Biological quality elements, intercalibration and ecological status Anne Lyche Solheim, Norwegian institute for water research (NIVA), European Topic Centre for Inland Coastal and Marine Waters (ETC/ICM), Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Outline Important aspects of WFD-reporting for biological quality elements (BQEs), intercalibration and ecological status Main structure and content of data reporting on BQEs and ecological status/potential of surface waters Overview of data in river basin management plans (RBMPs) reported by countries Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Important aspects of WFD reporting for BQEs intercalibration and ecological status (1) Relevant Article in WFD: Annex V (1.4), Articles 1, 4, 8 Core of the WFD, link between pressures and mitigation measures Good ecological status = WFD objective Intercalibration of the good status class boundaries for each BQE is important to ensure comparable targets across EU Classification results enable distance to target (good ecological status) to be assessed and the programme of measures to be properly planned to reach the target HIGH GOOD MODERATE POOR BAD Ecological status Measures Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Important aspects of WFD reporting for BQEs intercalibration and ecological status (2) Strategic Questions for the European Commission concerning ecological status: Are the methods to assess ecological status well correlated to existing pressures? Do the ecological status assessments provide a sound basis for a proper selection of mitigation measures to reduce the pressures? Is the overall assessment of ecological status comparable across the EU? And does this provide a sound basis to compare Member States' efforts in establishing the Programme of Measures? Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Outline Important aspects of WFD-reporting for biological quality elements (BQEs), intercalibration and ecological status Main structure and content of data reporting on BQEs and ecological status/potential of surface waters Overview of data in river basin management plans (RBMPs) reported by countries Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Main structure and content of data reporting of BQEs and ecological status: User guide for reporting CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 What is in this document 1 2. WFD REPORTING SCHEMAS – GENERAL ISSUES 3 2.1 Background 3 2.2 General issues 4 2.2.1 Reporting and resubmissions 4 2.2.2 Levels of reporting 4 2.2.3 The basis for reporting 4 2.2.4 Stylesheets 5 2.2.5 Approach to status codes 5 2.2.6 Reporting of protected areas and their status 8 2.2.7 Namespaces, Schema and Stylesheet Locations 9 2.2.8 Metadata 9 2.2.9 Additional Internet-based information 10 2.2.10 Required Elements 10 2.2.11 Conditional Elements 10 2.2.12 Optional Elements 10 2.2.13 Common Elements 11 3. THE SCHEMAS 12 4. THE COMMON SCHEMA (lists of parameters and codes for types and quality elements 13 5. SCHEMA: ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS (COMPETENT AUTHORITIES, RIVER BASIN DISTRICTS AND SUB-UNITS) 46 6. SCHEMA: SURFACE WATER BODIES (incl. Water body type and ecological status) 52 7. SCHEMA: GROUNDWATER BODIES 67 8. SCHEMA: PROTECTED AREAS 82 9. SCHEMA: SURFACE WATER AND GROUNDWATER BODIES METHODOLOGIES 86 9.1 SURFACE WATER BODY METHODOLOGIES 86 9.2 GROUNDWATER BODIES METHODOLOGIES 115 10. SCHEMA: RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT PLANS AND PROGRAMMES OF MEASURES 130 11. SCHEMA: MONITORING PROGRAMMES 177 12. SCHEMA: SURFACE WATER MONITORING PROGRAMMES 194 13. SCHEMA: GROUNDWATER MONITORING PROGRAMMES 204 EUROPEAN COMMISSION – DG ENVIRONMENT TECHNICAL SUPPORT IN RELATION TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE (2000/60/EC) A USER GUIDE TO THE WFD REPORTING SCHEMAS Report Ref: V4.3 22 October 2009 Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Main structure of data reporting of BQEs and ecological status: How is the data summarised in WISE? Chapter 3: Classification methods Section 3.1.1.1 Assessment methods for ecological status Section 3.1.1.2 Translation of intercalibration results Chapter 4: Monitoring Section 4.1.6 Monitoring methodologies Section 4.1.7. Summary of site and quality element info Section 4.1.8. Number of sites used for surveillance and operational monitoring of quality elements Chapter 5: Surface water status (Results of classification) Section 5.1.2 Overall ecological status/potential Section 5.2 Ecological status of natural water bodies, one sub-section for each water category Supporting info on pressures and impacts: Sections 2.2.4, 2.2.5 and 2.2.6. Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Main structure and content of data reporting of BQEs and ecological status: overview 1. Development of assessment methods: Biological + supporting quality elements (nutrients, hydro-morph., specific pollutants) Relationship to pressures and impacts, Overall classification (one-out-all-out principle), National water body types for each water category Confidence/precision (high, medium, low, unknown) 2. Intercalibration of assessment methods: ensuring the comparability of assessment methods in terms of the good status class boundaries (H/G & G/M), consistency check of national versus intercalibrated class boundaries for national water body types corresponding to the common types used for intercalibration and for types not corresponding to common types 3. Application of assessment methods: Quality elements used for monitoring and classification, Spatial variability within water bodies, No-deterioration objective in relation to development of pressures, Uncertainty/confidence in results Grouping of water bodies for classification and monitoring Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Main structure and content of data reporting of BQEs and ecological status (1a) Development of assessment methods for BQEs: Relationship to pressure/impact Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Overall classification method at water body level: Main structure and content of data reporting of BQEs and ecological status (1b) Overall classification method at water body level: One-out-all-out principle BQEs with low confidence can be excluded, (e.g. fish in lakes) Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Main structure and content of data reporting of BQEs and ecological status (1c) National water body types (example UK): Rivers: size of river basin, altitude, geology, Lakes: surface area, depth, geology Transitional waters: mixing, size, tides, salinity Coastal waters: wind exposure, tides, salinity Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Main structure and content of data reporting of BQEs and ecological status (2a) 2. Intercalibration of assessment methods: Purpose: ensure the comparability of assessment methods in terms of the good status class boundaries (H/G & G/M), all countries same ambition, not acceptable with too lax boundaries compared to neighbour countries (e.g. Country B) Requirement: national class boundaries for each BQE must be consistent with the agreed intercalibrated class boundaries Agreed intercalibrated class boundaries for each BQE are found in the Intercalibration Official Decision and Technical Annexes for Rivers, Lakes and Coastal waters (will be updated in 2012 with more BQEs): (http://eurlex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:332:0020:0044:EN:PDF Fixed HG Fixed GM Country A Country B Country C Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

National assessment methods for rivers used for intercalibration Macrophytes Phytobenthos Macro-invertebrates Fish Large rivers Cross GIG 15 countries (CB, NO GIGs) 15 countries 12 (invert) 9 (fish) 7 (macrph) 12 (phbenth) 4 (phytopl) Alpine GIG 6 countries Central & Baltic GIG 10 countries [cross-GIG] 18 (round 1) 6 (new/upd.) Med GIG 7 countries, 3 finalised 6 countries (except GR) 7 countries Eastern Continental GIG 3 countries - RO, CZ missing 8 countries Northern GIG 2 countries (SE, UK) Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Main structure and content of data reporting of BQEs and ecological status (2b) 2. Reporting of class boundaries and compliance with Intercalibrated boundaries in WISE (e.g. SE): Coastal waters Rivers Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Main structure and content of data reporting of BQEs and ecological status (3) 3. Application of assessment methods: Quality elements used for monitoring and classification (WISE summary, chapter 5(example Sweden, North Baltic RBD) Table 5.1.2.b Comparison of number of water bodies monitored and classified Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Main structure and content of data reporting of BQEs and ecological status (3) 3. Application of assessment methods: Uncertainty/Confidence in results (WISE summary, chapter 5) (example Sweden, North Baltic RBD) Table 5.1.2.a Number and percentage of total numbers of water bodies Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Outline Important aspects of WFD-reporting for biological quality elements (BQEs), intercalibration and ecological status Main structure and content of data reporting on BQEs and ecological status/potential of surface waters Overview of data in river basin management plans (RBMPs) reported by countries Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Overview of data in river basin management plans (RBMPs) reported by countries WFD database version v3 March 2011 based on data reported in the RBMPs: Circa: task 1.4.1.a - 3 WFD Art 13 reporting -> Links to WFD data and information -> WFD master database v.3 -> WFD database v.3 – SQL database converted to MS Access – corrected version 13 countries available: AT, BE, BG, CZ, DE, EL, FI, FR, LT, NL, SE, SK, UK Total number of water bodies: 74090 (69861 classified) River water bodies: 59296 (57858 classified) Lake water bodies: 14794 (12003 classified) Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Overview of data in river basin management plans (RBMPs) reported by countries European scale Regional scale Hot spots Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

General European picture   58% < Good 6% 9% 14% 34% 38% Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

General European picture RIVERS LAKES Lakes better than rivers because most lakes are in the North where pressures are low Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Europe: Natural vs heavily modified+artificial Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Country plot of rivers and lakes Arranged by % < Good (low to high) Total number of classified water bodies on top of the bars Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Country plot all vs HMA Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Country plot: Basis for classification 50% of all freshwater water bodies are classified based on at least 1 BQE Arranged by % at least 1 BQE (high to low) BQE = biological quality element, QE = quality element Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Country plot: Basis for classification Similar analysis available for rivers Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

BQEs determining status The analysis can also be made on RBD level (hot-spots) Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Geographical regions (SoE regions) Arranged by % < Good (low to high) Total number of classified water bodies on top of the bars Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Best vs least good countries Vertical line marks split between RBDs from best and least good countries Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Country “transects” Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

River “transects” Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan   Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

River types: Germany Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Areas with dense population and intensive agriculture are worst Hot spots in Europe: % river water bodies in poor status (V. Kodes, Cenia) Areas with dense population and intensive agriculture are worst Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Hot spot analyses: Ideas select the worst waterbodies and try to explain the reasons why they are bad using pressure and impact information Large point source emissions (nutrients, organics, toxic subst) Area of intensive agriculture (nutrients, pesticides) Mining (toxic substances, metals) Hydromorphologial impacts due to hydropower or navigation Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA

Thanks for your attention Event/ date: ETC/ICM regional workshop West Balkan Author: Anne Lyche Solheim, NIVA