Implementation of WFD in Hungary - rivers Zoltán Simonffy Hungarian Academy of Sciences Research Group for Water Management Zoltán Simonffy Hungarian Academy.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Simone Bizzi In collaboration with: Dr Andrea Nardini Technical Director of CIRF (Italian Centre for River Restoration) Model and evaluate geomorphology.
Advertisements

Implementing the Water Framework Directive at an Environmental and Water Directorate, Hungary László Kóthay director Trans-Tisza Region Environmental and.
Section 3: Stream Deposition
Tasks of stream revitalization in the light of water framework directive in Hungary E.Molnár Corvinus University,Budapest E.Bardóczy,St.Stephan University,Gödöllő.
MODULE 1 Water Framework Directive, Relation of WFD with Daughter Directives, River Basin Management Planning, Water Bodies, Typology, Classification Surface.
The Water Withdrawal Assessment Process Context within regional water policy discussions Context within regional water policy discussions –Aquatic ecosystems.
GIS development. Danube Commission+ISRBC meeting Sava GIS Sava GIS establishment –Performed in accordance with the Sava GIS Strategy EU WFD INSPIRE Directive.
Fresh Water Systems Parkside Junior High 2010/11 Mrs. Doig-Gray and Mrs. Friesen.
Nile Hydrology Preliminary Research Anthony Makana Paris
Greg Jennings, PhD, PE Professor, Biological & Agricultural Engineering North Carolina State University BAE 579: Stream Restoration Lesson.
Environmental flows in Europe Mike Acreman. Green and pleasant land? Thames basin 10,000 km mm rainfall 15 million people significant water stress.
Rivers Intercalibration Phase 2 Key Cross-GIG activities  Refining Reference Conditions  Intercalibrating Large River Ecological Status  Initial.
Module 2: Water Budget, Pressures and Impacts, Significant Water Management Issues, Monitoring, Characterization Report Hydromorphological quality elements,
24 Hour Freephone Water Pollution Hotline Risk Assessment Refinement Use field data to refine Article 5 risk assessment pressure thresholds.
Characterization Report Module 2: Water Budget, Pressures and Impacts, Significant Water Management Issues, Monitoring, Characterization Report Characterization.
Natural Riparian Resources Water Landscape & SoilVegetation.
Dr Richard Johnson, Mountain Environments, UK.  Lead Partner: Germany: Research Institute of Forest Ecology and Forestry  Partner countries: Germany,
Seite Hier steht ein thematisches Foto European Workshop on HMWBs, March 2009, Brussels Final designation of HWMBs in Austria for WBs.
German Guidebook on the Implementation of the EC Water Framework Directive Dr. Harald Irmer Germany.
Biological Workshop April 21/22, 2008 Implementation of the Water Framework Directive in Croatia Twinning Project Introduction to the development of the.
South Africa PRIMA Operating Rules. Model Trans-boundary Operating Process PRIMA,TPTC etc Trans-boundary Agreement Operational Committee Representatives.
Site Selection and Security Considerations Mark Heggli Innovative Hydrology, Inc. Consultant To The World Bank Expert Real-Time Hydrology Information Systems.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE IN HUNGARY Eszter HAVAS-SZILÁGYI Ministry of Transport and Water Management Eszter HAVAS-SZILÁGYI Ministry.
Fish migration from a Water Framework Directive perspective
Module 3: Environmental Objectives, Programme of Measures, Economic Analysis, Exemptions PoM implementation: Upper Tisza case study Alexei Iarochevitch.
19 June 2003, Athens, Greece INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT THE RIVER BASIN PERSPECTIVE The Jucar River Basin - First results Teodoro Estrela Júcar PRB Coordinator.
Hydropeaking and minimum flow : the French approach. P. Baran CIS ECOSTAT - HYDROMORPHOLGY WORKSHOP 12th and 13th June Brussels Pôle Ecohydraulique.
MODULE 1 Water Framework Directive, Relation of WFD with Daughter Directives, River Basin Management Planning, Water Bodies, Typology, Classification River.
STRATEGIES FOR FRESHWATER. CONTEXT FOR STRATEGIES.
THE MANAGEMENT PLAN IN PRACTICE Case study. RBMP Detailed publication process in the directive...  art. 13: general rules  annex VII: detailed contents.
WFD Characterisation Report Dr Tom Leatherland Environmental Quality Manager 29 October 2003.
Water.europa.eu Water Framework Directive - a framework for Community action in the field of water policy Marieke van Nood WFD Team, DG ENV.D.2, European.
© WRc plc 2010 Agenda item 3b: Summary of WISE electronic delivery: presentation of an example.
Natural and artificial hydromorphological changes in Norway Agnès Moquet-Stenback – Section for erosion and sediment transport – Hydrology.
CURRENT CHALLENGES FACING HYDROPOWER DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE Brussels 1-2 october 2009 Sara Gollessi APER (Association of Producers of Energy from Renewables)
A Practical Approach: The General Physico-Chemical Quality Elements and the Classification of Ecological Status.
PCWA Study Plan Physical Habitat Characterization Study Plan –Geomorphology Study Plan –Riparian Habitat Mapping Study Plan –Aquatic Habitat Characterization.
Austrian Approach for Identification of Water Bodies Workshop on Identification of Surface Water Bodies Brussels, 25/26 September 2003 Birgit Vogel Austrian.
Water Director Meeting 30th November 2006, Inari / SF WFD and Hydromorphology Technical report on “Good practice in managing the ecological impacts of.
Water Resources Management and the Implementation of the Water Framework Directive in Hungary Water Resources Management and the Implementation.
By, Janet Hooks RIVERS & STREAMS. The bumpiness or flatness of the land is called TOPOGRAPHY. The topography of the land determines how fast water will.
Implementing environmental flows in Catalan rivers Cost analysis and impact on use CIS ECOSTAT HYDROMORPHOLGY WORKSHOP 12 th and 13 th June 2012 Antoni.
Defining Good Ecological Potential : Method used in the UK Niall Jones Hydro-morphology senior advisor Environment Agency.
11 juni 2007 Ecological classification in the Netherlands1 Diederik van der Molen Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management CIS workshop.
1 European Topic Centre on Water Workshop on: Identification of surface water bodies under the Pilot River Basin Initiative Monitoring Water Bodies Steve.
Week 2. Work plan 2 Week 1 Week 2 Hydrological models Hydraulic models 1D quasi 2D 2D (25x25 m) Flood resilience 2D (5x5 m) Structural measures.
CIS Working Group 2A ECOSTAT Overall Approach to the Ecological Classification 01 July 2003 D/UK WGL CIS 2A.
Macroinvertebrate responses to flow and thermal variability associated with impoundments James. C. White 1, Paul. J. Wood 1, David. M. Hannah 2 and Andy.
Estimating environmental flows (E-flows) in Poland Piotr Parasiewicz, Katarzyna Suska, Paweł Prus Fundig: Polish National Water Authority.
Thematic assessments based on results from RBMPs Coastal and transitional ecological status & related presures Inland surface waters Hydromorphological.
Identification and evaluation of anthropogenic pressures Northern calotte water authority meeting Levi 16 th -18 th April 2013 Pekka Räinä/ Lapland ELY-centre.
Monitoring, assessing and classifying the environment
Carolin Vorstius PhD Showcase Day, 29/03/2017
Type of presentation/visualisation
on Identification and Designation of Heavily Modified and
Experiences of designing WFD-monitoring networks in the Netherlands
River Kokemäenjoki – Flood risk management & WFD
River Kokemäenjoki – Flood risk management & WFD
Design of monitoring networks for rivers in Austria
Availability of water resources under climate change in SE Europe
Project 2.7 Guidance on Monitoring
CIS Working Group 2A ECOSTAT SCG Meeting in Brussels
on Identification and Designation of Heavily Modified and
EP Pilot project Comparative study of pressures and measures
Preparation of the second RBMP in Romania
WG A ECOSTAT Draft Mandate
DG Environment WG DIS, 9 – 10 April 2019, Copenhagen (DK)
”Identification of water bodies as potentially heavily modified”
Seppo Hellsten & Teemu Ulvi
Pilot River Basin Project for the Szamos/Somes River Basin
Presentation transcript:

Implementation of WFD in Hungary - rivers Zoltán Simonffy Hungarian Academy of Sciences Research Group for Water Management Zoltán Simonffy Hungarian Academy of Sciences Research Group for Water Management

Content: 1.Typology system in Hungary 2.Identification of River Water Bodies 3.Identification of Hyromorphological risks

1. Typology for rivers in Hungary

Structure of the typology Geology (hydrogeochemistry) Topography (slope of groundsurface) Geology (Substratum of the river bed) Size of the catchment area  Chemical composition  Sediments and river morphology System B is accepted

Topography ( landscape, elevation, slope) Geology - hydrogeochemistry  sub-ecoregions Geology - substratum  aquatic landscapes Size of the catchment  B - typology Structure of the typology

Topography Releváns morfológiai jellemzők

Topography > 800 m200 – 800 m < 200 m

Topography (sub-ecoregion) Releváns morfológiai jellemzők Plains Mountains Hills

Geochemical characteristics Calcerous: karstic rocks loess calcerous soils Organic: peat Silicious: acidic rocks acidic soils BUT: Ionic composition of water: Everywhere calcerous type in the hilly and flat regions

Substratum of the river bed coarse medium fine

Aquatic landscapes  Sediments and river morphology

Sub-ecoregions, geology Size of the catch. Organic (peaty) regions small medium coarsesmall,mountainous regions, calcerous mountainous regions, siliciouscoarsesmall, medium, hilly regions, calcerouscoarsesmall medium large very large medium - finesmall, medium, large plains, calcerouscoarse small medium large, very large, medium - finesmall, small slope medium, small slope medium, large, very large, River types

