From 1 - 10 / 78
  • Large shallow inlets bays (according to Habitats Directive Annex I) are large, shallow indentations of the coast, sheltered from wave action and where, in contrast to estuaries, the influence of freshwater is generally limited. The distribution map is based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Most of the submitted data is based on GIS analysis and modelling, but also field inventories and ground-truthing has been carried out in some areas. Data coverage, accuracy and the methods in obtaining the data vary between countries.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • The pressure oil slicks and spills is combination of following datasets: • Illegal oil discharges • Polluting ship accidents Illegal oil discharge data is based on airborne surveillance with remote sensing equipment in the Baltic Sea Area. The area of the detected spills in 2011–2016 was used to represent the pressure. The value of spills under 1km2 were directly given to grid cell, spills over 1km2 were buffered based on estimate spill area. For polluting ship accidents the reported oil spill volumes (m3) in years 2011-2015 were used for the pressure. Some polluting ship accidents spills were missing spilled oil volume, thus a mean of reported volumes was given to accidents with missing oil volume. Datasets were handled separately. Both layers were normalized, summed and normalized again to produce the “oil slicks and spills” pressure layer. Please see below for further details.

  • Distribution of blue mussel based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Mainly pointwise occurrences of Mytilus spp. were submitted, originally gathered in national mapping and monitoring campaigns, or for scientific research. Point data from Poland was digitized based on Polish Marine Atlas. From Lithuania, a polygon delineating reefs was used to present Mytilus occurrence. For Germany, point data was complemented with a model describing Mytilus biomass in the German marine area (Darr et al. 2014), where predicted biomasses > 1g dw/ m2 were included as presence. 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 Mytilus) were generalized to 5km x 5km 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.

  • Potential cumulative impacts on benthic habitats is based on the same method than http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/9477be37-94a9-4201-824a-f079bc27d097, but is focused on physical pressures and benthic habitats. The dataset was created based on separate analysis for potential cumulative impacts on only the benthic habitats, as these are particularly affected by physical pressures. In this case the evaluation was based on pressure layers representing http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/ea0ef0fa-0517-40a9-866a-ce22b8948c88 and http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/05e325f3-bc30-44a0-8f0b-995464011c82, combined with information on the distribution of eight broad benthic habitat types and five habitat-forming species (http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/363cb353-46da-43f4-9906-7324738fe2c3, http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/f9cc7b2c-4080-4b19-8c38-cac87955cb91, http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/264ed572-403c-43bd-9707-345de8b9503c, http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/822ddece-d96a-4036-9ad8-c4b599776eca and http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/ca327bb1-d3cb-46c2-8316-f5f62f889090). The potential cumulative impacts has been estimated based on currently best available data, but spatial and temporal gaps may occur in underlying datasets. Please scroll down to "Lineage" and visit http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/cumulative-impacts/ for more info.

  • Physical loss pressure layer combines all human activities that cause physical loss of seabed. The pressure is given as area lost in each cell (km2). For the polygon datasets the area was assumed to be the lost area. For line and point datasets spatial extents were calculated with buffers (below in brackets). If no buffer extent is indicated, the data was reported as polygon. The human activities used for the physical loss pressure: - Bridges (2 m) - Cables (operational; 1,5 m) - Coastal defence and flood protection (area of polygon, 50 m for lines) - Dredging (capital dredging, Area of polygon or a 25/50 m buffer for <5000 m3 / >5000m3 points) - Extraction of sand and gravel - Finfish mariculture (150 m) - Harbours (polygon with 200 m buffer) - Land claim (area of polygon, 30m buffer for lines) - Marinas and leisure harbours (200 m) - Oil platforms (25 m) - Oil terminals and refineries (200 m) - Pipelines (operational; 15 m) - Shellfish mariculture (area of polygon, 150 m points) - Watercourse modification (50 m) - Wind turbines (operational; 30m point location of turbine) The datasets were first processed separately covering the whole Baltic Sea and then merged into one uniform data layer and minimizing the effect of overlapping areas. Polygon areas were clipped with coastline to remove buffered areas that reached to land.