• Latest Version, 2024 Assessment
• Birds, 2018 assessment

Marine Birds

The extent to which Good Environmental Status has been achieved

Marine Birds overall have not achieved Good Environmental Status (GES). Although there has been improvement in one of the breeding seabird indicators (presence of invasive mammals on important seabird islands) the outlook remains ‘not good’ across most of the functional groups in both the Greater North Sea and Celtic Seas regions. 

Long-tailed duck (Clangula hyemalis) (Photo credit Daisy Burnell). 

Progress since previous assessments

A summary of the status of each indicator used for the Marine Birds Thematic Assessment is provided in Table 1. A summary of the species group assessments is presented in Table 2. The inclusion of the non-breeding component of B6 makes comparison with the previous assessment challenging. This evidence was considered in the Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR) Quality Status Report 2023 (QSR) using only B1 and B3 however, which suggests there has been some improvements across the groups and regions, but the overall status for each species group has not changed.  

The integration used for this assessment is different from the previous UK Marine Strategy (UKMS) assessment. Figure 1 more closely resembles the previous assessment’s layout. Comparing these outputs, it would appear for both regions that abundance of non-breeding marine birds has declined, with the Greater North Sea dropping below target. Breeding abundance, for both regions has improved, though not enough to meet target. Productivity was assessed in reverse for the past assessment (breeding failure, rather than success), for both regions this looks to have declined. The improvement of the invasive mammal indicator is positive and has largely been due to the work of the Biosecurity for LIFE project. 

Figure 1. Schematic showing all the indicators and their targets (split into their non-breeding and breeding components) across each region, Greater North Sea (top) and Celtic Seas (bottom) and colour coded depending on whether overall they met or did not meet target overall for the region, or if they were not included in the integrated assessment.  

How progress has been assessed

Assessment overview

‘Good’ GES status overall was only awarded if more than 75% of the species populations in each functional group were in ‘good’ status. Any less than 75% and the status of the group was deemed ‘not good’. For the two UK regions, Greater North Sea and Celtic Seas, ‘good’ status was given only if all bird groups were also in ‘good’ status, as per the Coordinated Environmental Monitoring Programme (CEMP) Guidelines.  

Table 1. Overview of the indicator status for Marine Birds (2024) 

Criteria 1	Population abundance
2019 Target	The population size of marine bird species has not declined substantially since 1992 as a result of human activities.
Corresponding OSPAR QSR 2023 Indicator	Marine bird abundance  - B1
Greater North Sea	Not met
Celtic Seas	Not met
Criteria 2	Population demographic characteristics
2019 Target	Widespread lack of breeding success in marine birds caused by human activities should occur in no more than three years in six.
Corresponding OSPAR QSR 2023 Indicator	Marine Bird Breeding Productivity - B3
Greater North Sea	Not met
Celtic Seas	Not met
Indicator	Kittiwake breeding success - B2
Greater North Sea	Not met
Celtic Seas	Not used
Indicator	Invasive mammal presence on island seabird colonies - B4
Greater North Sea	Met
Celtic Seas	Met
Criteria 3	Distributional range
2019 Target	There is no significant change or reduction in population distribution of marine birds caused by human activities.
Indicator	Distribution of breeding and non-breeding marine birds - B6
Greater North Sea	Met
Celtic Seas	Met
Criteria 4	Bycatch mortality
2019 Target	The long-term viability of marine bird populations is not threatened by deaths caused by incidental bycatch in mobile and static fishing gear
Indicator:	Seabird bycatch - B5
Greater North Sea	Not used
Celtic Seas	Not used

Table 2. Overview of functional group status across the two UK relevant OSPAR regions: Greater North Sea and Celtic Seas. 