Location of types

2. Identification of river Water Bodies

Natural River Water Bodies Merging neighbouring, short river sections following the typology classification Merging related river sections having <100km2 catchment area Division of water bodies by important mouths (or country border): Danube, Tisza, Körös River sections having <10km2 catchment area are not water bodies except if it is recharged by a spring, or it has local importance. Result: 875 natural River Water Bodies

Artificial River Water Bodies Definition: "Artificial water body means a body of surface water created by human activity”. (creating a new water body from previously dry land, e.g. a canal) Selection of canals by considering their ecological importance (discrete expert judgements) Result: 151 Artificial Water Bodies

Artificial River Water Bodies Artificial water courses Artificial Water Bodies

3. Identification of Hydromorphological Risk

METHODOLOGY FOR ASSESSMENT OF RISK RELATED TO HYDROMORPHOLOGICAL ALTERATIONS Rapid ecological survey in selected river sections (65) (different types and different alteration) Criteria for significant alterations obvious: not good status uncertain: possibly not good status Ecological status based on biological data Database of human pressures Designation of significantly altered river sections ( two main groups according to criteria) Water bodies at risk: > 50 % is altered considering only obvious effects Estimation of the modified hydromorphological parameters Water bodies possibly at risk: > 50 % is altered considering all significant alterations Water bodies not at risk: if non of the above criteria applies to the water body

DETAILED CRITERIA FOR RESERVOIRS IN MOUNTAINS AND HILLS Reservoir itself: obvious impact Changes in cathegory  obvious impact Downstream impact, if no bypass, MLF is below the type-specific value, frequency of drying is doubled, obvious impact Upstream impact if no continuty: impact isuncertain (Slope 10 cm, v< 0,6 m/s) impact is uncertain, because it depends on species (migration?) Impacted river section: where the downstream catchment is biger than 50 times the surface of reservoir (excluding catchment of other reservoirs!)

CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT OF HYDROMORPH. RISK IN RIVERS HUMAN ACTIVITY AND ALTERATION HMRHMR? Dams and reservoirs river section influenced by storage in mount.& hilly areas downstream section of dam in mount.&hilly areas, no continuity, diminished MLF river section influenced by storage in lowland, level >1m above groundsurface downstream section of dam in lowland, no continuity, diminished MLF upstream section of dam, no continuity (sensitive species??) Impoundment impounded section in mount.& hilly areas, bank-full stage impounded section in hilly areas, lower stage lowland, large rivers, impounded section other lowland rivers, impounded section downstream section of weir, if water regime significantly impacted upstream section of weir, no continuity (sensitive species??) Dikes and dumps ratio of width of floodplain and lowflow river bed < 5 in hills, < 10 in lowland not appropriate land use in floodplain

significant artificial inflow HUMAN ACTIVITY AND ALTERATION HMRHMR? River regulation ratio of width of high and lowflow river bed < 5 in hills or < 10 in lowland alignment of highflow river bed is not appropriate not appropriate flow conditions and river bed status not appropriate substratum not appropriate riperian zonation riperian zonation is partly missing Dredging overdredging of river bed dredging of unnecessary frequency or length Bank protection (pavement) pavement > 20 % of highflow river bed, or > 40 % of lowflow river bed pavement between % of lowflow river bed Water abstraction and deviation frequent water scarcity in summer due to abstraction significant deviation for hydropower generation other deviation CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT OF HYDROMORPH. RISK IN RIVERS

Total (50%) Obvious criteria: 15 ( 7.5) Uncertain criteria: 12 ( 6.0) 27 (13.5) AN EXAMPLE FOR DEFINING HYDROMORPHOLOGICAL RISK For Water Body No 1 Obvious impacts: 10 Uncertain impact: 4 14 For Water Body No 2 Obvious impacts: 5 Uncertain impact: For Water Body No 3 Obvious impacts: 5 Uncertain impact: 7 12 WB is at risk WB is possibly at risk WB is not at risk

VÍZTEST SZINTŰ OSZTÁLYOZÁS CLASSIFICATION OF WATER BODIES ACCODING TO HYDROMORPHOLOGICAL RISK Hydromorphological risk

GROUP OF RIVER WATER BODIES FROM HYDROMORPHOLOGICAL POINT OF VIEW All river water bodies: 875 db, km 236 db (23%), 4594 km (25%) Good hydromorphological conditions already 297 db (34%), 6425 km (35%) 347 db (40%), 7796 km (42%) Hydromorphological risk (no good status without measures) Possibly at risk (hydromorphological impact is uncertain) 231 db (26%), 4257 km (23%)

METHODOLOGY FOR FURTHER ASSESSMENT OF HYDROMORPHOLOGICAL RISK Criteria for significant alterations obvious: no good status ( checking ) uncertain: possibly no good status ( clarification ) Survey of ecological status (ECOSURV, 400 sites) Evaluation of the results (cluster analysis and filters according to hydromorphological impacts Database of human pressures Estimation of the modified hydromorphological parameters Still uncertain Repeating designation procedure Checking water bodies at risk Focusing on water bodies possibly at risk - either in good status - or at risk

Thank you for your attention!