Intercalibration: problems of selecting types

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

MODULE 1 Water Framework Directive, Relation of WFD with Daughter Directives, River Basin Management Planning, Water Bodies, Typology, Classification River.

Advertisements

WFD Characterisation Report Dr Tom Leatherland Environmental Quality Manager 29 October 2003.

HMWB-Workshop „Heavily Modified Water Bodies: Information Exchange on Designation, Assessment of Ecological Potential, Objective Setting and Measures”

Reporting and compliance checking on RBMP in 2010 WFD Reporting Working Group D on Reporting Brussels, 17/18 October 2006.

Framework for the intercalibration process  Must be simple  Aiming to identify and resolve big inconsistencies with the normative definitions and big.

Intercalibration Option 3 results: what is acceptable and what is not ? Sandra Poikane Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability.

WG 2A “ECOSTAT” Stresa, 3-4 July 2006 L-M GIG Final report Presented by J.Ortiz-Casas (ES), GIG coordinator Data analysis by L. Serrano and C. de Hoyos.

Marcel van den Berg / Centre for Water Management The Netherlands

Relationship between EUROWATERNET and the Water Framework Directive, and for broader water reporting Steve Nixon ETC/WTR.

REFCOND EU Water Framework Directive project funded by the European Commission DG Environment Included in the EU Water Directors “Common Strategy on.

Intercalibration progress: Central - Baltic GIG Rivers

WG 2A Ecological Status First results of the metadata collection for the draft intercalibration register: RIVERS.

CIS guidance document on E-Flows

Marine Environment and Water Industry Unit

WG 2A Ecological Status Drafting group: Guidance on the process of the intercalibration excercise 2nd meeting WG2A, 15-17/10/03.

Results of the Coastal and Transitional Waters Metadata Analysis

Synthesis of the intercalibration process Working group 2.5.

Marine Environment and Water Industry Unit

WG 2A Ecological Status First results of the metadata collection for the draft intercalibration register 2nd meeting WG2A, 15-17/10/03.

Task 1 - Intercalibration WG 2A ECOSTAT - Intercalibration

CIS-Workshop on River Basin Management Plans

Workshop Objectives To update COAST on progress

WG ECOSTAT: Good Ecological Potential (GEP)

Seppo Rekolainen Finnish Environment Institute

WG 2.5 Intercalibration.

Discussion agenda Summary & proposals (30 min)

EU Water Framework Directive

Nutrient Standards: Proposals for further work

Update on progress since last WG meeting (13-14 June 2002)

Working Group A Ecological Status - ECOSTAT State of play in the intercalibration exercise Water Directors Meeting, November 2005.

Background CRiteria for the IDentification of Groundwater thrEsholds BRIDGE Summary of BRIDGE achievements Contract N° (SSPI) Co-ordinator:

on a protocol for Intercalibration of Surface Water

Project 2.7 Guidance on Monitoring

Progress Report Working Group A Ecological Status Intercalibration (1) & Harmonisation (3) Activities Presented by Anna-Stiina Heiskanen EC Joint Research.

Intercalibration Decision and Technical Report

WG 2.5 Intercalibration. ISPRA, 6-7 December 2001

Comparison of methodologies for defining Good Ecological Potential

EU Water Framework Directive

Alternative Methodology for Defining Good Ecological Potential (GEP)

Water Directors meeting Mondorf-les-bains, June 2005

EU Water Framework Directive

WGC - GROUP 2 PROTECTED AREAS

ECOSTAT 2013 – 2015 Tasks and Deliverables

Water Directors meeting Warsaw, 8-9 December 2011

WG 2.3 REFCOND Progress report for the SCG meeting 30 Sep-1 Oct 2002

Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive

Legal issues and compliance checking in WFD implementation SCG meeting 5-6 November 2008 Jorge Rodríguez Romero, Unit D.2, DG Environment, European.

Compliance checking of RBMP An inventory of questions

Working Group 2A ECOSTAT Guidance for the intercalibration process Wouter van de Bund Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability.

FITTING THE ITALIAN METHOD FOR EVALUATING LAKE ECOLOGICAL QUALITY FROM BENTHIC DIATOMS (EPI-L) IN THE “PHYTOBENTHOS CROSS-GIG” INTERCALIBRATION EXERCISE.

Metadata analysis.

WFD CIS 4th Intercalibration Workshop

HMWB-Workshop „Heavily Modified Water Bodies: Information Exchange on Designation, Assessment of Ecological Potential, Objective Setting and Measures”

Concept paper on the assessment of WFD River Basin Management Plans

Working Group A Ecological Status - ECOSTAT WFD CIS Strategic Coordination Group meeting, 22 Febraury 2006 Progress Report.

ASSIGNING WATER BODY TYPES IN THE WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION Wouter van de Bund EC Joint Research Centre, Institute for Environment and sustainability,

WG A Ecological Status Progress report April-October 2010

WISE – Freshwater WFD visualization tool

Common Implementation Strategy for the

WFD CIS WG ECOSTAT meeting on 8-9 October 2007 Objectives What do we need to achieve during this meeting?

Guidance document on the identification of water bodies

WG A ECOSTAT Draft Mandate

Working Group 2A ECOSTAT progress report Presented by Wouter van de Bund Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability Inland.

EU Water Framework Directive

Typology and Intercalibration Typology System

Results of the screening of the draft second RBMPs

WG A Ecological Status Progress report October 2010 – May 2011

Joint REFCOND and Intercalibration Meeting

Assessment of Member States‘ 2nd River Basin Management Plans

Presentation transcript:

Intercalibration: problems of selecting types WFD Annex V, 1.4.1: “The (intercalibration) network shall consist of sites selected from a range of surface water body types present within each ecoregion”

Intercalibration: problems of selecting types Important issues: which typology system to use for intercalibration? how many and which types to include heavily modified water bodies

Which typology system to use for intercalibration? Typologies are not yet defined Different Member States will use different typologies What typology should be used as a basis for intercalibration

Typology requirements for intercalibration….

Typology requirements for reference conditions are different!

How many types for intercalibration? Impossible to include all types in intercalibration network Focus on a few types: keeps intercalibration exercise manageable allows to select more intercalibration sites for each type, allowing better comparison

How many types for intercalibration? Sufficient types should be included to cover: all ecoregions all Member States

Selection criteria for intercalibration types Representative for many ecoregions Existence of potential intercalibration sites quantifiable reference conditions availability of sites at high/good and good/moderate boundary data availability

Artificial and Heavily modified water bodies Still unclear if and how to include HMWB in intercalibration Need for agreement between WG’s HMWB and Intercalibration Proposal: preparation of common paper

Artificial and Heavily modified water bodies WFD seems to require that HMWB are also intercalibrated Maximum ecological potential instead of reference conditions Some countries plan do designate most of their water bodies as HMWB - should be included in intercalibration

Artificial and Heavily modified water bodies Problem: provisional HMWB designation only in 2004 ‘failure to achieve good ecological status’ is one of the criteria this requires intercalibrated assessment methodologies “Maximum ecological potential” needs to be further defined