1. MSFD Com Dec 2010/ 477/ EU review Recommendations for D2
14th meeting of the Working Group on Good Environmental Status (WG GES) 5th-6th October Francesca Somma - JRC

2. D2
non-indigenous species
STATE OF PLAY
The final version of the manual is available from CIRCABC since the 7th of April
The outstanding issues therein were addressed at a workshop held on the September 2015
The workshop report was circulated to the WG GES meeting

3. Key outcomes from the D2 workshop
non-indigenous species
Key outcomes from the D2 workshop
Updated criteria and indicators for D2
Current status of indicators and methodological standards
Current status of reference points and GES boundaries
Not yet mature, conceptual discussions still going on, only some updates possible, but further research needed on some specific aspects. We don’t yet have the tools to provide a complete assessment.

4. D2 criteria and indicators: proposed changes and their status
non-indigenous species
D2 criteria and indicators: proposed changes and their status
Criterion 2.1
Abundance and state misleading. Scope of 2.1 is to deal with pressure, while abundance and state would limit.

5. D2 criteria and indicators: proposed changes and their status
non-indigenous species
D2 criteria and indicators: proposed changes and their status
Criterion 2.2
Environmental: limiting; invasive: limiting.
221: ratio does not work, therefore eliminate.
222: Bio Pollution Index (Helcom): working to improve, not yet mature. Leave open to allow for more to come in.

6. Current status of indicators and methodological standards
non-indigenous species
Current status of indicators and methodological standards
Need of specific indicators
Indicators for the MSFD status descriptors (D1, D3 (part), D4 and D6 (part)) may or could include the impact of NIS
Concern was raised regarding how to directly link e.g. D1 elements features to D2 impacts
Need to ensure harmonisation and the quality of NIS specific monitoring
Specifically designed monitoring, harmonised regionally and across regions
It would benefit from initiative at European level to provide general recommendations based on the on-going work.
OSPAR and HELCOM close to finalising the development of a common regional indicator (trends in arrival of new NIS), criterion 2.1 (2.1.1) . Barcelona Convention is also working towards developing an indicator for criterion 2.1.
Further work is required to improve the knowledge on NIS impacts, develop suitable indicators of impact and acquire the underlining data.
2: existing programs for monitoring not sufficient
3: RSC
4: need more operational indicators, especially for 2.2

7. Current status of reference points and GES boundaries
non-indigenous species
Current status of reference points and GES boundaries
Without a standardised monitoring frame and quantitative baseline, setting thresholds is not relevant
Baseline information is vital for the assessment of trends in new introductions
Agreement on the principle for setting the baseline is essential for coherent assessment of indicators within and across regions
No quantitative threshold or baseline feasible for 2.1.1, but GES should be related to a reduction in the rate of new introductions
Similar arguments used for 2.1.2
Baseline: similar to reference points: GES: no more than 2 species per year in the baltic. Baseline: number of species last year: 6.

8. D2
non-indigenous species
Follow-up work
The on-going work in the Member States, RSCs and projects will provide experience and knowledge, which should feed in the implementation process
Possible further involvement of D2 expert group for the purpose of contributing to the harmonization and coherent implementation of MSFD Descriptor 2:
Monitoring
Scales and aggregation
Thresholds and reference points