Feeding Group	Region	No. species	% species in good status	Status of species group
Surface	Greater North Sea	20	30	Not good
	Celtic Seas	13	38	Not good
Water column	Greater North Sea	19	84	Good
	Celtic Seas	17	76	Good
Benthic	Greater North Sea	9	67	Not good
	Celtic Seas	8	63	Not good
Wading	Greater North Sea	32	72	Not good
	Celtic Seas	26	65	Not good
Grazing	Greater North Sea	9	100	Good
	Celtic Seas	8	88	Good
All	Greater North Sea	89	67	Not good
	Celtic Seas	72	65	Not good

Detailed assessments

The overarching assessment for the status of the biodiversity of marine birds follows a similar approach to that taken by the OSPAR QSR marine bird thematic assessment and CEMP. This allows us to bring together and integrate findings from three indicators: Marine Bird Abundance (B1), Marine Bird Breeding Productivity (B3) and the non-breeding component of the Marine Bird Distribution (B6). From this, we can build a clear picture for the status of marine birds as presented here.  

The confidence in the breeding component of the Marine Bird Distribution indicator (B6) was deemed too low to be used in the thematic assessment for marine birds. The Invasive Mammal indicator (B4) could not be integrated due to this assessment not being species specific. 

The status for each species was assessed as ‘not good’ if at least one of the indicators failed. If a species had both breeding and non-breeding components in any of the indicators, these were assessed separately, thus counting as two elements. Species population assessments were then combined to assess the status of five functional species groups, which are: 

• Surface feeders (Table 3), 

• Water column feeders (Table 4),  

• Benthic feeders (Table 5),  

• Wading feeders (Table 6)  

• Grazing feeders (Table 7) 

• Combined assessment (Table 8) 

The B6 indicator is not shown or utilised for the integrated assessment of the surface feeders functional group as there were no non-breeding surface feeding marine birds within it. However, the kittiwake breeding success indicator (B2), was considered alongside B1 and B3 for black-legged kittiwake in the Greater North Sea. The overall status for breeding black-legged kittiwake in the Greater North Sea remains ‘not good’ as the threshold for this indicator was not met.  

There were no species in the benthic or grazing feeders functional groups included in the B3 indicator, hence the integrated assessments for these only include the B1 and B6 indicators. A pilot assessment of Marine Bird Bycatch (B5) was produced for QSR23, although the only UK relevant area and species with sufficient data was the Celtic Seas for Common Guillemot. Bycatch may be an issue, but an assessment was not possible as impacts cannot be attributed to specific breeding populations. Therefore, this indicator was not considered for this thematic summary. 

Table 3. Surface-feeding marine birds species group indicator outcomes (B1, B3) and integrated assessment status. Breeding populations (B) and non-breeding populations (NB) are assessed separately. Blue: indicator threshold achieved or status 'good'. Red: indicator threshold not achieved or status 'not good'. OSPAR Listed species are shown in italics; * status solely derived from status assessment 

Surface feeders		Greater North Sea (OSPAR Region II)			Celtic Seas (OSPAR Region III)
		B1	B3	Status	B1	B3	Status
NB	Black-headed gull			Good
NB	Common gull			Good
NB	Great black-backed gull			Not good
NB	European herring gull			Not good
NB	Lesser black-backed gull			Good
NB	Balearic Shearwater			Not good*			Not good*
B	Black-legged kittiwake			Not good			Not good
B	Black-headed gull			Not good			Not good
B	Common gull			Not good			Good
B	Great black-backed gull			Not good			Good
B	European herring gull			Not good			Not good
B	Lesser black-backed gull			Not good			Not good
B	Sandwich tern			Good			Good
B	Little tern			Good			Good
B	Roseate tern			Good
B	Common tern			Not good			Not good
B	Arctic tern			Not good			Not good
B	Great skua			Not good			Good
B	Arctic skua			Not good
B	Northern fulmar			Not good			Not good
Number of species in good status				6			5
Number of species not in good status				14			8
Proportion of species in good status				30%			38%
State of species group				Not good			Not good

Table 4. Water column-feeding marine birds species group indicator outcomes (B1, B3, B6) and integrated assessment status. Breeding populations (B) and non-breeding populations (NB) are assessed separately. Blue: indicator threshold achieved or status 'good'. Red: indicator threshold not achieved or status 'not good'. 

