Potential cumulative impacts of eutrophication and hazardous substances assesses the cumulative potential effect of eutrophication and hazardous substances over all ecosystem components. The evaluation is based on the pressure layer on eutrophication and hazardous substances, combined with information on all ecosystem components (57 layers) included in SPIA for HOLAS 3. The thematic analyses is calculated for each assessment unit (1 km2 grid cells) and the data set covers the time period 2016-2021. Spatial Pressure and Impact Assessment (SPIA) is the framework for assessing spatial and cumulative pressures and impacts in HOLAS 3, and this analyses present a thematic assessment including only a certain subset of layers. The framework also includes results for the Baltic Sea Impact Index (full cumulative impact assessment), Baltic Sea Pressure Index (full cumulative pressure assessment), and other thematic assessments where a subset of pressure and ecosystem layers are used. For more info please - visit the HOLAS 3 website (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/) - download the report thematic assessment of spatial distribution of pressures and impacts 2016-2021 (https://helcom.fi/post_type_publ/holas3_spa) - or check out the HELCOM SPIA online tool to make calculations for any desired combination of pressures and ecosystem layers (https://maps.helcom.fi/website/bsii/). Please scroll down to "Lineage" for a more detailed description of the methodology.

Broad-scale habitat maps for the Baltic Sea have been produced in the EUSeaMap project in 2016. For German and Estonian marine areas, national (more accurate) datasets were used. German data included both substrate and light information (division into infralittoral/circalittoral). Estonian data included only substrate and the division into light regimes was obtained from the EuSeaMap data. Here, the habitat class “circalittoral mixed substrate” includes classes “mixed sediment” of the original data, in the circalittoral zone. The original polygon maps have been converted to 1 km x 1 km grid. The scale of the substrate data used in broad-scale habitat maps varies from 1:250 000 to 1:1M (data from EMODnet Geology). Coarser resolution data has been used in areas, where 1: 250 000 substrate data has not been available. Due to different scales used, the habitat classes may show different sized patterns in different areas.

Distribution of eelgrass based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Mainly pointwise occurrences of eelgrass were submitted, originally gathered in national mapping and monitoring campaigns, or for scientific research. Polygon data from Puck Bay (Poland) was digitized based on Polish Marine Atlas and Orlowo cliff area was added based on expert knowledge. From Estonian waters, a predictive model was used (200m resolution), that was converted to presence/absence using minimized difference threshold (MDT) criteria. All data (points, polygon and the raster presenting predicted presence of eelgrass in the Estonian waters) were generalized to 5km x 5km grid cells.

This dataset is built from following Human activities datasets: • http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/81c917ea-492d-48e2-9f00-e1bb7fe3e4fc • http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/4fcd51dd-b8be-4e83-8cad-37c566782e8f The game hunting of seabirds data (see separate metadata): The total number of hunted seabirds were averaged over 2011-2015 (number of hunted seabirds / year). The area of the reporting unit was used to calculate the number of hunted seabirds / km2 and the data was converted to 1km x 1km grid. The predator control of seabirds data (see separate metadata): The total number of hunted cormorants were averaged over 2011-2015 (number of hunted cormorants / year). The area of the reporting unit was used to calculate the number of hunted cormorants / km2 and the data was converted to 1km x 1km grid. The two datasets were first separately log transformed and then summed, to get the total value for each grid cell. Zero values were given to all grid cells with no reported seabird hunting activity. The layer was normalized.

