32nd CIS Groundwater Working Group Meeting, Malta Poor Quantitative Status of Isokangas-Syrjänharju Groundwater Body Case study of using exemption in relation to article 4(4) Janne Juvonen, Finnish Environment Institute 32nd CIS Groundwater Working Group Meeting, Malta 25.4.2017

The amount of abstraction in the 80’s was around 400 m3/d In the beginning of the 90’s the abstraction increased, having an average of approx. 500 m3/d. Between 1983-1997 the groundwater table was lowered two meters In 2007 the amount of abstraction was already between 700-800 m3/d and the groundwater table was 4 meters lower than in 1983 The average amount of abstraction remained close to 700 m3/d until 2012 when it was l lowered to 500 m3/d The groundwater level started rising and in 2014 it was 1,5-2 meters higher than in 2011 but good quantitative status was not reached by 2015

Case study area Isokangas-Syrjänharju GWB is a typical Finnish GWB situated in an esker Total area is 6,75 km2 and infiltration area 4,04 km2 Estimated amount of groundwater formation is 3100 m3/d One operating water works with a permit of 1000 m3/d abstraction (given in 1978)

Abstraction vs. groundwater level © Pälkäne municipality (Pälkäneen pohjavesialueiden suojelusuunnitelma)

Effect of measures

Summary Abstraction has exceeded the available groundwater resource leading to poor quantitative status Abstraction has always remained under the limit stated in the permit Poor knowledge of the actual available groundwater resource Programme of measures suggested that the permit for abstraction should be re-evaluated, but it has not yet been necessary Water act states that it is forbidden to alter the water level so that it will prevent other uses of the groundwater body  water works have decreased the abstraction to restore good quantitative status Response time is slow  Exemption 4(4) Artificial groundwater has been planned for years but there is a strong movement against it

Lessons learned? Abstraction should have been reduced earlier but it might not have been possible since the need of public water supply At the same time there is growing demand of water In the backround there is also multiple issues concerning local decision making, politics and the slow and difficult process of the artificial groundwater project In the end it is hard to say what could have been better…

Thank you!