From 1 - 10 / 78
  • Distribution of Charophytes (Chara spp., Nitella spp., Nitellopsis spp., Tolypella spp.) mainly based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Submitted point data was originally gathered in national mapping and monitoring campaigns, or for scientific research. Also scientific publications were used to complement the data (in Curonian, Vistula and Szczechin lagoons, see reference list). Polygon data from Poland was digitized based on Polish Marine Atlas. 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 Charophytes) were generalized to 5km x 5km grid cells.

  • 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.

  • This map shows probability of detection of harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) in the Baltic Sea, for May – Oct. This dataset was produced by the EU LIFE+ funded SAMBAH project and maps the probability of detection of harbour porpoises in the study area, which extends from the Åland Islands in the north to the Darss and Limhamn underwater ridges in the southwest. The study area excludes areas of depths greater than 80 m. Probability of detection was modelled using General Additive Modelling and static covariates such as depth, topographic complexity, month, spatial coordinates and with time surveyed as a weight. Monthly predictions were done on a 1x1 km grid and averaged to result in seasonal distribution maps for May – Oct and Nov – Apr. This division of the year is a result of visual inspection of data and results, showing a clear separation of spatial clusters of harbour porpoises in the summer season May – Oct and a more dispersed pattern with no clear separation in Nov – Apr.

  • This map shows the distribution and abundance of ringed 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).

  • 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 hard substrate” includes classes “Rock and other hard substrate” and “Coarse substrate” 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.

  • Pressure layer combines all human activities that cause physical disturbance or damage to seabed. For several human activity datasets, spatial extents were given (table below). Buffers with decreasing value rates were applied to represent the impact distance of physical disturbance. The following human activities were combined into the physical disturbance layer; - Cables (under construction, 1 km buffer) - Coastal defence and flood protection (under construction, 500 m buffer) - Deposit of dredged material (500 m buffer for points and areas) - Dredging (maintenance) (500 m buffer for points and areas) - Extraction of sand and gravel (500 m buffer) - Finfish mariculture (1 km buffer) - Fishing intensity 2011-2016 average (subsurface swept area ratio) - Furcellaria harvesting - Pipelines (0,3 km buffer) - Recreational boating and sports - Shellfish mariculture - Shipping density - Wind farms (under construction) (1 km buffer) - Wind farms (operational) (0,1 km buffer) The human activity data sets were first processed separately covering the whole Baltic Sea and then summed together. In this integration, some data layers were down-weighted to arrive at a balanced pressure layer, as described below. High pressure intensity and/or slow recovery (weighting factor 1): Coastal defence and flood protection, Deposit of dredged material, Dredging, Extraction of sand and gravel and Fishing intensity Moderate to high (Weighting factor 0,8): Pipelines and Shipping density Moderate (Weighting factor 0,6): Finfish mariculture, Shellfish mariculture and Wind farms (under construction) Low to moderate (Weighting factor 0,4): Cables Low (Weighting factor 0,2): Maerl and Furcellaria harvesting, Recreational boating and sports and Wind farms (operational) Harbours and marinas were left out from the physical disturbance pressure to avoid double counting due to their representation in the shipping density and recreational boating and sports data sets.

  • 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.

  • 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).

  • 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 “infralittoral mixed substrate” includes classes “mixed sediment” of the original data, in the infralittoral zone. The original polygon maps have been converted to 1 km x 1km 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.

  • '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.