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 dataset contains total landings of sprat for years 2011-2016 reported per ICES statistical rectangles (tonnes / ICES rectangle) under EU Joint Research Centre’s data collection framework for fisheries data. Russian data extracted from ICES annual reports.

Pressure layer combines all human activities that cause changes to hydrological conditions. The human activities were presented as point data which were given spatial extents (given below). The pressure value was given as the proportion of the grid cell under the pressure. The following human activities were combined into the changes to hydrological conditions layer; - Hydropower dams (a 1km2 grid cell in the river estuary was selected) - Water course modification (1 km) - Wind turbines (operational, 0.3 km, linear decline) - Oil platforms (0.5 km, linear decline) The human activity datasets were first processed separately covering the whole Baltic Sea and then summed together and overlapping areas were dissolved to remove double counting. Attenuation gradients are assigned to each layer as described above. Area effected decreases when distance from avtivity increases. Layer was normalized.

Concentration of nitrogen pressure layer is interpolated from annual seasonal average of total nitrogen concentrations 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).

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.

The map of herring relative abundance is mainly based on Baltic International acoustic surveys (BIAS), years 2011-2016 (ICES WGBIFS reports), reported as millions of herring / ICES rectangle. Also herring landings data were 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 2011-2016). MAX-value = millions of herring according to BIAS in the ICES rectangle with highest landings. ICES rectangles outside the BIAS survey area with no reported herring landings were given the value 0. The relative abundance values in each ICES rectangle were divided by the area of the rectangle to obtain values per 1km2. If the values in small coastal ICES rectangles (outside BIAS area) became unrealistically large due to high herring landings, the value of the neighboring rectangle was given. The final layer was converted to 1 km x 1km grid cells. Values were first log transformed and normalized.

Data set represents dredging activities around the Baltic Sea. The data set contains information about the dredging activity and for some the type (capital, maintenance) and the year of activity as reported by HELCOM Contracting Parties in response to data request. The dredging data is missing from Denmark.

This map shows the distribution and abundance of harbour porpoise across the Baltic Sea. The abundance of harbour porpoise is presented using 4 abundance classes. The classification is based on expert consultation and information from scientific literature (e.g. Sveegaard et al. 2011, Viquerat et al. 2014). The class borders are defined by expert opinion and generalizing the data gathered and modelled in SAMBAH project. For the Baltic Proper the SAMBAH results have been used to delineate the class borders: 20% probability of detection during May-October has been used to define the area of “common occurrence and reproduction”, and the 20% probability of detection during November-April has been used to define the “regular occurrence, no regular reproduction” area. Please note: The applied spatial scale includes lagoons and estuaries of the inner coastal waters (e.g. Szczecin Lagoon, Jasmund lagoon) where harbour porpoises do not or only exceptionally occur unlike the map suggests.

Input of impulsive anthropogenic sound includes impulsive events from 2011-2016 • Seismic surveys (HELCOM-OSPAR Registry; national data call submissions as lines in the folder of data) • Explosions (HELCOM-OSPAR Registry) • Pile driving (HELCOM-OSPAR Registry) • Airguns (HELCOM-OSPAR Registry) For the different event types, numeric intensity value was used to represent the pressure as categorized in HELCOM-OSPAR Impulsive noise registry. All nationally reported seismic surveys were given intensity values “Very low” (0.25) - Very low (0.25) - Low (0.5) - Medium (0.75) - High (1) The impact distance has not been taken into account due to the different nature of separate datasets used for the pressure layer. We acknowledge that e.g. pile driving and airguns may impact up to 20 km from the source event. The spread of the sound wave depends on the sound frequency, water salinity, temperature and density.