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.

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.

Potential cumulative impacts of eutrophication and hazardous substances assesses the cumulative potential effect of eutrophication and hazardous substances over all ecosystem components. The evaluation is based on the pressure layer on eutrophication and hazardous substances, combined with information on all ecosystem components (57 layers) included in SPIA for HOLAS 3. The thematic analyses is calculated for each assessment unit (1 km2 grid cells) and the data set covers the time period 2016-2021. Spatial Pressure and Impact Assessment (SPIA) is the framework for assessing spatial and cumulative pressures and impacts in HOLAS 3, and this analyses present a thematic assessment including only a certain subset of layers. The framework also includes results for the Baltic Sea Impact Index (full cumulative impact assessment), Baltic Sea Pressure Index (full cumulative pressure assessment), and other thematic assessments where a subset of pressure and ecosystem layers are used. For more info please - visit the HOLAS 3 website (http://stateofthebalticsea.helcom.fi/) - download the report thematic assessment of spatial distribution of pressures and impacts 2016-2021 (https://helcom.fi/post_type_publ/holas3_spa) - or check out the HELCOM SPIA online tool to make calculations for any desired combination of pressures and ecosystem layers (https://maps.helcom.fi/website/bsii/). Please scroll down to "Lineage" for a more detailed description of the methodology.

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 mixed substrate” includes classes “mixed sediment” 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.

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.

This map shows the distribution and abundance of harbour 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).

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.

Mudflats and sandflats not covered by seawater at low tide (according to Habitats Directive Annex I) are often devoid of vascular plants, usually coated by blue algae and diatoms. They are of particular importance as feeding grounds for wildfowl and waders. The distribution map is based on data submission by HELCOM contracting parties. Only Denmark, Germany and Estonia reported occurrences of mudflats and sandflats. Most of the submitted data is based on modelling and/or GIS analysis. Data coverage, accuracy and the methods in obtaining the data vary between countries.

The occurrence of suitable nursery habitats is crucial for maintaining fish populations (Sundblad et al. 2013). Species distribution modelling studies have shown the importance of suitable environmental conditions for pikeperch recruitment. Due to lack of coherent data on pikeperch spawning and nursery areas across the Baltic Sea countries, environmental variables were used in delineating potential recruitment areas for pikeperch. The pikeperch recruitment area presented on the map is mainly delineated by selecting areas where depth < 5 m, logged exposure < 5, salinity < 7 PSU, Secchi depth < 2 m and distance to deep (10m) water < 4km. The threshold values have been obtained from literature (Veneranta et al. 2011, Bergström et al. 2013, Sundblad et al. 2013, Kallasvuo et al. 2016). Temperature, although important for pikeperch, was left out due to high variation in timing of suitable spawning temperatures across the Baltic Sea. In Finnish coastal waters, a national pikeperch model (Kallasvuo et al. 2016) has been used, with very suitable areas for pikeperch generalized to 1 km grid. In Sweden, the areas delineated by environmental variables have been complemented with information from national interview survey (Gunnartz et al. 2011) as well as expert opinion.