Water column feeders		Greater North Sea				Celtic Seas
		Region II				Region III
		B1	B3	B6	Status	B1	B3	B6	Status
NB	Red-throated Diver				Good				Good
NB	Black-throated Diver				Not good				Good
NB	Great Northern Diver				Good				Good
NB	Goosander				Good				Good
NB	Red-breasted merganser				Good				Not good
NB	Little Grebe				Good				Good
NB	Great crested grebe				Good				Not good
NB	Slavonian Grebe				Good				Good
NB	Black-necked Grebe				Good				Good
NB	Kingfisher				Good				Good
NB	Great cormorant				Good				Good
NB	European shag				Good
B	Common guillemot				Good				Good
B	Razorbill				Good				Not good
B	Black guillemot				Good				Good
B	Atlantic puffin				Not good
B	Northern gannet				Good				Good
B	Great cormorant				Good				Not good
B	European shag				Not good				Good
Number of species in good status					16				13
Number of species not in good status					3				4
Proportion of species in good status					84%				76%
State of species group					Good				Good

Table 5. Benthic-feeding marine birds species group indicator outcomes (B1, B6) and integrated assessment status. Breeding populations (B) and non-breeding populations (NB) are assessed separately. Blue: indicator threshold achieved or status 'good'. Red: indicator threshold not achieved or status 'not good'.  

Benthic feeders		Greater North Sea			Celtic Seas
		Region II			Region III
		B1	B6	Status	B1	B6	Status
NB	Pochard			Good			Good
NB	Tufted Duck			Good			Good
NB	Greater scaup			Not good			Not good
NB	Common eider			Not good			Good
NB	Long-tailed duck			Good			Not good
NB	Common goldeneye			Good			Not good
NB	Velvet Scoter			Good			Good
NB	Common Scoter			Good			Good
B	Common eider			Not good
Number of species in good status				6			5
Number of species not in good status				3			3
Proportion of species in good status				67%			63%
State of species group				Not good			Not good

Table 6. Wading feeding marine birds species group indicator outcomes (B1, B3, B6) and integrated assessment status. Breeding populations (B) and non-breeding populations (NB) are assessed separately. Blue: indicator threshold achieved or status 'good'. Red: indicator threshold not achieved or status 'not good'.  

 

Wading feeders		Greater North Sea				Celtic Seas
		Region II				Region III
		B1	B3	B6	Status	B1	B3	B6	Status
NB	Common shelduck				Good				Not good
NB	Eurasian teal				Good				Good
NB	Northern pintail				Good				Not good
NB	Eurasian spoonbill				Good				Good
NB	Eurasian oystercatcher				Not good				Good
NB	Pied Avocet				Good				Good
NB	Lapwing				Good				Good
NB	Golden Plover				Good				Good
NB	Grey Plover				Not good				Not good
NB	Common ringed Plover				Good				Not good
NB	Black-tailed godwit				Good				Good
NB	Bar-tailed godwit				Good				Not good
NB	Eurasian whimbrel				Good				Good
NB	Eurasian curlew				Good				Not good
NB	Spotted redshank				Not good
NB	Common redshank				Good				Good
NB	Common greenshank				Good				Good
NB	Ruddy turnstone				Good				Not good
NB	Red knot				Not good				Good
NB	Sanderling				Good				Good
NB	Purple sandpiper				Not good				Not good
NB	Dunlin				Not good				Not good
NB	Ruff				Not good
NB	Jack Snipe				Good				Good
NB	Snipe				Good				Good
NB	Common sandpiper				Good				Good
NB	Little egret				Good				Good
NB	Grey Heron				Good				Good
B	Eurasian spoonbill				Good
B	Eurasian oystercatcher				Not good
B	Pied Avocet				Not good
B	Common ringed Plover				Good
Number of species in good status					23				17
Number of species not in good status					9				9
Proportion of species in good status					72%				65%
State of species group					Not good				Not good

Table 7. Grazing feeding marine birds species group indicator outcomes (B1, B6) and integrated assessment status. Breeding populations (B) and non-breeding populations (NB) are assessed separately. Blue: indicator threshold achieved or status 'good'. Red: indicator threshold not achieved or status 'not good'.  

