1. GIS modelling for marine management Poland habitat mapping Oslo Workshop 2007-05-29 Martin Isæus 08-16 10 11 martin.isaeus@aquabiota.se

2. What drives the marine mapping in Sweden, Norway and the Baltic? EU National County management Industry – Marine Wind Power BALANCE Off-shore reefs survey Nature reserve survey WPD Finngrunden

3. The BALANCE project 19 partners & 10 countries 2½ year & € 4,7 mio. Main activities: Collation of marine environ- mental & anthropogenic data Baltic seafloor mapping Biodiversity assessment Marine spatial planning BSR INTERREG IIIB region from space, Source: SeaWiFS Project, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Centre and ORBIMAGE

4. The BALANCE approach Collate & analyse available geo- physical and hydrographical information within HELCOM region Define and agree on an unified data format Decide a common platform for data handling, processing and projection of marine landscape map, e.g. ArcGis, WGS84, UTM Define standards for classifying Baltic marine landscapes Validation & confidence scheme Applying an ecosystem-based approach, not the one nation – one approach

5. Benthic marine landscapes Basic layers: Seabed sediments Photic depth Bottom salinity Secondary layers: Temperature Wave exposure Ice cover Current velocity Bathymetry Word of caution!

6. Benthic marine landscapes Features 60 benthic landscapes identified Most common is non-photic mud at 7,5 – 11psu covering 58.640 km 2 or 14,3% of total seabed 8 landscapes cover 371.000 km 2 or 90,7% of total seabed 40 landscapes cover less than 1% of total seabed area Coverage data for each EEZ as well as entire HELCOM region is available

7. Linking the physical characterisation to socio-economic exploitation Illustrating the value of (transnational ?) marine landscape mapping Could be linked to implementation of various EU obligations, e.g WFD or pMSD (?) Could be linked to climatic change showing the consequences to marine environment Annual variation in the Cod Reproductive Volume, DIFRES Pelagic marine landscapes – an example

8. Habitat mapping Norway Denmark Sweden Lituania Estonia Finland

9. Nephrops in Skagerrak Martin Isæus, AquaBiota Hans C. Nilsson, NIVA Mattias sköld, Swedish board of Fishery

10. SPI – Sediment Profile Images

11. Ecological status

12. Study area Grids from multi-beam survey: Bathymetry (5 m res.) Hardness (4 classes) SPI (22) SPI + fauna (14) SPI + new fauna sample (2) New field data

13. Predictors importance for the model

14. Probalitity of Nephrops presence Spearman Corr 0.659

15. Random SPI + Nephrops burrow shape + Trawling frequency => density plot and population estimate

16. Kernel density 2002-2006 mean yield per cage Radius 5 km, 100m-grid.

17. Kjell Magnus Norderhaug Martin Isæus Trine Bekkby Frithjof Moy Are Pedersen Spatial predictions of Laminaria hyperborea at the Norwegian Skagerrak coast

18. Probability of L. hyperborea Monitoring data vs All available data

19. Off-shore bank survey 2003-06 Natura 2000? Benthic biology Marine geology Hydrography

20. Nature values?

21. Utbredning av ”Död mans hand” Alcyonium digitatum

22. Nature values Fucus (+) Chara (+) Epithytes (-) Filamentous (-) Detritus (-) Sulphuric bacteria (-)

23. EUNIS in the Baltic

24. Wind Power FOTO: KNUT STRØM WPD

25. Bathymetry (multi-beam) Back-scatter Bentic biota Fish Birds Bats Seals

26. Presence of blue mussel Mytilus and Horse mussel Modiolus

27. Presence of fish Stensnultra cvROC=0,843 ROC=0,889 cvCOR=0,63 COR=0,682

28. Abundance of fish Stensnultra cvCOR=0,509 COR=0,619