This is a reordering of title words and the terminology to make it consistent with other regional seas and EUNIS typology (NB. Baltic codes shown here and in habitat descriptions are for tracking purposes only. This is not a proposal to change the names or codes in the HELCOM Hub.) Check Red List Project habitat description is correct and complete Check there is sufficient background in the territorial data sheet on why the conclusion [LC, A1] was reached. Consideration: This habitat was assessed as LC (A1) by the Baltic Red List Project workshop. The relevant was assessed as LC (A1) by HELCOM (2013). Proposal Retain as LC(A1). No further assessment required. Complete the territorial data sheet. Where expert judgement was used, indicate this on the territorial data sheet and give reasons. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. PROJECT HABITAT NUMBER: 20 HABITAT TITLES AA.M4 Baltic photic mixed substrate characterized by no macroscopic Nearest HELCOM HUB typology: biotic structures PROPOSED RED LIST PROJECT typology: AA.M4 Unvegetated Baltic infralittoral mixed sediment (hard and soft) RED LIST PROJECT ASSESSMENT The Baltic experts Red list workshop assessed this habitat at a lower level LC A1 AA.M4U Baltic photic mixed substrate characterized by no macrocommunity HELCOM Red List Assessment (2013) for relevant habitat was LC(A1) AA.M4U Baltic photic mixed substrate characterized by no macrocommunity PROPOSALS AND OUTSTANDING ACTIONS Discuss/agree change of title for purposes of the Red List Project. Proposed new title AA.M4 Unvegetated Baltic infralittoral mixed sediment (hard and soft) Check Red List Project habitat description Proposal: Retain as LC(A1)
This is a reordering of title words and the terminology to make it consistent with other regional seas and EUNIS typology (NB. Baltic codes shown here and in habitat descriptions are for tracking purposes only. This is not a proposal to change the names or codes in the HELCOM Hub.) Check Red List Project habitat description is correct and complete Check there is sufficient background in the territorial data sheet on why the conclusion [LC, A1] was reached. Consideration: This habitat was assessed as LC (A1) by the Baltic Red List Project workshop. The relevant was assessed as LC (A1) by HELCOM (2013). Proposal Retain as LC(A1). No further assessment required. Complete the territorial data sheet. Where expert judgement was used, indicate this on the territorial data sheet and give reasons. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. PROJECT HABITAT NUMBER: 20 HABITAT TITLES Nearest HELCOM HUB typology: AA.M4 Baltic photic mixed substrate characterized by no macroscopic biotic structures PROPOSED RED LIST PROJECT typology: AA.M4 Unvegetated Baltic infralittoral mixed sediment (hard and soft) RED LIST PROJECT ASSESSMENT The Baltic experts Red list workshop assessed this habitat at a lower level AA.M4U Baltic photic mixed substrate characterized by no macrocommunity LC A1 HELCOM Red List Assessment (2013) for relevant habitat was AA.M4U Baltic photic mixed substrate characterized by no macrocommunity LC(A1) PROPOSALS AND OUTSTANDING ACTIONS Discuss/agree change of title for purposes of the Red List Project. Proposed new title AA.M4 Unvegetated Baltic infralittoral mixed sediment (hard and soft) Check Red List Project habitat description Proposal: Retain as LC(A1)
No%20further%20assessment%20group%20V4.docx