in CON region was reported based on the estimates as average 10 497 spawners that is estimated to have entered Swedish waters annually during the period 2013-2017 based on SER (spawning escapement reserve) (ICES 2018).Minimum and maximum for the period is 6524 and 17941 respectively.

To estimate current population size in the required reporting format (km2) the following procedure was done in ArcGIS. First a Range Map is constructed using the Range Tool, then a layer displaying water occurrences is applied (From SMHI, For freshwater:  surface areas for lakes (object ID 50), dams (Object ID 51) and larger watercourses (Object ID 60), and lines for rivers (Object ID 10,11) and channels (Object ID 30,31); for Baltic Sea the SMHI water basin map). Finally a grid with 1km2 squares is applied and for all biogeographic regions the number of 1 km2 squares that is within the species range and contains water is counted. ||
->HabInfo: N/A ||
->Future: N/A ||
->Conclusion: N/A ||
->JustificationThreshold: N/A ||
->Other: ETC’s (2018) range tool is used to generate a standardized grid map and to calculate the range. The distribution is based on verified reports from several datasources in Analysportalen (https://www.analysisportal.se; excerpt made in 2018), complimented with commercial landings in 2017 for Vendace and whitefish in MBAL, and adding previous reported range for all species when expert judgement (Reference group for fishes; Mikael Svensson, SLU artdatabnken, Erik Degerman SLU Aqua, Zeynep Peckan Hekim, SLU Aqua, Ann-Britt Florin SLU Aqua, Micael Söderman, Sportfisheries organisation) deemed that the species most probably where still in the area although nobody had reported it during the last assessment period since there had been no monitoring in the area. The short term trend was estimated comparing size of range in 2013 report and current report. For fish only populations reproducing within the biogeographical region and within Sweden’s territorial boundaries are counted. This means that for MBAL only the populations in the coastal area is counted. Furthermore for anadromous fish only the part of the population migrating into rivers for spawning is counted. This means that salmon in the Skagerrak/Kattegat area is assessed in the BOR and CON region and not in MBAL or MATL.

Open Original Report