Claire Vincent Environment and Heritage Service United Kingdom CIS - Project 2.4 COAST Claire Vincent Environment and Heritage Service United Kingdom

Introduction Status of Guidance Work Packages Life After Guidance Common Understanding Typology Reference Conditions Classification Life After Guidance Lessons learnt

Status of Guidance Final steering group meeting 12-13 September , Copenhagen Comments from Steering Group & Norway Finland Latvia Denmark Netherlands Ireland Belgium Portugal Commission

Status of Guidance Open issues Controversial issues fisheries role of physico-chemical and hydromorphological Controversial issues Inconsistent issues minimum size guideline typology type specific / site specific pressure criteria high status / reference conditions  

WP1. Common Understanding Water categories defining transitional extent of coastal waters Types Water bodies Assigning coastal strips to the appropriate river basin Wetlands Territorial waters Lead WP1 - Germany and United Kingdom

Size of ‘significant’ transitional water ? km2 1 km2 0.5km2 Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

WP2. Typology Framework - Annex II System B Lead WP2 - Germany

WP2. Typology Framework - Annex II System B Mandatory factors lat, long tidal range salinity Venice Optional factors exposure depth the others Lead WP2 - Germany

WP2 - Typology MSs currently drafting / testing typology Typology ready - end 2002 / spring 2003 Common types for intercalibration Lead WP2 - Germany

Inconsistent issue - differing approaches to typology?

Is a European typology framework necessary? 1. Atlantic Ocean 2. Norwegian Sea 3. Barents Sea 4. North Sea 5. Baltic Sea 6. Mediterranean Sea Lead WP2 - Germany

Is a European typology framework necessary? No. As long as Member States understand the real differences and co-operate where there are similar types. Lead WP2 - Germany

WP3. Reference Conditions Reference conditions will be expressed as ranges Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

The European Sea EuroTypes A B C E D Reference Conditions

WP3. Reference Conditions Reference conditions will be expressed as ranges Will not reflect a single date Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

WP3. Reference Conditions Reference conditions will be expressed as ranges Will not reflect a single date Represented by EQR values close to 1 Incorporate ‘very minor disturbance’ Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

Ecological Quality Ratio Deviation Status 1 High Relation of biological parameter value observed Good Slight EQR = Moderate Reference biological value Moderate Poor Bad

Do Reference Conditions = High Status? Reference conditions are a description of the BIOLOGICAL conditions found in a high status site. AGREEMENT COAST - REFCOND - IMPRESS Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

Type specific - site specific The European Sea EuroTypes A B C E D Reference Conditions AGREEMENT

Use of Pressure Criteria Link - high status and lack of pressures IMPRESS Toolbox is a useful starting point Further use of pressure criteria is not in the spirit of the Directive NORMATIVE DEFINITIONS AGREEMENT Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

 Fisheries Lead WP3 - United Kingdom Some fishing activities (benthic trawling) must constitute more that very minor disturbance  Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

Fisheries Lead WP3 - United Kingdom At Good Status Annex V 1.2.3 Description of fish fauna at good status The abundance of the disturbance-sensitive species shows slight signs of distortion from the type-specific conditions attributable to anthropogenic impacts on physico-chemical or hydromorphological quality elements. Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

WP4. Classification Schemes Starting point no classification schemes meeting WFD needs no classification tools meeting WFD needs Outlines the principles of classification One out - all out Develop guidance further on how to combine quality elements statistical advice use of indicators Lead WP4 - EEA/WTC

Role of physico-chemical and hydromorphological Annex II 1.3i …..type-specific hydromorphological and physico-chemical conditions shall be established representing the values of the hydromorphological and physico-chemical elements……at high ecological status.

Role of physico-chemical and hydromorphological Intercalibration Annex V, 1.4.1 Comparability of biological monitoring results Intercalibration is on biological parameters only. Common sense approach - use everything you have to support your decisions on biology!! Physico-chemical & hydromorphological within a type support the biological information

Role of physico-chemical and hydromorphological Annex V 1.4.2 …..the ecological status classification shall be represented by the lower of the values for the biological and physico-chemical monitoring results for the relevant quality elements…..

Do the physico-chemical conditions meet high status? Do the estimated values for the biological quality elements meet reference conditions? Do the physico-chemical conditions meet high status? Do the hydro-morphological conditions meet high status? Yes Yes Yes Classify as high status No No No Do the estimated values for the biological quality elements deviate only slightly from their reference values? Do the physico-chemical conditions (a) ensure ecosystem functioning and (b) meet the EQSs for specific pollutants? Yes Yes Classify as good status No No Classify on the basis of the biological deviation from reference conditions? Is the deviation only moderate? Yes Classify as moderate status No Is the deviation only major? Yes Classify as poor status No Classify as bad status

Specific pollutants & high status COAST guidance now explains the terms chemical status relationship between chemical status & physico-chemical component of ecological status (ref - EAF PS / AMPS) specific pollutants (ref - IMPRESS)

WP4. Classification Toolbox Collating information on existing schemes biological classification tools from national schemes from the Conventions Lead WP4 - EEA/WTC

Greek Plant Classification Moderate Good High Poor Bad 30% 60% Mean Abundance % ESG II Opportunistic Species Stable, established community. Late successional species Mean Abundance % ESG I

Sweden - Macroalgae Scheme protected to moderately exposed hard bottom

Iterative Process

Outstanding Work Further work on classification principles and schemes (with REFCOND?) Executive summary Summary and Conclusions After Water Directors: Amend water bodies (if necessary)

Life After Guidance COAST - There is a need. Tasks 2003-2004 identify common types for intercalibration to establish a reference network of high status sites share information on testing & development of classification tools

Lessons learnt - COAST Pragmatism Steering Group representative of all ecoregions Steering Group UK Sweden Germany EEA France Remember GUIDANCE Good communication Belief in the process Pragmatism

Alternative Fish Classification Status Disturbance Ecological Criteria Fish sampled from clean, sandy sea bed. Fish jump, when commanded into boat in length stratified samples. No beam trawling, seine netting or interference from Civil Servants High Fish are present but are slightly shy of sampling equipment. Slight disturbance due to classification scientists Good Only mentally challenged species remain All sensitive species gone. Moderate Only mad (indicators) species left. Flounder and sand goby. Mud and stones rip nets Poor Fish obscured by mud Suspect flounder still present Bad