 

Grazing feeders		Greater North Sea			Celtic Seas
		Region II			Region III
		B1	B6	Status	B1	B6	Status
NB	Barnacle goose			Good			Good
NB	Brent goose			Good			Good
NB	Mute Swan			Good			Good
NB	Eurasian wigeon			Good			Good
NB	Mallard			Good			Not good
NB	Northern shoveler			Good			Good
NB	Gadwall			Good			Good
NB	Coot			Good			Good
B	Barnacle goose			Good
Number of species in good status				9			7
Number of species not in good status				0			1
Proportion of species in good status				100%			88%
State of species group				Good			Good

Table 8. Overall status for each species used within the integrated assessment split by breeding and non-breeding populations and by region. Red: indicator threshold not achieved or status 'not good'. * status solely derived from status assessment. 

 

Breeding
Species	Greater North Sea	Species	Celtic Seas
Black-legged kittiwake	Not good	Black-legged kittiwake	Not good
Black-headed gull	Not good	Black-headed gull	Not good
Common gull	Not good	Common gull	Good
Great black-backed gull	Not good	Great black-backed gull	Good
European herring gull	Not good	European herring gull	Not good
Lesser black-backed gull	Not good	Lesser black-backed gull	Not good
Sandwich tern	Good	Sandwich tern	Good
Little tern	Good	Little tern	Good
Roseate tern	Good	Common tern	Not good
Common tern	Not good	Arctic tern	Not good
Arctic tern	Not good	Great skua	Good
Great skua	Not good	Northern fulmar	Not good
Arctic skua	Not good	Common guillemot	Good
Northern fulmar	Not good	Razorbill	Not good
Common guillemot	Good	Black guillemot	Good
Razorbill	Good	Northern gannet	Good
Black guillemot	Good	Great cormorant	Not good
Atlantic puffin	Not good	European shag	Good
Northern gannet	Good	Good status	9
Great cormorant	Good	Not good	9
European shag	Not good	Good status (%)	50
Common eider	Not good
Eurasian spoonbill	Good
Eurasian oystercatcher	Not good
Pied Avocet	Not good
Common ringed Plover	Good
Barnacle goose	Good
Good status	11
Not good	16
Good status (%)	41

 

Non-breeding
Species	Greater North Sea	Species	Celtic Seas
Black-headed gull	Good	Balearic Shearwater	Not good*
Common gull	Good	Red-throated Diver	Good
Great black-backed gull	Not good	Black-throated Diver	Good
European herring gull	Not good	Great Northern Diver	Good
Lesser black-backed gull	Good	Goosander	Good
Balearic Shearwater	Not good*	Red-breasted merganser	Not good
Red-throated Diver	Good	Little Grebe	Good
Black-throated Diver	Not good	Great crested grebe	Not good
Great Northern Diver	Good	Slavonian Grebe	Good
Goosander	Good	Black-necked Grebe	Good
Red-breasted merganser	Good	Kingfisher	Good
Little Grebe	Good	Great cormorant	Good
Great crested grebe	Good	Pochard	Good
Slavonian Grebe	Good	Tufted Duck	Good
Black-necked Grebe	Good	Greater scaup	Not good
Kingfisher	Good	Common eider	Good
Great cormorant	Good	Long-tailed duck	Not good
European shag	Good	Common goldeneye	Not good
Pochard	Good	Velvet Scoter	Good
Tufted Duck	Good	Common Scoter	Good
Greater scaup	Not good	Common shelduck	Not good
Common eider	Not good	Eurasian teal	Good
Long-tailed duck	Good	Northern pintail	Not good
Common goldeneye	Good	Eurasian spoonbill	Good
Velvet Scoter	Good	Eurasian oystercatcher	Good
Common Scoter	Good	Pied Avocet	Good
Common shelduck	Good	Lapwing	Good
Eurasian teal	Good	Golden Plover	Good
Northern pintail	Good	Grey Plover	Not good
Eurasian spoonbill	Good	Common ringed Plover	Not good
Eurasian oystercatcher	Not good	Black-tailed godwit	Good
Pied Avocet	Good	Bar-tailed godwit	Not good
Lapwing	Good	Eurasian whimbrel	Good
Golden Plover	Good	Eurasian curlew	Not good
Grey Plover	Not good	Common redshank	Good
Common ringed Plover	Good	Common greenshank	Good
Black-tailed godwit	Good	Ruddy turnstone	Not good
Bar-tailed godwit	Good	Red knot	Good
Eurasian whimbrel	Good	Sanderling	Good
Eurasian curlew	Good	Purple sandpiper	Not good
Spotted redshank	Not good	Dunlin	Not good
Common redshank	Good	Jack Snipe	Good
Common greenshank	Good	Snipe	Good
Ruddy turnstone	Good	Common sandpiper	Good
Red knot	Not good	Little egret	Good
Sanderling	Good	Grey Heron	Good
Purple sandpiper	Not good	Barnacle goose	Good
Dunlin	Not good	Brent goose	Good
Ruff	Not good	Mute Swan	Good
Jack Snipe	Good	Eurasian wigeon	Good
Snipe	Good	Mallard	Not good
Common sandpiper	Good	Northern shoveler	Good
Little egret	Good	Gadwall	Good
Grey Heron	Good	Coot	Good
Barnacle goose	Good	Good status	38
Brent goose	Good	Not good	16
Mute Swan	Good	Good status (%)	70
Eurasian wigeon	Good
Mallard	Good
Northern shoveler	Good
Gadwall	Good
Coot	Good
Good status	49
Not good	13
Good status (%)	79

