1. Review of Decision 2010/477/EU and MSFD Annex III - biodiversity aspects European Commission DG Environment Marine Environment and Water Industry Unit Expert meeting on marine Natura 2000 sites 06 November 2015, Brussels

2. Review process  2013: MSFD Committee mandate for review  2014-15: Phase I - Technical review per Descriptor and Annex III  May-July 2015: Phase II – Consultation with MS and stakeholders  August 2015 onwards: Phase III – policy development  Nov. 2015: Draft proposal on revised Annex III  Jan. 2016: Draft proposal on revised Decision  Summer 2016: Target date to finalise proposals in Committee (with formal procedures afterwards)

3. Main aims of a revised Decision & Annex III a.Simpler; b.Clearer; c.Introducing minimum requirements (to be enhanced by regions and MS, if necessary); d.Self-explanatory; e.Coherent with other EU legislation; f.Coherent with regional assessment methods (where EU methods do not exist); g.Include a clear and minimum list of elements and/or parameters per descriptor (e.g. specified lists of contaminants, species, litter types, etc.).

4. MSFD CIS work programme: Prioritisation of actions Working together – Directors meeting: Riga 26-27 May 2015 ImplementationHarmonise approach between EU & regional level Duplication of efforts & obligationsAvoid conflicting or uncoordinated timelines External dimension Cooperation with non-EU countries, among RSCs & international organisations Using resources wisely – Directors meeting: Riga 26-27 May 2015 Using resources wiselyFocus on implementation Set strict priorities Focus on "big things" Establish better knowledge base Collaboration between Commission, EEA and Regional Sea Conventions Understand cause-effect relationships Effective & efficient processReporting: joint assessment Technical, administrative & financial support EMFF funding for MSFD

5. Cross-cutting issues paper (MSCG_17-2015-06) Sets out overall framework for Art. 8 and 9 a.Pressure-impact-state concepts b.Need for inter-relationship: how GES is determined and how it is assessed c.Linking Art. 8 and 9 to Annex I and Annex III – overall architecture d.Relationship of Art. 9(3) Decision to Art. 9(1) determination – EU and (sub)regional aspects e.Proposed set of assessment elements (‘pizza and satellites’) f.Improved integration across descriptors – linking state-based descriptors (D1 habitats-D6-D7), linking impacts from pressures to state assessments

6. Revised Decision: outline needs Assessments of pressures for Art.8(1b) D5 D8, 9 D10D11 D2D3D6 D6,7 - Nutrients Contam- inants Litter Sound, other energy NIS Fishing/ by-catch Physical damage Physical loss Other P S Distribution, extent, (frequency) and intensity/quantity of pressure Assessments of state for Article 8(1a) D1, D3 Species groups Distribution, population size, condition, habitat Extent (proportion, distribution), nature and intensity of impacts per species group or per species D1 Pelagic habitats Condition Extent (area, volume), nature and intensity of impact per habitat group D1, D6 Benthic habitats Extent, condition Extent (area), nature and intensity of impact per habitat group or per habitat D1, D4 Ecosystems Structure, function Extent and nature of impact per ecosystem

7. Decision outline Primary criterion Secondary criterion Assessments of pressures for Article 8(1b) D5 D8, D9 D10D11 D2D3D6 D6, D7 - Nutrients Contam- inants Litter Sound, other energy NIS Fishing/ by-catch Physical damage Physical loss Other P S 5.1.1 5.1.2 8.1.1 8.1.2 9.1.1 10.1.1 10.1.2 10.1.3 11.1.1 11.2.1 2.1.1 2.1.2 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.3.2 6.1.36.1.4 Assessments of state for Article 8(1a) D1 D3 Species groups 1.1 1.2 1.3 Habitat Diversity 8.2.1 8.2.2 10.2.1?2.2.1 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.3.1 3.3.3 By- catch 6.1.2 7.2.2 ? D1 Pelagic habitat groups 1.5 1.6 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.4 5.2.5 5.3.2 8.2.1 8.2.2 ?2.2.1 7.1.1 ? D1 D6 Benthic habitat groups 1.4 1.5 1.6 5.3.2 5.2.3 5.3.1 5.3.3 8.2.1 8.2.2 ?2.2.1 3.2.1 3.2.2 3.3.1 3.3.3 6.1.2 6.2.1 6.2.2 6.2.3 6.2.4 6.1.5 7.2.1 ? D1 D4 Eco- systems 4.1.1 4.2.1 4.3.1 5.2.1 5.2.2 5.3.2 ????

