Ecological basis for the conservation of Aquatic Epicontinental Habitat types of Community Interest (HCI) in Spain: the case of Standing waters Antonio Camacho (University of Valencia) & Rafael Hidalgo (Ministry of Environment, and Rural and Marine Affairs) antonio.camacho@uv.es rhidalgom@mma.es

Total surface: >147.000 km2 - 27,1 %

 conservation status of its typical species HABITATS DIRECTIVE ► Maintaining or restoring the natural Habitat types & Species of Community Interest at a Favourable Conservation Status (FCS)  natural range  specific structure and functions  conservation status of its typical species Conservation must be based on their ‘environmental requirements’

HABITATS HABITATS DIRECTIVE 116 Habitat types of Community Interest officially recognized as present in Spain Coastal and halophytic habitats.................…………… 20 Coastal sand dunes and inland dunes..................…… 11 Freshwater habitats..……………………..........……… 13 Temperate heath and scrub...……….…………………… 6 Sclerophyllous scrub...……………………………..…… 10 Natural and semi-natural grasslands....……………..… 13 Raised bogs and mires and fens….……………..……… 8 Rocky habitats and caves...…………………………..….. 8 Forests….………………………………………………… 27

Ecological characterization of all them FCS typified and standardised HABITATS DIRECTIVE Project ‘Ecological basis for the conservation of the Habitat types of Community Interest in Spain’ Ecological characterization of all them FCS typified and standardised Indexes & protocols to evaluate FCS Ecological correspondence between aquatic epicontinental HCIs and WFD’s ecological types

Inland Standing Waters HABITATS HABITATS DIRECTIVE Group 31 Inland Standing Waters http://www.mma.es/portal/secciones/biodiversidad/rednatura2000/documentos_rednatura/bases_ecologicas_habitats/index.htm

Background  WFD Waterbodies 'lakes' in the Mediterranean Ecoregion Spain > 300 natural lakes (235 inland)  Other countries from the LM-GIG – Less than 10 % on addition compared to Spain (Size > 0.5 Km2)  Spain: lakes as waterbodies (wide criteria,> 0,08 Km2, environmental significance, Ramsar wetlands, etc.)  + protected areas – Art 6 and Annex IV WFD (habitats requirements: Natura 2000, Spanish National Wetland Inventory)  Why? – Water allocations are decided by Water Authorities  Need for coordination between WFD and Habitats Directive  Wide work on Habitats Directive by the Biodiversity Conservation Authority – Collaboration with Scientific Societies

HABITATS & WF DIRECTIVES HD Group 31 'Standing Inland Waters' + WFD Waterbodies of the Category 'Lakes'  Spanish lakes and wetlands typology – Big groups with sound definition of their ecological features  HCIs typology – Sound definition of ecological features of Group 31 HCIs  WFD lake water bodies typology (System B) and sound definition of ecological features of lake types  Association of ecological types with HCIs and lake (WFD- waterbodies) types  Search for compatible indicators for the evaluation of the ecological/conservation status (ecological integrity)

Group 31 'Standing Inland Waters' HABITATS HABITATS DIRECTIVE Group 31 'Standing Inland Waters' 3110 - Oligotrophic waters containing very few minerals of sandy plains (Littorelletalia uniflorae) 3140 - Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp. 3150 - Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition-type vegetation 3160 - Natural dystrophic lakes and ponds 3170 - * Mediterranean temporary ponds 3190 - Lakes and ponds of gypsum karst

Inland Lakes & Wetlands: Main ecological types HABITATS WF DIRECTIVE Inland Lakes & Wetlands: Main ecological types Type 1 - Riverine ponds and wetlands: 1.1 – Floodplains; 1.2 – Ox- bow ponds; 1.3 – Travertine dams Type 2 - High mountain lakes and ponds Type 3 - Deep karstic lakes on limestone Type 4 - Deep karstic lakes on gypsum (HCI 3190) Type 5 - Saline lakes and ponds Type 6 - Shallow lakes and ponds on calcareous bedrock: 6.1– permanent; 6.2– temporary Type 7 - Shallow lakes and ponds on siliceous bedrock: 7.1– permanent; 7.2– temporary Type 8 - Volcanic lakes and ponds

A B C D E G H J L K F I A – Humedal de Salburúa (Álava); B – Galacho de Juslibol (Zaragoza); C – Laguna del Marquesado (Cuenca); D – Laguna Grande de Gredos (Ávila); E- Lago de la Calabazosa (Asturias); F- Laguna de La Cruz (Cuenca); G – Lago de Arreo (Álava), H – Laguna de Fuentedepiedra (Málaga); I – Ullal de Baldoví (Valencia); J – Laguna Grande de la Albuera (Badajoz); K – Laguna de La Posadilla (Ciudad Real); L – Laguna del Prado o La Inesperada (Ciudad Real). (From Camacho et al., 2009)