The map of sprat relative abundance is mainly based on Baltic International acoustic surveys (BIAS), years 2011-2016, (ICES WGBIFS reports), reported as millions of sprat per ICES rectangle. The BIAS surveys cover almost the whole area where sprat is commonly encountered. Outside BIAS area, sprat landings data was used to complement the data. For ICES rectangles surveyed by BIAS, values shown are the mean values per ICES rectangle based on BIAS data, average for 2011-2016. For ICES rectangles not surveyed by BIAS, values are calculated as: MAX-value x Weighting factor. The weighting factor is specific to each ICES rectangle, calculated as the ratio between the commercial landings in that rectangle and the commercial landings in the ICES rectangle with highest landings (based on averages for 2011-2015). MAX-value = millions of sprat according to BIAS in the ICES rectangle with highest landings. ICES rectangles outside the BIAS survey area with no reported sprat landings were given the value 0. The abundance values / ICES rectangle were divided by the area of the rectangle to obtain values per 1km2, and then converted to 1 km x 1km grid cells. Values were first log transformed and then normalised.

Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide (according to Habitats Directive Annex I) are often devoid of vascular plants, usually coated by blue algae and diatoms. They are of particular importance as feeding grounds for wildfowl and waders. The distribution map is based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Only Denmark, Germany and Estonia reported occurrences of mudflats and sandflats. Most of the submitted data is based on modelling and/or GIS analysis. Data coverage, accuracy and the methods in obtaining the data vary between countries.

The occurrence of suitable nursery habitats is crucial for maintaining fish populations (Sundblad et al. 2013). Species distribution modelling studies have shown the importance of suitable environmental conditions for pikeperch recruitment. Due to lack of coherent data on pikeperch spawning and nursery areas across the Baltic Sea countries, environmental variables were used in delineating potential recruitment areas for pikeperch. The pikeperch recruitment area presented on the map is mainly delineated by selecting areas where depth < 5 m, logged exposure < 5, salinity < 7 PSU, Secchi depth < 2 m and distance to deep (10m) water < 4km. The threshold values have been obtained from literature (Veneranta et al. 2011, Bergström et al. 2013, Sundblad et al. 2013, Kallasvuo et al. 2016). Temperature, although important for pikeperch, was left out due to high variation in timing of suitable spawning temperatures across the Baltic Sea. In Finnish coastal waters, a national pikeperch model (Kallasvuo et al. 2016) has been used, with very suitable areas for pikeperch generalized to 1 km grid. In Sweden, the areas delineated by environmental variables have been complemented with information from national interview survey (Gunnartz et al. 2011) as well as expert opinion.

The extraction of Sprat data set is based on: 1. http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/1fb1bd2d-8dff-493a-9ed3-a278aec8f371 for years 2011-2016 reported per ICES statistical rectangles (tonnes / ICES rectangle). Landing values were redistributed within each ICES rectangle by the c-square fishing effort data provided by ICES (all gears, 2011-2013). Tonnes / km² was calculated and the results were converted to 1 km x 1 km grid cells. The layer was log-transformed and normalised to produce the final pressure layer on extraction of Sprat. Please see "lineage" section below for further details on attributes, data source, data processing, etc.

Concentration of phosphorus pressure layer is interpolated from annual seasonal average of total phosphorus measurements from surface waters (0-10 m) extracted from ICES’s oceanographic database, database of Swedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute, EEA’s Eionet database and Data from Gulf of Finland year 2014. The points were interpolated to cover the entire Baltic Sea with Spline with barriers interpolation method. Values were log-transformed and normalised (more detailed description below).

The extraction of cod pressure layer is based on two datasets: 1. http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/7a1389b3-382a-487f-8888-ac45c94c5a97 for years 2011-2016 reported per ICES statistical rectangles (tonnes / ICES rectangle). 2. http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/debeafcd-948b-4455-88ae-7a3d1618f5a8 from ICES recreational fisheries reports for 2011-2016, reported per country (only coastal areas included). Landing values were redistributed within each ICES rectangle by the c-square fishing effort data provided by ICES (all gears, 2011-2013). Tonnes / km² were calculated for both data sets and the results were converted to 1 km x 1 km grid cells. The layers were summed together, log-transformed and normalised to produce the final pressure layer on extraction of cod. Please see "lineage" section below for further details on attributes, data source, data processing, etc.