8. Pelagic habitats Benthic habitats Bird group 1Bird group 2Bird group 3Bird group 4 Mammal group 1 Mammal group 2 Mammal group 3 Turtles Fish group 1Fish group 2Fish group 3Fish group 4 Cephalopod group 1 Cephalopod group 2 D4 D1 D1, D3 D1, 6 CoastalShelfOcean/deep sea D1

9. Ecosystem componentSpecies groups Birds Grazing birds Wading birds Surface-feeding birds Pelagic-feeding birds Benthic-feeding birds Mammals Small toothed cetaceans Deep-diving toothed cetaceans Baleen whales Seals Reptiles Turtles Fish Coastal fish Pelagic shelf fish Demersal shelf fish Deep-sea fish Cephalopods Coastal/shelf cephalopods Deep-sea cephalopods Proposed Species Groups

10. Seals S1S2S3 HD

11. Demersal fish F1F2F3F4 CFP RSC New 1.4 diversity F5

12. Species group Species ASpecies BSpecies C Criterion 1.1 - distribution Criterion 1.2 – population size Criterion 1.3 – population condition Data set XData set YData set Z

13. Proposed habitat groups – equated to EUNIS 2015 HardHard/softSoftOther Level 2Rock* Biogenic habitat (flora/ fauna) CoarseMixedSandMud e.g. non- oxygen- based habitats Photic Littoral Infralittoral Circalittoral Aphotic Bathyal Abyssal *Includes soft rock, marls, clays, artificial hard substrata Proposed Habitat Groups

14. Ecosystem componentHabitat groups Benthic (formerly seabed) habitats Littoral rock and biogenic reef Littoral sediment Infralittoral rock and biogenic reef Infralittoral coarse sediment Infralittoral sand Infralittoral mud Infralittoral mixed sediment Circalittoral rock and biogenic reef Circalittoral coarse sediment Circalittoral sand Circalittoral mud Circalittoral mixed sediment Upper bathyal rock and biogenic reef Upper bathyal sediment Lower bathyal rock and biogenic reef Lower bathyal sediment Abyssal rock and biogenic reef Abyssal sediment Pelagic (formerly water column) habitats Variable salinity Coastal Shelf Oceanic

15. Infralittoral sand (EUNIS 2) H1H2 H3 H4 HD RSC EUNIS 4/5

16. Habitat group (e.g. Circalittoral sand) Sub- habitat A Sub- habitat B Criterion 1.6 – habitat condition (proportion impacted) Data set A extent of physical loss – from D6.1 (loss) Data set B extent of physical damage – from D6.1 (damage) Data set E, F etc extent of other impacts (e.g. D5 - eutrophication) Criterion 1.5 – habitat extent (proportion lost) Data set C on benthic condition from D1.6/6.2 Data set D on benthic condition from D1.6/6.2

17. Criteria: species MSFD (D1, 3) 2010 Decision Habitats DirectiveBirds Directive Proposed for revised MSFD Decision Distribution (1.1)Range Breeding distribution map and range Distribution (2) Population size (1.2); reproductive capacity (3.2) Population Population size Population size (1) +3.2 Population condition (1.3); age & size distribution (3.3) Population condition (1) +3.3 Habitat for species Habitat for species (2) Future prospects -

18. Criteria: habitats MSFD (D1, 6, 7) 2010 Decision Habitats Directive Proposed for revised MSFD Decision Distribution (1.4)Range[Distribution (2)] Extent (1.5)Area covered Extent (1) Condition (1.6, 6.2, 7.2)Structures & functionsCondition (1) Future prospects-

19. Other aspects  Joint assessments per (sub)region  Via RSCs (HELCOM, OSPAR) or jointly by MS (Black Sea, Mediterranean, Macaronesia)  Ecologically-relevant assessment scales within (sub)region  Common methodologies (per indicator)  Data sets aggregated, where needed  Use same data as per HBD  Assessments could be used for HBD reporting (needs further development)  Aim for single assessments for selected species/habitats for MSFD, RSC and HBD purposes