 Additional information about the status the UK’s breeding seabirds can be found in the recent update to the IUCN Birds of Conservation Concern Red List assessment for marine birds. 

Achievement of targets and indicators used to assess progress in 2024

Kittiwake breeding success

Marine Bird Breeding Productivity

Invasive mammals

Distribution

Abundance

 

Photographic credits: Kittiwake breeding success © Ian Mitchell. Marine Bird Breeding Productivity © Matt Parsons. Invasive mammals © Phil Davison. Distribution © JNCC.

Drivers, activities and pressures affecting the state of the marine environment

Marine bird biodiversity in the UK is impacted by various pressures from drivers of human activities, all of which are reflected in the QSR thematic assessment. Some of the key drivers for the UK are society’s need for food, energy and to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change.     

The key activities that exert pressure on marine bird biodiversity in the UK are:  

- Fisheries activities (Figure 2) 

- Increased offshore renewable energy activities 

- Aggregate extraction activities 

- Coastal squeeze through coastal/flood defence support 

These activities can lead to pressures such as, but not limited to:  

- Increased disturbance  

- Depleted prey sources  

- Increased risk direct mortality 

This assessment does not consider new or emerging pressures such as Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI), which had a devastating impact on marine bird species in the UK in 2022 and 2023. At some gannet colonies initial estimates suggest between 25% and 50% reduction in breeding abundance.

Figure 2. Fisheries activities can exert both direct and indirect pressures on marine bird abundance. Photo of common guillemot (Uria aalge) (Photo credit Justin Hart). 

Impact of pressure on ecosystem services

Decline in marine bird biodiversity from increasing pressures can have adverse effects on various ecosystem services in which they play an important role. The roles marine birds play in these services in the UK are detailed in the 2023 QSR thematic assessment. Of particular concern is their role in regulating and maintaining food webs, as top predators; minimising this function has negative connotations across the wider marine ecosystem, effectively reducing biodiversity at lower levels.  

Additionally, marine birds hold great cultural value in the UK. This is reflected in the vast numbers of volunteers involved in survey schemes and members to organisations like the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB). They are also linked to positive economic value through ecotourism. 

Impacts of climate change on pressures and state

Climate change was identified as one of the top three most important threats to seabirds globally by Dias et al. (2019) and an important driver for change in the UK (Pearce-Higgins et al., 2021; Mitchell et al., 2020) and more widely in the northeast Atlantic (OSPAR, 2023). The main impact of climate change is thought to be reduction in abundance and availability of small shoaling fish (e.g. sandeels, sprat) which are prey to most seabirds. Rising sea temperatures have been linked to declines in breeding success and survival rates of some seabird species.  The ways in which climate change is impacting on seabirds and their prey, through changes lower down the food chain, are poorly understood and likely to be complex. 

