Preparing a River Basin Management Plan WFD Characterisation Manager

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Proposed National Liaison Panel for England Cath Beaver Stakeholder Relations Manager.
Advertisements

Wrap up and next steps. Remit of Water Forum To enable stakeholders to engage & influence statutory authorities in implementation of WFD To help ensure.
WFD Stakeholder Meeting 2 February 2007 WFD Environmental Standards Rob Hitchen WFD Team, Defra.
Water Framework Directive Programme of Measures River Basin Management Plans Milan Matuška Ministry of the Environment Slovak Republic Water Protection.
Characterization Report Module 2: Water Budget, Pressures and Impacts, Significant Water Management Issues, Monitoring, Characterization Report Characterization.
Advisory group update – September 2013 Development of the second river basin management plans Sustainable water management for the benefit of Scotland’s.
Current condition and Challenges for the Future Report s (Scotland and Solway Tweed)
Which role for economics in the implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive ? Arnaud Courtecuisse Artois-Picardie Water Agency Miedzyzdroje, 23.
German Guidebook on the Implementation of the EC Water Framework Directive Dr. Harald Irmer Germany.
FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT The next steps. The National Technical Advisory Group On Flooding Issues An Overview and the Future.
Water Framework Directive An Introduction David Whiles Anglian River Basin Manager.
Current condition and Challenges for the Future Report s (Scotland and Solway Tweed)
THE MANAGEMENT PLAN IN PRACTICE Case study. RBMP Detailed publication process in the directive...  art. 13: general rules  annex VII: detailed contents.
Water Framework Directive Implementation and Risk Analysis John Sadlier Water Quality Section.
River Basin Management Planning Cath Preston Senior Planning Officer (River Basin Planning) 2 nd March 2006.
WFD Characterisation Report Dr Tom Leatherland Environmental Quality Manager 29 October 2003.
© WRc plc 2010 Agenda item 3b: Summary of WISE electronic delivery: presentation of an example.
FBAG- Catchment Planning Floods Directive and Flooding Bill Flood Risk Management Planning.
Water.europa.eu Compliance Checking of River Basin Management Plans Strategic Coordination Group Meeting, 4-5 November 2009 DG Environment, European Commission.
EU Update/CIS England WFD Stakeholder Forum 4 April 2008.
The second River Basin Management Plans and implementation of fish barriers measures Jenny Davies RBMP coordinator June 2017.
The Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) & Integration Joint Boards
Relationship between EUROWATERNET and the Water Framework Directive, and for broader water reporting Steve Nixon ETC/WTR.
Principles and Key Issues
Background CRiteria for the IDentification of Groundwater thrEsholds BRIDGE Project Presentation Contract N° (SSPI) Co-ordinator: BRGM (Fr)
River Basin Management Planning
Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)
Project Objectives, Workplan and Timescales
Restoration target values?
Synthesis of the intercalibration process Working group 2.5.
State of play of French progress in cost-effectiveness analysis
CIS-Workshop on River Basin Management Plans
Monitoring, assessing and classifying the environment
1. Implementation of the Water Framework Directive: notifications & infringements, RBMP assessments for the agricultural sector Expert Group on WFD & agriculture.
River Basin Planning & Flood Risk Management in Scotland
Developing the second plans
Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)
CIS-Workshop on River Basin Management Plans 8 and 9 May 2006 Bonn
The Water Directors recognised in 2004 that……..
Commission report on Art. 8 WFD Monitoring programmes
At the Water Directors meeting in June ’04 we recognised ……..
Addressing the challenge of water scarcity and droughts
Meeting of Water Directors Future Work Programme of the CIS
Project 2.7 Guidance on Monitoring
Mandate of the EEA To provide the Community and Member States with:
GROUNDWATER CHARACTERISATION in England & Wales
1st Implementation Report of the Water Framework Directive
Meeting of Water Directors 2/3 December 2004
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Scottish Government Responsible for environment & flooding issues
Towards a Work Programme for the Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) Water Directors Meeting 28 November.
WFD and Agriculture Activity under the CIS 2005/2006 Work Programme
WGC - GROUP 2 PROTECTED AREAS
Water Directors meeting Warsaw, 8-9 December 2011
Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive
Water Framework Directive, Habitats Directive and Inland Waterway Transport Marieke van Nood WFD Team, DG ENV.D.2, European Commission.
Preparation of the second RBMP in Romania
IMPRESS Guidance and Policy Summary Water Directors Copenhagen, 21-22nd November 2002 Working Group leaders: Volker Mohaupt, Umwelt Bundes Amt Isobel.
THE WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE (WFD)
Philippe Quevauviller
WFD & Agriculture – Article 5
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Concept paper on the assessment of WFD River Basin Management Plans
Article 13 RBMP Schema.
UK experience of Programmes of Measures
DG Environment, Unit D.2 Marine Environment and Water Industry
Brussels – 20 April 2007 European Commission - DG Environment
SCG May 2005 CIRCA review.
Results of the screening of the draft second RBMPs
Assessment of Member States‘ 2nd River Basin Management Plans
Presentation transcript:

Preparing a River Basin Management Plan WFD Characterisation Manager Ingrid Baber WFD Characterisation Manager 8 May 2006

