Alien species and classification under the WFD Jochen Vandekerkhove (IES) Ana Cristina Cardoso (IES) Phil Boon (SNH)

Background Objective 3 of ECOSTAT mandate: “To compare approaches and promote exchange of experiences on development and application of monitoring and biological classification systems in the Member States” 2010-2012 Priority tasks of ECOSTAT ad-hoc topic on alien species: Determine how to use alien species data in classifying ecological status Evaluate the potential of existing alien species databases for compiling lists that can be used under the WFD Link to the Invasive Species Strategy and parallel activities (MSFD) History (2009) - May: Questionnaire (23 Member States + Norway; report) June: Workshop (20 participants: ECOSTAT/GIGs, DGEnv, scientists, IUCN; report) Conclusion: Globally, AS constitute an important pressure and alter the taxonomic composition of biological communities; therefore they must be taken into account when implementing the WFD.

1. Alien species - WFD ecological status MS method detects AS pressure Workshop Conclusion 5 In some cases, biological assessment tools used for ecological status classification may have already integrated any impacts from alien species (Option 3). Where this is not the case, biological assessment tools should be modified to achieve this, or alien species pressures may be assessed as a separate step in ecological status classifications (Options 1 or 2). Alternatively, a separate assessment should be undertaken using e.g. a ‘biopollution’ index (Option 4). MS method detects AS pressure qualitative post-assessment downgrading quantitative OPTION 1 OPTION 2 no WISER QUESTIONNAIRE yes OPTION 3 no OPTION 4 (BPI)

1. Alien species - WFD ecological status WISER QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Alien species - WFD ecological status Lakes Rivers Coast/Trans 11% of WFD methods (27 of 217) 7 10 10 69 75 73 Macrophytes Angiosperms AT, BE, SI BE, AT, DE ES, BE, IE, DE Benthic invertebrates BE, EE BE, EE, UK BE, NL Fish BE, IT AT, BE, SK Phytobenthos Phytoplankton Macroalgae HU EE, PO, IT, IE Evaluation pressure – response relationship Who: MSs, GIGs, JRC, WISER? How to quantify alien species pressure? Biopollution index? Data sets needed (site specific multi-taxon species lists with abundance categories): Lakes: AT, BE, SI, EE, IT Rivers: AT, BE, DE, DK, EE, HU, SK Coastal/Transitional: BE/NL, DE, EE, ES, IE, IT, PO,

1. Alien species - WFD ecological status Workshop Conclusion 7 ‘Biopollution’ indices may provide a potential tool to meet the needs outlined in C5-6. Although methods such as BPL, SBC and IBPR show some promise, they have been applied most widely in marine environments. It is recommended that a project is planned at a European level to develop the approach across all types of surface waters, including (inter alia) their application to the WFD. No consensus (trade-off between practicability and accuracy) Need for harmonized IAS lists with impact (and establishment) categorization

1. Alien species - WFD ecological status Comparison of BPIs: needs Multi-group community data with (categorized) abundances project-based (BIOMAN etc.) BioFresh (FP7)  Freshwater Biodiversity Portal for Europe and world WISER? WFD IC? Alien species lists DAISIE: synonyms, spelling errors, irregular updating, completeness is MS specific MSs: 16 of EU27; completeness is MS specific JRC: Integration of 31 alien species databases Centralized European alien species database (post 2012) Impact categorization literature, DAISIE, EEA? defining criteria for use under WFD

2. Alien species lists global (4) European (2) regional (3) national (22)

2. Alien species lists 13827 species names (EU27) DE (3212) DK (3307) AT (2302) DAISIE 54% 9% 7% other 5% 12% 11% NOBANIS 3% 44633 species x country records (EU27) DAISIE 34% 13% 9% 15% 17% NOBANIS 7% other 4%

annelida/platyhelminthes 2. Alien species lists plantae actinopterygii (-actinopterygii) chordata arthropoda other mollusca worms annelida/platyhelminthes ochrophyta / 8 1777 aquatic aliens 13827 aliens (EU27+NO) TERRESTRIAL 90% FRESHWATER 7% MARINE 7% / 10 ? 100-200 high impact aliens criteria?

3. Links with other activities 1. Marine Strategy Framework Directive (AC) - July 2010: EC decision on GeS with criteria for non-indigenous species 2. FP7 BioFresh project (KT, AC) - Data portal for freshwater biodiversity data Models for freshwater biodiversity (native vs. alien) Policy support – awareness raising 3. FP7 WISER project (DH) - Evaluation alien species pressure - response relationships of WFD methods? - Methods questionnaire - Data sets (?) 4. EU Early Warning Rapid Response framework (PG) - do nothing < EU panel < EU institution

Planned activities Determine how to use alien species data in classifying ecological status * evaluation alien species pressure – response relationship? * comparison of biopollution indices * evaluation alien species capture efficiency of WFD methods Evaluate the potential of existing alien species databases for compiling lists that can be used under the WFD * finalize report on gaps in and complementarity of existing alien species databases * propose criteria for impact categorisation Link to the Invasive Species Strategy and parallel activities * BioFresh: alien species tasks (SB, UPS) and policy support (WD, IUCN) * MSFD: coordination Task Group on non-indigenous species (AC) * EWRR: follow-up pogress (PG)

Potential for a CEN standard Background CEN/TC 230/WG 2 – Biological and Ecological Methods Proposal for a CEN guidance standard at ECOSTAT alien species workshop in Bordeaux What might a standard cover? Terms and definitions – need for clarity and consistency Creating and maintaining lists of alien species relevant to WFD – what criteria should be used? Monitoring and recording alien species – standard biological sampling methods may not be effective for all species Risk assessment – how to assess risk of invasion, establishment, causing ecological damage Assessing levels of impact for individual species – need consistent approach Discussion at WG 2 Meeting in Rome, 6th May