99
occurrence in the different marine compartments,
will help to predict both health and socioeconomic consequences.
It is not generally feasible for assessments to
provide information on the extent of harm at the
population, community or ecosystem level, and it
is thus essential to consider harm at the level of
the individual organism. Estimates of the number
of individuals affected are likely to offer the most
feasible and representative conclusions about
biological impacts. Following the example of the
OSPAR EcoQ for plastic litter items in fulmar
stomachs in the North Sea region, additional
indicator species must be found for the other EU
marine regions (such as sea turtles for the
Mediterranean Sea), and additional indicators on
ecological impacts of litter (e.g. on entanglements) may be required by reference to
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU.
Reaching GES may be understood as a continuous reduction of inputs with the aim of
reducing the total amount of marine litter by
2020 to a level that does not cause harm.
Activities to remove litter that has already
entered the marine environment will assist in
reaching this goal, but some important points
have to be considered. One of the diffi culties in
target setting for some marine regions is the lack
of data for developing a baseline. Moreover, any
assessment of marine litter should consider
short-term variations caused by meteorological
and/or hydrodynamic events and natural fl uctuations, which could infl uence our ability to detect
underlying trends. Given the variability of litter
data, which is infl uenced greatly by season,
weather conditions and water currents, a 5-year
running mean is considered appropriate for providing a baseline in terms of an average level of
pollution. However, the reduction in litter inputs
may not lead to a measurable reduction of total
litter levels in the marine environment in the
short term. This is due to the persistence of some
materials and the long degradation processes for
certain types of litter (plastics, metal, glass and
rubber). Timescales of observations should
therefore be adapted to ensure multiannual frequency of surveying.
Beached litter surveys can be applied to the
European spatial scale while deep-seafl oor monitoring, restricted to a few areas, is more relevant
at smaller scales and over longer periods. It
would not be reasonable to argue that the ultimate
goal of the MSFD should be 0 % litter in the
marine environment. Targets for the different
compartments of the marine environment need to
be set by Member States on the basis of the initial
level of pollution within the area considered.
Increasing knowledge of the amount and dynamics of litter in the marine environment will help to
determine whether targets need to be defi ned at
the regional level in addition to targets set by
individual EU Member States.
For litter on beaches and at sea (fl oating and
on the seafl oor) and for microplastics, it is proposed that the reduction goal recommended by
TSG ML is adopted as a fi rst step. This goal is to
achieve a general measurable and statistically
signifi cant reduction in beach litter until 2020.
Such trend-based target maybe appropriate until
the evidence supports other procedures.
For microplastics, not currently measured on a
regular basis, suffi cient monitoring should be
carried out and a baseline established before
defi ning a precise target. Based on such monitoring, a potential target for the signifi cant decrease
of microparticles by 2020 could be formulated
and the occurrence of microparticles in sediments should also be considered.
Recent studies on industrial plastics found in
beached fulmars in the North Sea showed that
reductions in abundance of specifi c marine litter
items in the order of 50 % per decade are a feasible target if adequate measures are taken.
OSPAR defi ned its more reasonable target for
ecological pressure concerning litter in the
North Sea that, 10 % of Northern Fulmars
should be allowed to have 0.1 g plastic in their
stomach. This OSPAR EcoQO cannot be
directly transferred to other marine areas where
fulmars do not occur. Appropriate indicator species still need to be established and it may be
more suitable, after a reference value will have
been established, to describe GES in relation to
the ingestion of litter in terms of a trend, e.g. x%
annual reduction in the quantity of ingested
litter.
Harmonization is necessary for common and
comparable monitoring approaches and for
Marine Litter Within the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive
occurrence in the different marine compartments,
will help to predict both health and socioeconomic consequences.
It is not generally feasible for assessments to
provide information on the extent of harm at the
population, community or ecosystem level, and it
is thus essential to consider harm at the level of
the individual organism. Estimates of the number
of individuals affected are likely to offer the most
feasible and representative conclusions about
biological impacts. Following the example of the
OSPAR EcoQ for plastic litter items in fulmar
stomachs in the North Sea region, additional
indicator species must be found for the other EU
marine regions (such as sea turtles for the
Mediterranean Sea), and additional indicators on
ecological impacts of litter (e.g. on entanglements) may be required by reference to
Commission Decision 2010/477/EU.
Reaching GES may be understood as a continuous reduction of inputs with the aim of
reducing the total amount of marine litter by
2020 to a level that does not cause harm.
Activities to remove litter that has already
entered the marine environment will assist in
reaching this goal, but some important points
have to be considered. One of the diffi culties in
target setting for some marine regions is the lack
of data for developing a baseline. Moreover, any
assessment of marine litter should consider
short-term variations caused by meteorological
and/or hydrodynamic events and natural fl uctuations, which could infl uence our ability to detect
underlying trends. Given the variability of litter
data, which is infl uenced greatly by season,
weather conditions and water currents, a 5-year
running mean is considered appropriate for providing a baseline in terms of an average level of
pollution. However, the reduction in litter inputs
may not lead to a measurable reduction of total
litter levels in the marine environment in the
short term. This is due to the persistence of some
materials and the long degradation processes for
certain types of litter (plastics, metal, glass and
rubber). Timescales of observations should
therefore be adapted to ensure multiannual frequency of surveying.
Beached litter surveys can be applied to the
European spatial scale while deep-seafl oor monitoring, restricted to a few areas, is more relevant
at smaller scales and over longer periods. It
would not be reasonable to argue that the ultimate
goal of the MSFD should be 0 % litter in the
marine environment. Targets for the different
compartments of the marine environment need to
be set by Member States on the basis of the initial
level of pollution within the area considered.
Increasing knowledge of the amount and dynamics of litter in the marine environment will help to
determine whether targets need to be defi ned at
the regional level in addition to targets set by
individual EU Member States.
For litter on beaches and at sea (fl oating and
on the seafl oor) and for microplastics, it is proposed that the reduction goal recommended by
TSG ML is adopted as a fi rst step. This goal is to
achieve a general measurable and statistically
signifi cant reduction in beach litter until 2020.
Such trend-based target maybe appropriate until
the evidence supports other procedures.
For microplastics, not currently measured on a
regular basis, suffi cient monitoring should be
carried out and a baseline established before
defi ning a precise target. Based on such monitoring, a potential target for the signifi cant decrease
of microparticles by 2020 could be formulated
and the occurrence of microparticles in sediments should also be considered.
Recent studies on industrial plastics found in
beached fulmars in the North Sea showed that
reductions in abundance of specifi c marine litter
items in the order of 50 % per decade are a feasible target if adequate measures are taken.
OSPAR defi ned its more reasonable target for
ecological pressure concerning litter in the
North Sea that, 10 % of Northern Fulmars
should be allowed to have 0.1 g plastic in their
stomach. This OSPAR EcoQO cannot be
directly transferred to other marine areas where
fulmars do not occur. Appropriate indicator species still need to be established and it may be
more suitable, after a reference value will have
been established, to describe GES in relation to
the ingestion of litter in terms of a trend, e.g. x%
annual reduction in the quantity of ingested
litter.
Harmonization is necessary for common and
comparable monitoring approaches and for
Marine Litter Within the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive