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.

This dataset shows the sub-basins of the Baltic Sea which are used for Baltic Sea Pollution Load Compilation 6.

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.

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).

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.

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.

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.

'Availability of deep water habitat, based on occurrence of H2S' layer describes the suitability of the bottom areas for the Baltic Sea biota, with regard to oxygen conditions of the near bottom waters. The data used to produce the layer was received from Leibniz-Institut für Ostseeforschung Warnemünde (IOW): - areas (polygons) with hydrogen sulfide (H2S) based on point measurements and modelling. Five time periods / year, for years 2011-2016 (altogether 30 layers). The polygons were converted to raster layers in a way, that for each time period (6 years, 5 time periods each year), areas with H2S got a value 0, other areas got the value 1. All layers were summed, (representing 6 years, 5 time periods each year, maximum value 30) and data was normalised. For more detailed information on the data used, please see Feistel et al. 2016.

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.

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.