The UK-only-indicator B2 (Kittiwake Breeding Success) uses this negative relationship between kittiwake breeding success and sea temperature to determine if productivity at colonies on the UK North Sea is being affected solely by climate change or by impacts from other anthropogenic activities.  The indicator showed that at the majority of colonies, breeding productivity was lower than expected from prevailing sea temperatures.  

Climate change can also affect the distribution of some species.  The UK-only-indicator on Marine Bird Distribution (B6), showed how species such as spoonbill and little egret, that are more associated with warmer climes, have expanded their distribution in the UK. Conversely, climate change has led to reductions in numbers of other non-breeding waterbird species. 

Other direct impacts of climate change may have been evident recently; in 2021 and 2023, when large numbers of auks and shags were washed up dead or dying along the UK coast. Such ‘seabird wrecks’ are thought to be linked to extreme weather (storms and marine heatwaves), which is increasing in frequency or magnitude due to climate change. 

Management actions taken

The actions we are taking to achieve GES for marine birds are set out in the UK Marine Strategy Part 3 2025: Programme of Measures. These actions contribute to the wider OSPAR-level strategic response to pressures, and the drivers of activities that lead to these, on marine birds, which are detailed in the 2023 OSPAR thematic assessment. Priority actions are highlighted below: 

1. Marine bird conservation is an area of devolved policy. Although the approaches to marine bird conservation are being developed separately by England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, they aim to improve the outlook of the seabird community across the UK and beyond.  These pathways are being developed through identifying pressures affecting seabirds and seeking stakeholders’ views on options for seabird conservation measures. In England, Defra is planning the next steps to work closely with stakeholders to seek their views on the recommended actions in the English Seabird Conservations and Recovery Pathway (ESCaRP) technical report, published by Natural England in 2024. A key challenge is to develop implementation options that prioritise the most urgent recommendations. 

2. Bycatch Mitigation Initiative: Published in 2022, the initiative outlines how the UK aims to minimise and where possible eliminate the bycatch of sensitive marine species. This includes improving our evidence base for seabird bycatch, identifying hotspots and the reasons behind these as well as developing toolkits to support the industry in reducing seabird bycatch in UK fisheries.  

3. Fisheries management: The kittiwake breeding success indicator highlights some of the historical management strategies that have taken place to minimise the pressure on seabirds from fishing of forage fish. A ban on sandeel fisheries in English waters of the North Sea was introduced in March 2024. The Scottish Government enacted the Sandeel (Prohibition of Fishing) (Scotland) Order 2024 in March 2024, which prohibits fishing for sandeels in Scottish waters and applies to all fishing boats. Licensing requirements and evaluation of fisheries activities through Habitats Regulations Appraisals (HRAs) are needed in both Scotland and Wales.  

4. UK Biosecurity plans on important seabird islands: See B4 (Invasive mammal indicator) for more information.

5. Localised conservation initiatives: Bird Aware Solent, Roseate Tern LIFE, LIFE on the Edge and LIFE Raft project are but a few examples of the smaller scale initiatives that have taken place or have just started in the UK, to help manage marine bird conservation. 

Next steps

Evidence challenges

• We have a UK-wide initiative to develop conservation actions for marine birds. Each devolved administration is at a different stage with their respective policies for these.  

• We recognise the need to establish a suitable framework that enables us to monitor and assess the success of these and other measures and their implementation, alongside the strategic objectives set out in the North-East Atlantic Environment Strategy 2030 (NEAES).  

Other significant challenges include: 

• Establishing a detailed picture of the extent of the impacts caused by single-point events, such as outbreaks of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) in 2021-2023, and the auk and shag wrecks in 2021 and 2023.  

