CIS - Project 2.4 Transitional and Coastal Waters Uli Claussen after Claire Vincent WFD Coast Guard (Environment and Heritage Service United Kingdom)

Introduction Timescales & Starting Point WP1 Common Understanding of Terms WP2 Typology WP3 Reference Conditions WP4 Classification Summary Steering Group UK Sweden Germany EEA France

2003 - Site selection, Intercalibration Timescales…. 2003 - Site selection, Intercalibration 2004 - Characterisation 2006 - Monitoring Programmes 2009 - River Basin District Plan Characterisation includes typology map, an assessment of pressures and impacts inc. a judgement on water bodies that may fail to meet good status and an economic analysis of water use. MSs must aim ro meet good status Good Status 2015

Starting Point Typology No networks of reference condition types/sites No existing classification schemes meeting all the need of WFD

Update from the Commission ECOSTAT Cluster 2.3 REFCOND - 2.4 COAST – 2.5 INTERCALIBRATION cross-cutting issues (defining high status, boundaries between high, good and moderate etc.) Common Format of Guidance Communication strategy Tasks from the Commission

WP1 Common Understanding Draft paper covering Water categories, transitional and coastal not prescriptive, outlining valid methods Water Bodies Types Forwarded to the Commission Draft for Water Directors, June Assigning coastal waters to River Basin Districts Lead WP1 - Germany and United Kingdom

Coastal Water Water Bodies As Management Units (or Compliance Checking Units) Type B Type A Protected Area (bathing beach) Protected Area (SAC) Low Pressure Coastal Water Significant Pressure Transitional Water Significant Pressure Low Pressure

Assigning Coastal Waters to River Basin Districts How to define water bodies (Management Units): On the map, draw the following boundaries: OSPAR HELCOM areas MS borders Ecoregion Protected areas River Basin District Category changes Type HMW Pressure changes When drawing boundaries, apply these principles: Minimise number of boundaries Try not to cut natural units (e.g. bays)

WP2 Typology Hierarchical approach Mandatory factors lat, long tidal range salinity Venice System Optional factors exposure depth the others Lead WP2 - Germany

WP2 Typology Lead WP2 Germany

WP2 Typology Lead WP2 - Germany Identification of common Types continued in Stockholm (May 2002): Eurotypes proposed ‘pan-European’ approach chosen – ecoregion approach removed from Guidance Major step forward for Intercalibration Lead WP2 - Germany

WP3 Reference Conditions ‘High ecological status’ undisturbed biology no, or only very minor, anthropogenic alterations to the physicochemistry and hydromorphology of the water body use predictive models or hind-casting, species or groups of species (indicators) expert judgement Anchor for classification schemes Provide direction for restoration - not target Member states to define ‘reference conditions’ within a water body type Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

WP3 Reference Conditions Agreed a draft ‘generic’ guidance Principles of defining type specific reference conditions Initiated pilot studies Draft will be available for WD not including examples Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

WP3 Reference Conditions Initiated pilot studies - 7 received so far high status sites ‘best of type’ sites - may not be of high status These Pilot studies are located in: DK (Randers Fjord) POR (Mira Estuary & Ria Formosa) N (North Sea Skagerrak Open Sea Coast) UK (Strangford Loch, Lochs Creran & Ardbhair) Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

Denmark Randers Fjord

Mira Estuary Portugal Ria Formosa

Norway North Sea Skagerrak Open Rocky Coast

United Kingdom Strangford Lough Loch Creran Loch Ardbhair

WP3 Reference Conditions - Key issues ‘very minor disturbance’ the relationship between ecologically high status and supporting physico-chemical status (synthetic pollutants - below LOD) Are there any high status sites in Europe? ‘other significant pressures’ - trawling - impact on benthic communities - good and moderate status Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

WP3 Reference Conditions - Key issues The discussions on Reference Conditions high- lighted inter alia: Reference conditions may be qualitative or quantitative (the latter is preferred); Derivation and use of reference conditions are method-dependant; Reference conditions should be formulated taking into account the classification systems. Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

Classification schemes - Annex V Fish Phytoplankton Ecological Quality Benthic Infauna Macroalgae Angiosperms Benthos - well developed, qa schemes inc NMMP Phytoplankton - some monitoring, fisheries labs - shellfish hygiene, qa under development. Not in NMMP Big plants - some monitoring, conservation agencies. Not wide spread. qa not developed. Not in NMMP Fish (transitional waters only) - some monitoring, not all estuaries. qa not developed. Contaminants in fish NMMP

WP4 Classification Schemes Collating information on existing schemes biological classification tools national schemes schemes from Conventions Identify tools which are WFD compliant to be included in guidance Go shopping, e.g. the harmonised OSPAR Eutrophication Assessment (MS should test those tools) Lead WP4 - EEA/WTC

Timescale Stylise Further edits SCG & WD WD Meeting 2-3 May 10-12 June 3rd Working Group Meeting WD Meeting Steering Group Meeting Steering Group Meeting 2-3 May 10-12 June 27-28 June ?? Sept 30 Sept

Summary Draft guidance June for WD meeting CUT Typology Reference conditions Classification Horizontal Water Body guidance via SCG to WD meeting Use the existing expertise from Conventions Expert judgement will be a crucial element in marine systems

Claire´s Trident Always smiling Chair Claire (Coastguard) Famous Assistant Julia Always smiling Chair Claire (Coastguard)

What we are aiming at?

Bedrock on NW coast of Rathlin Island with crayfish and grey sponge

Ecological Quality Ratio 1 Status Deviation Relation of observed values of Biological parameters Very minor High Slight Good EQR = to Moderate Moderate Reference values of biological parameters Poor Bad

Biological Quality Elements Benthic Invertebrate Fauna Composition & abundance, Disturbance sensitive & pollution indicator species Macroalgae / angiosperms Composition & abundance Phytoplankton Composition, abundance & biomass Bloom frequency and intensity. Fish Disturbance sensitive species

Pragmatism Sensible Practical Realistic Logical Systematic Orderly

Tasks from the Commission Plans for ‘Life after guidance’ Guidance on assigning coastal waters to River Basin Districts