From 1 - 10 / 36
  • This data set on deposition sites of dredged material (points) reported by HELCOM Contracting parties according to http://www.helcom.fi/Recommendations/Rec%2036-2.pdf for the reporting period 2011-2016. The dataset contains data reported by nationally by nominated experts by HELCOM PRESSURE group for Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia and Sweden.

  • 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.

  • This pressure dataset is derived from three human activities datasets - Urban land use (on land) - Recreational boating and sports (updated layer for 2018 version, please see separate http://metadata.helcom.fi/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/8c30e828-1340-4162-b7f9-254586ae32b6) - Bathing sites These data are described in more detail in separate fact sheets. Urban land use data was first converted to 1 km grid cells and expanded with 1 km. Thus, coastal urban areas extended also to the sea. These areas were given value 1 and other sea areas, value 0. Bathing sites (points) were converted to 1km grid and given value 1, rest of the sea areas were given value 0. Normalized recreational boating data was converted to 1 km grid cells. These three layers were summed to produce the layer (values from 0 to 3), after that the layer was normalized. Hunting and recreational fishing data were excluded from human disturbance layer, as they are mostly reported per country and would have resulted in overestimation of the actual pressure.

  • 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.

  • 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 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 dataset contains total landings of cod 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.

  • 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 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 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.