Operational objectives

We will contribute to the further development of the assessment of bird populations and identify the most important pressures at a regional level through OSPAR, as well as continue to support the strategic objectives set out by the 2023 QSR thematic assessment. We will continue to enhance and protect marine birds through: 

• Effective management at protected sites. 

• Increasing our understanding of climate impacts at a regional level to better enable assessments to account for these. Thus, allowing for more conclusive results on the potential impacts of additional human activities.  

• Further reducing the risks to island seabird colonies from invasive mammalian predators by evolving the invasive mammal indicator to assess effectiveness of biosecurity measures now adopted and expanding to other protected sites such as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs). 

• Developing tools, such as an indicator, to assess the effectiveness of the Bycatch Mitigation Initiative for marine birds in the UK. 

• Improving our understanding of distributional change in marine birds through the inclusion of breeding seabird data and preferably offshore distribution data into the assessment.  

• Improving the depth and breadth of marine bird monitoring across the UK.  

• Increasing our understanding of the impacts of offshore marine renewable developments on marine birds and how they could best be mitigated or compensated for. 

We will also look to further develop our understanding of the individual and cumulative impacts of human activities on marine birds in the UK. The outbreak of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) in our wild marine birds in 2021-23, will have unknown consequences on their populations and demographics in the coming years, it will be key to try and gain an understanding of these to ensure they are accounted for or properly addressed for the next assessment cycle. Similarly, with the unpredictable events, like those seen in the auk and shag wrecks in 2021 and 2023, understanding how these may influence the assessments in the future should be considered. Furthermore, investigating the frequency of these random events for all species included in these assessments will help to inform the assessments further. 

Technical Detail: Good Environmental Status for the next cycle

Table 9. shows the overarching targets (characteristics) for GES, along with their criteria, individual GES targets and associated indicators for the next assessment cycle (subject to change following the UK Marine Strategy Part 1 public consultation).

Table 9. GES criteria and targets for next assessment cycle.  

Overarching target
The abundance and demography of marine bird species indicate healthy populations that are not significantly affected by human activities.
Criteria	2024-2030 GES targets	Comment	Indicators to be used
Bycatch mortality	The long-term viability of marine bird populations is not threatened by deaths caused by incidental bycatch in mobile and static fishing gear.	No change	Seabird bycatch (B5)
Population abundance and distribution	The population size of marine bird species has not declined substantially since 1992 as a result of human activities.	No change	Marine bird abundance – OSPAR (B1)
Population demographic characteristics	Widespread lack of breeding success in marine birds caused by human activities should occur in no more than three years in six.	No change	Marine bird productivity – OSPAR (B3)  Kittiwake breeding success (B2)  Invasive mammal presence on island seabird colonies (B4)
Distributional range	There is no significant change or reduction in population distribution of marine birds caused by human activities.	No change	Distribution of breeding and non-breeding marine birds (B6)

 

References

Dias, M.P., Martin, R., Pearmain, E.J., Burfield, I.J., Small, C., Phillips, R.A., Yates, O., Lascelles, B., Borborogly, P.B. and Croxall, J.P. (2019). Threats to seabirds: A global assessment. Biological Conservation 237: 525-537. 

Mitchell, I., Daunt, F., Frederiksen, M. and Wade, K. (2020). Impacts of climate change on seabirds, relevant to the coastal and marine environment around the UK. MCCIP Science Review 2020 382–399. 

OSPAR (2023). Marine Birds Thematic Assessment. In: OSPAR, 2023: Quality Status Report 2023. OSPAR Commission, London. Available at: https://oap.ospar.org/en/ospar-assessments/quality-status-reports/qsr-2023/thematic-assessments/marine-birds/ 

Pearce-Higgins, J.W., Davies, J.G. and Humphreys, E.M. (2021). Species and habitat climate change adaptation options for seabirds within the INTERREG VA area. Report to Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute and Marine Scotland Science as part of the Marine Protected Area Management and Monitoring (MarPAMM) project. 

Contributors

Daisy Burnell, Bryony Baker 

Acknowledgements: Matthew Murphy, Emma Philip, Richard Berridge, Justin Hart and Claire Macnamara.