European coastal monitoring programmes may fail to identify impacts on benthic macrofauna caused by bottom trawling.

Bottom trawling (hereafter trawling) is the dominant human pressure impacting continental shelves globally. However, due to ongoing data deficiencies for smaller coastal vessels, the effects of trawling on nearshore seabed ecosystems are poorly understood. In Europe, the Water Framework Directive (WFD) provides a framework for the protection and improvement of coastal water bodies. It requires member states to track the status of 'biological quality elements' (including benthic macrofauna) using WFD-specific ecological indicators. While many of these metrics are sensitive to coastal pressures such as nutrient enrichment, little is known about their ability to detect trawling impacts. Here, we analysed a comprehensive data set of 5885 nearshore benthic samples - spatiotemporally matched to high-resolution trawling and environmental data - to examine how these pressures affect coastal benthos. In addition, we investigated the ability of 8 widely-used benthic monitoring metrics to detect impacts on benthic biological quality. We found that abundance (N) and species richness (S) were strongly impacted by bottom trawling. A clear response to trawling was also observed for the WFD-specific Benthic Quality Index (BQI). Relationships between N and S, and trawling were particularly consistent across the study area, indicating sensitivity across varying environmental conditions. In contrast, WFD indices such as AZTIs Marine Biotic Index (AMBI), multivariate AMBI (M-AMBI), and the Danish Quality Index (DKI), were unresponsive to trawling. In fact, some of the most heavily trawled areas examined were classified as being of 'high/good ecological status' by these indices. A likely explanation for this is that the indices are calculated using species sensitivity scores, based on expected species response to eutrophication and chemical pollution. While the BQI also uses species sensitivity scores, these are based on observed responses to disturbance gradients comprising a range of coastal pressures. Given the prominent use of AMBI and DKI throughout Europe, our results highlight the considerable risk that the metrics used to assess Good Ecological Status (GES) under the WFD may fail to identify trawling impacts. As trawling represents a widespread source of coastal disturbance, fishing impacts on benthic macrofauna may be underestimated, or go undetected, in many coastal monitoring programmes around Europe.

Developing benthic monitoring programmes to support precise and representative status assessments: a case study from the Baltic Sea.

Benthic habitats and communities are key components of the marine ecosystem. Securing their functioning is a central aim in marine environmental management, where monitoring data provide the base for assessing the state of marine ecosystems. In the Baltic Sea, a > 50-year-long tradition of zoobenthic monitoring exists. However, the monitoring programmes were designed prior to the current policies, primarily to detect long-term trends at basin-scale and are thus not optimal to fulfil recent requirements such as area-based periodic status assessments. Here, we review the current monitoring programmes and assess the precision and representativity of the monitoring data in status assessments to identify routes for improvement. At present, the monitoring is focused on soft-bottoms, not accounting for all habitat types occurring in the Baltic Sea. Evaluating the sources of variance in the assessment data revealed that the component accounting for variability among stations forms the largest proportion of the uncertainty. Furthermore, it is shown that the precision of the status estimates can be improved, with the current number of samples. Reducing sampling effort per station, but sampling more stations, is the best option to improve precision in status assessments. Furthermore, by allocating the sampling stations more evenly in the sub-basins, a better representativity of the area can be achieved. However, emphasis on securing the long-term data series is needed if changes to the monitoring programmes are planned.