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.

This layer is based on data from the BIAS project representing ambient underwater noise, modelled into a 0.5 km x 0.5 km grid, and representing sound pressure levels at 1/3 octave bands of 125 Hz exceeded at least 5% of the time. Measured and modelled acoustic data is provided as Sound Pressure Level (SPL). The time period for the data is annual values for year 2014. The selected depth interval is 0 m – bottom to represent the ambient underwater noise in the whole water column. The data were normalized setting level 0 at 92 db re 1µPa and level 1 at 127 db re 1µPa.

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.

Submarine structures made by leaking gases (according to Habitats Directive Annex I) are also known as “bubbling reefs”. These formations support a zonation of diverse benthic communities consisting of algae and/or invertebrate specialists of hard marine substrates different to that of the surrounding habitat. The distribution map is based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Only Sweden and Denmark reported occurrences of submarine structures made by leaking gases.

Input of hazardous substances pressure layer is interpolated from CHASE Assessment tool concentration component. The contamination ratio values were calculated with CHASE Assessment tool for hazardous substances monitored in water, sediment and biota. Classified mean contamination ratio was used in the interpolation. Classification is based on the http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/about-helcom-and-the-assessment/downloads-and-data/. The points were interpolated to cover the entire Baltic Sea with Spline with barriers interpolation method. Please see "lineage" section below for further details on attributes, data source, data processing, etc.

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.

The data represents the seabed slope of the Baltic Sea and has been derived from a bathymetry dataset. Both datasets have been produced by the BSR INTERREG IIIB project BALANCE. For more information see also the metadata file on bathymetry.

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.

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.

This map presents the Special Protection Areas (SPAs) with reported breeding areas for birds. The spatial data on Special Protection Areas were gathered from the HELCOM contracting parties by Lund University, Sweden. In the data, the countries also indicated whether the sites were designated mainly due to wintering or breeding birds in the area. For Denmark, the information was obtained from standard forms for Natura 2000 sites. For Denmark, the data was updated after review process 20 February 2017. For Germany, the areas that were reported as “NA”(=information not available) were included in both breeding and wintering area maps. Many of the SPAs are both wintering and breeding areas. For the Baltic Sea Impact Index, the data was converted to 1 km x 1km grid cells.