The extraction of herring data set is based on: 1. http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/a3b67a55-7c1e-469e-b692-58c4e7b79279 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 herring. Please see "lineage" section below for further details on attributes, data source, data processing, etc.

This dataset contains modelled small vessel fuel consumption. This describes the geographical distribution of the fuel used by small boats. The total fuel consumption was modelled in SHEBA project to study emissions from pleasure boats. The model is based on locations and berths in marinas and leisure harbours, AIS information, statistics on fuel sale and extensive survey. For 2018 version the layer is weighted with depth, log-transformed and normalised (please see below). This dataset was also used on HOLAS 3.

Springtime Chl-a concentration is here used as a proxy for productive surface waters. In the Baltic Sea Impact Index (BSII), areas with high springtime phytoplankton production will be given higher importance, as they are considered important areas for the Baltic Sea food web. In the current map, mean of springtime maximum weekly values (weeks 12-22, years 2003-2011) Chl-a concentration of the surface waters has been used, derived from satellite data (MERIS). Years 2003-2011 have been used, as there is no MERIS data available for years 2012-2016. The data for eastern Baltic Sea is provided by the Finnish Environment Institute (~300m resolution). Outside this high resolution data, MERIS-data downloaded from JRC-database has been used (~4 km resolution, to calculate average of maximum monthly values for April or May for 2003-2011). Both datasets were converted to 1 km x 1 km grid cells.

Distribution of Fucus sp. based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Mainly pointwise occurrences of Fucus were submitted, originally gathered in national mapping and monitoring campaigns, or for scientific research purposes. From Estonian waters, a predictive model was used (200m resolution), that was converted to presence/absence using minimized difference threshold (MDT) criteria. All data (Fucus points and the raster presenting predicted presence of Fucus) were generalized to 5km x 5km grid cells.

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 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.

Baltic International Trawl Survey (BITS) data (2011-2016) from ICES DATRAS database was used as a base to create a map of cod relative abundance (quarter 1 data, CPUE values per ICES subdivision). Cod = 30cm was included. For ICES rectangles surveyed by BITS, values shown are the mean CPUE per ICES subdivision based on BITS data, average for 2011-2016. For ICES rectangles not surveyed by BITS, 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 2011-2016). MAX-value = CPUE according to BITS in the ICES rectangle with highest landings. ICES rectangles outside the BITS survey area with no reported cod landings were given the value 0. Values were first log transformed and then normalized.

This map shows the distribution and abundance of grey seals across the Baltic Sea. The map was originally created for HELCOM Red list assessment of the Baltic Sea, using seal expert consultation. For the Baltic Sea Impact Index, the map was modified to represent four abundance classes, based on expert consultation. The map has been updated from the 1st version of HOLASII, based on expert consultation (HELCOM Seal EG).

Pressure layer combines all human activities that cause physical disturbance or damage to seabed. For several human activity datasets, spatial extents were given (table below). Buffers with decreasing value rates were applied to represent the impact distance of physical disturbance. The following human activities were combined into the physical disturbance layer; - Cables (under construction, 1 km buffer) - Coastal defence and flood protection (under construction, 500 m buffer) - Deposit of dredged material (500 m buffer for points and areas) - Dredging (maintenance) (500 m buffer for points and areas) - Extraction of sand and gravel (500 m buffer) - Finfish mariculture (1 km buffer) - Fishing intensity 2011-2016 average (subsurface swept area ratio) - Furcellaria harvesting - Pipelines (0,3 km buffer) - Recreational boating and sports - Shellfish mariculture - Shipping density - Wind farms (under construction) (1 km buffer) - Wind farms (operational) (0,1 km buffer) The human activity data sets were first processed separately covering the whole Baltic Sea and then summed together. In this integration, some data layers were down-weighted to arrive at a balanced pressure layer, as described below. High pressure intensity and/or slow recovery (weighting factor 1): Coastal defence and flood protection, Deposit of dredged material, Dredging, Extraction of sand and gravel and Fishing intensity Moderate to high (Weighting factor 0,8): Pipelines and Shipping density Moderate (Weighting factor 0,6): Finfish mariculture, Shellfish mariculture and Wind farms (under construction) Low to moderate (Weighting factor 0,4): Cables Low (Weighting factor 0,2): Maerl and Furcellaria harvesting, Recreational boating and sports and Wind farms (operational) Harbours and marinas were left out from the physical disturbance pressure to avoid double counting due to their representation in the shipping density and recreational boating and sports data sets.

The occurrence of suitable nursery habitats is crucial for maintaining fish populations (Sundblad et al. 2013). For perch, species distribution modelling studies (Snickars et al. 2010, Bergström et al. 2013, Sundblad et al. 2013) have shown the importance of suitable environmental conditions for reproduction. Due to lack of coherent data on perch spawning and nursery areas across the Baltic Sea countries, environmental variables were used in delineating potential recruitment areas for perch. The distribution area or perch recruitment is delineated by selecting areas where depth < 4 m (For Danish waters < 3 m), logged exposure < 5 (exposure model described in Isæus 2004), and salinity < 10 PSU. The threshold values have been obtained from literature (Snickars et al. 2010, Bergström et al. 2013, Skovrind et al. 2013, Sundblad et al. 2013). Relatively “loose” thresholds have been used, to rather overestimate than underestimate the recruitment area (precautionary approach). Along the Finnish coastline a national model has been used (Kallasvuo et al. 2016), with suitable environments for perch recruitment generalized to 1 km x 1 km grid.