Introduction Stakeholder engagement Summary of Significant Water Management Issues (SWMI) report What is a draft and final River Basin Management Plan? Level of detail

Stakeholder engagement National/RBD level – National Advisory Group Provide strategic direction Link with Ministers Catchment level - Area Advisory Groups (AAG) 8 in Scotland RBD 2 in Solway Tweed RBD Scale to allow effective participation without excessive resource input AAG Forum – all interested parties In UK we are going to have advisory groups/liaison panels. Will have input at national level, RBD level, and area/catchment level: National: National Advisory Group (Scotland); National liaison panel (England) RBD level: National Advisory Group (Scotland – RBD is same as national); RBD liaison panels (England) Sub-RBD (catchment): Area Advisory Groups (Scotland); Existing catchment level arrangements, supplemented where necessary (England) The administrative arrangements for River Basin Management Planning in Scotland will be based around two levels of Advisory Groups. A National Advisory Group for the Scotland RBD will be formed. The purpose of this group is to provide strategic direction over the RBMP production process. It will also provide a link between Ministers and the advisory groups. RBMP production will primarily be co-ordinated through the Area Advisory Groups. There will be 8 of these in the Scotland RBD and a further 2 in the Solway Tweed RBD. SEPA developed the number and area of these in consultation with stakeholders and used catchments, coastal cells and administrative boundaries to form these group areas. The aim of the process was to find a scale that will allow effective participation without excessive resource input by stakeholders. Public consultation responses supported the final proposals. 6

Purpose of Summary of Significant Water Management Issues Report To identify significant water management issues in the RBD: based on pressures and impacts within water bodies at risk (Art. 5 plus new data) To present an initial assessment of potential measures which will be needed in the RBMP to address significant water management issues To identify water bodies where alternative or less stringent objectives may be required (if available) One consultation document per RBD (In Scotland the report will have annexes based on Area Advisory Groups and interactive map at water body level) Main focus of report will be on measures (and alternative objectives). [In England and Wales the report will focus on issues. We will cover measures as much as possible. To make this a UK point suggest: Purpose of the report is to give an early view of the main implications of the WFD – the main issues which will need to be addressed, main changes likely to be required, and who is likely to be affected by measures.] Report will move from Art. 5 report and into the draft RBMP. Will be a consultation – responses will be addressed in the draft RBMP. Hoping to produce report spring/summer 2007 – this will allow enough time to take on board consultation responses. As for engagement: 3 layers of detail – RBD, AAG and water body

Proposed Method for Identifying Significant Water Management Issues Based on information held at water body level. Pressure types by industry sector impacting at risk river water bodies in the Scotland RBD

Significant Water Management Issues and Measures Focus of report is on issues and measures: Existing measures – regulations, guidance, voluntary action & support Gaps in existing measures Future measures Example of a SWMI in the Scotland RBD Diffuse source pollution – farming of animals, growing of crops, mixed farming Examples of existing measures - Controlled Activities Regulations 2005, PEPFAA Code & Rural Stewardship Scheme Gaps in existing measures – no comprehensive piece of legislation that specifically targets diffuse pollution Future measures – diffuse pollution regulations How do other member states see the SWMI report? We hope to use it to engage advisory groups in thinking about measures – solving the problems.

What’s in the RBMP? Characteristics of the District; pressures and impacts risk assessment plus additional information based on water quality, ecology, quantity and hydro-morphology factors including protected areas economic assessment of water services Environmental objectives and timescale for achieving Programme of measures to achieve objectives: summary in RBMP details for water bodies in GIS Monitoring networks and programmes Consultation & participation opportunities for “interested parties”

What Constitutes a RBMP? Levels of information Summary report for the RBD Strategic objectives and summary of the associated programmes of measures (PoMs) for the district Sub-basin plans More detailed management plans including sub-basin objectives and PoMs. In Scotland, Area Advisory Groups will prepare Area Management Plans forming chapters in the RBMP for the district. Water body level Detailed objectives and measures for each water body. Scotland will present this via interactive GIS. Rest of UK are exploring this. Summary reports will refer to other plans, or those parts that link with RBMP. Summary RBD reports and sub-basin plans are derived from water body level information. Accept that water body information will not stay static for 6 years (all plans are like this). This is Scottish view – still being discussed in UK, not necessarily UK view. (All agree that detail is needed, but not necessarily whether it constitutes part of plan or not). RBMP is what is approved by Ministers and submitted to the Commission – so question is how much detail is in the RBMP and how much sits below it.

Interactive GIS Water Body Information Pressures & Impacts Status Monitoring Results Environmental Objectives Measures We feel it is essential to present information for each water body. Easiest way of doing this is using GIS tools. By displaying WB info using GIS, can update information without having to rewrite RBD plan. Most up to date info available at WB level.

Summary Welcome discussion on: Levels of engagement Identification of significant water management issues and use of report Level of detail that is considered part of the RBMP

Assessment of Compliance of RBMP with WFD Requirements Compliance indicators could include: Average size of water body Objectives set for all water bodies Percentage of water bodies with alternative objectives Justification provided for use of alternative objectives Measures identified for all water bodies ‘at risk’ Assessment should be numeric but also based on quality of data