WFD Spanish inland “lakes” Type (System B) WFD Spanish inland “lakes” Number of waterbodies Type 1 High mountain, , deep, acid water 66 Type 2 High mountain, deep, alkaline waters 5 Type 3 High mountain, little deep, acid waters 17 Type 4 High mountain, little deep, alkaline waters Type 5 High mountain, temporal 13 Type 6 Mid mountain, deep, acid waters 1 Type 7 Mid mountain, deep, alkaline waters Type 8 Mid mountain, little deep, alkaline waters Type 9 High mountain, southern, Type 10 Karstic, calcareous, feed by groundwater 9 Type 11 Karstic, calcareous, feed by groundwater, spring type 6 Type 12 Karstic, calcareous, temporal Type 13 Karstic, calcareous, mixed feeding Type 14 Karstic, evaporitic, large Type 15 Karstic, evaporitic, small 10 Type 16 Continental, oligosaline, permanent 2 Type 17 Continental, oligosaline, temporal 11 Type 18 Continenral, subsaline, permanent Type 19 Continental, subsaline, temporal 8 Type 20 Continental, hyposaline or mesosaline, permanent Type 21 Continental, hyposaline or mesosaline, temporal 28 Type 22 Continental, hypersaline, permanent Type 23 Continental, hypersaline. Temporal Type 24 Continental, fluvial origin, flood plain, oligosaline or subsaline 3 Tupe 25 Continental, fluvial origin, flood plain, hiposaline or mesosaline Type 26 Continental, fluvial origin, abandoned meander Type 27 Continental, associated to alkaline peat moss

Equivalence of Ecological types HABITATS WF DIRECTIVE Equivalence of Ecological types Example: 3170 - * Mediterranean temporary ponds

ECLECTIC Index for HCIs HABITATS HABITATS DIRECTIVE ECLECTIC Index for HCIs  Value of the index from 0 to 100. Variables: Compulsory or optional  Reference conditions for each ecological type for any variable  Each group accounts for 25 points, every variable ranges from 0 to 10, then standarization by groups from 0 to 25 points  4 groups of quality elements

ECLECTIC Index for HCIs HABITATS HABITATS DIRECTIVE ECLECTIC Index for HCIs Vegetation: % surface cover of hydrophytes & helophytes, diversity of typical species Other biological elements: Chl-a, phytoplankton, zooplankton, benthic invertebrates, fishes, amphibians, species from Annexes II & IV HD, exotic species Hydrogeomorphological: variations in surface, hydrology, siltation, morphology Chemical: water transparency, DO, salinity, pH, N&P concentrations

PRESSURES & IMPACTS (DIAGNOSIS AND DESIGN OF MEASURES) Hydrological (water abstractions, damming of inflows, artificial inputs, draining structures, aquifer overexploitation) Geomorphological (variations in the morphometry, extraction or supply of materials). Water pollution (wastewater inputs, specific pollutants, diffuse sources, salinity changes, thermal inputs, chemical alteration of the groundwater). On biological communities (exploitation of natural resources, aquaculture, conectivity) Land use (waterbody basin occupation, urbanization, industries, aerial electric lines). Other (Solid wastes, cattle use, hunting, recreation activities, others)

2. What were the main problems encountered? 1. What are the main synergies in the implementation of the WFD and BHD? To achieve and maintain the ecological health of the ecosystems (habitats/ water bodies). Joint efforts for monitoring and establishment of management and restoration measures 2. What were the main problems encountered? The scarce coordination between Water Authorities and Nature Conservation Authorities for the implementation of both Directives when concerning aquatic habitats. The lack of a sound ecological knowledge of the structure and function of the ecosystems concerned both at general and case-specific levels. Problems of ecological interpretation for HCIs types, and to the relationship between Good Ecological Status and Favourable Conservation Status. Implementation of Article 6 and Annex IV of the WFD into River Basin Plans for sites of Natura 2000 Network.

3 - What are the most important questions in the FAQ paper which the case study answers? Which are the links between the objectives of WFD and BHD? Healthy (structural/functional) ecosystem (Waterbody – Habitat) Which are the objects / management units addressed in the directives? Ecosystem (Water body – Habitat), connected to catchment What is the difference between the species / biological quality elements addressed in WFD and BHD? BHD Focus on species as themselves or as characteristic from the habitat WFD focus on BQE as indicators of the ecological status. What is the relationship between good ecological status/potential of the WFD and favourable conservation status of BHD?

3 - What are the most important questions in the FAQ paper which the case study answers? Can a protected species or habitat be in a favourable conservation status even if the water body in which it occurs is not in good ecological status/potential? Yes, but not common (example, plants from eutrophic conditions in HCI 3150). Can the monitoring schemes of WFD and HD be integrated? Yes, they can. How can the river basin management plans of WFD and the conservation measures / management plans of the HD be linked? Through common objectives. Need for the definition of ecological features and indicators of their status

4. What difficulties or challenges remain that need further guidance or policy development? The main difficulty still remaining is that of coordination. First, a sounder knowledge of each other Directive (BHD and WFD) is needed by Water Authorities and managers and Nature Conservation Authorities and managers. Then, coordination is needed, to implement joint monitoring programs and to establish management plans and measures to be adopted for common goals, both at any specific site (waterbodies and Natura 2000 sites) and as strategic general plans. Guidance documents for these issues would be a very valuable tool for anyone involved.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!