1. Water Bodies in Europe: Integrated Systems to assess Ecological Status and Recovery
Funded under FP7, Theme 6: Environment (including Climate Change) Contract No.:

2. Contents A short WISER pre-history Aims and structure Fieldwork
WISER contribution to intercalibration
WISER contribution to restoration strategies
Data needs and handling
Communication and dissemination

3. Contents A short WISER pre-history Aims and structure Fieldwork
WISER contribution to intercalibration
WISER contribution to restoration strategies
Data needs and handling
Communication and dissemination

4. The pre-history of WISER
Prone

5. The pre-history of WISER
Submission AQUINES
2/5/07
Evaluation of WISER
27/5/08
WISER begins
1/3/09
Call 22/12/06
Evaluation of AQUINES 26/7/07
Submission WISER
25/02/08
Call
30/11/07
Invitation to contract negotiations
17/7/08
Conclusion of contract and prefinancing
22/12/08
2006
2007
2008
2009

6. Countries involved

7. Contents A short WISER pre-history Aims and structure Fieldwork
WISER contribution to intercalibration
WISER contribution to restoration strategies
Data needs and handling
Communication and dissemination

8. Aims in general
Contribution to remove still existing obstacles for WFD implementation, in the fields of:
Ecological assessment and intercalibration
Linkage of assessment and restoration
Linkage of assessment and climate change

9. Obstacles for WFD implementation (I)
Nine years after the WFD was released many countries still lack assessment systems for organism groups and water types
The official intercalibration exercise has not been finalized for many organism groups and water types
Due to its complexity the intercalibration process is raises some suspicion
In many regions, the “one out-all out” principle leads to almost 100% water bodies of status “moderate” to “bad”

10. Obstacles for WFD implementation (II)
River Basin Management Plans have already been defined – often without waiting for results on ecological status
When water bodies are restored – the organisms do often not respond at all!
Climate change interacts with other stressors – how to address this in assessment and restoration?

11. Specific aims of the project
Which indicators are best suited for the assessment of ecological status? Which are most reliable? Which are redundant?
How can results of different organism groups best be compared, intercalibrated and combined into an integrated appraisal of ecological status?
How do organism groups respond to recovery?
How is assessment and restoration affected by global change?
How can uncertainty be quantified and minimized?

12. 1 Management, coordination and reporting
Rivers
Rivers
6.1 Uncertainty
5.1 Effects of management and global change
6.2 Combination of organism groups
Lakes
Lakes
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
2.1 Data service
5.2 Effects of management and global change
2.2 Review
6.3 Cross water categories comparison
Coastal/trans.
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
Coastal/trans.
6.4 Comparison of recovery processes
5.3 Effects of management and global change
7 Dissemination

13. 1 Management, coordination and reporting
Rivers
Rivers
6.1 Uncertainty
5.1 Effects of management and global change
6.2 Combination of organism groups
Lakes
Lakes
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
2.1 Data service
5.2 Effects of management and global change
2.2 Review
6.3 Cross water categories comparison
Coastal/trans.
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
Coastal/trans.
6.4 Comparison of recovery processes
5.3 Effects of management and global change
7 Dissemination

14. The five challenges and chances of WISER
Data harmonization – use of many new data sources
Field sampling: Agreement about common sampling design – comparison of BQEs and water categories
Common sampling design for uncertainty estimation
Contribution to remove WFD obstacles – immediate use of results
Cooperation with GIGs – datasets, sampling, use of results

15. Structure Scientists WP leaders WP leaders WP leaders WP leaders
Module leaders
Module leaders
Module leaders
Coordinators
Steering Group
Advisory Board

16. Advisory Board José Luis Buceta (Ministry of the Environment Spain)
Anna-Maria Cicero (Institute for Environmental Protection Italy)
Andreas Hoffmann (Federal Environment Agency Germany)
Henning Karup (Danish Ministry of the Environment)
Peter Kristensen (EEA)
Otilia Mihail (Ministry of Environment Romania)
José Luis Ortiz-Casas (Ministry of Environment Spain)
Geoff Phillips (Environment Agency England and Wales)
Ursula Schmedtje (DG Environment)
Vassilis Spyratos (Ministry of the Environment France)
Gorazd Urbanič (Institute for Water of the Republic of Slovenia)
Birgit Vogel (ICPDR)

17. Contents A short WISER pre-history Aims and structure Fieldwork
WISER contribution to intercalibration
WISER contribution to restoration strategies
Data needs and handling
Communication and dissemination

18. Lakes Aims To test congruency of different BQEs To analyze uncertainty
Lake types
NGIG: low alk., clear, stratified, 3-15 m mean depth
CBGIG: high alk., stratified, 3-15 m mean depth
MedGIG: high alk., stratified, 3-15 m mean depth
Structure (maybe subject to minor changes)
9 lakes per type (= 27 lakes) for phytoplankton, macrophytes, invertebrates
22 lakes to be sampled for all BQEs (including external programmes)

19. Sampling scheme for phytoplankton
Sub-sample 1 (expert # 1)
Sub-sample 2 (expert # 1)
Sub-sample 3 (expert # 2)
Sample 1
Station 1
(Deep point)
Sample 2
Sub-sample 1 (expert # 1)
Sub-sample 1 (expert # 2)
Sub-sample 2 (expert # 2)
Sub-sample 3 (expert # 1)
Sample 1
Lake 1
Station 2
(Centre)
Sample 2
Sub-sample 1 (expert # 2)
Sub-sample 1 (expert # 1)
Sub-sample 2 (expert # 1)
Sub-sample 3 (expert # 2)
Sample 1
Station 3
(Near outflow)
Sample 2
Sub-sample 1 (expert # 1)

20. Coastal / transitional waters
Number of replicate samples (existing data not included)
Location PP MA AS BI FI
Oslofjord CW 12 21
Skagerrak CW 9
Helsinki Bay CW 12
Basque Country CW 12 18 21
Mondego TW 36 6 6 21 27
Balearic Islands CW 12 18
Lesina Lagoon TW 12 18 18 21 27
Varna Bay
TW/CW 12 21 27
Total
TW/CW
108 51 42
105 81

21. Contents A short WISER pre-history Aims and structure Fieldwork
WISER contribution to intercalibration
WISER contribution to restoration strategies
Data needs and handling
Communication and dissemination

22. # deliverables relevant for intercalibration6 2
Lakes 2 5 1 2
Coastal
/ trans 2 1
General 2

23. Targets and methods General Review of intercalibration methods
BQE / water category specific
Harmonization / comparison of assessment metrics
Suggestions for more generally applicable metrics
Guidance documents on sampling and analysis
Uncertainty estimation
Cooperation with GIGs
Lake GIG wish list
Overlap of personnel
Representation of WISER on GIG meetings
Joint data use
Joint use of results

24. Time plan Next phase of intercalibration ends in June 2011
11 relevant deliverables are scheduled well before
3 relevant deliverables are scheduled close to June 2011
WISER partner will be asked to produce deliverables earlier
9 relevant deliverables are scheduled later
WISER partners will be asked to produce preliminary versions before June 2011

25. Contents A short WISER pre-history Aims and structure Fieldwork
WISER contribution to intercalibration
WISER contribution to restoration strategies
Data needs and handling
Communication and dissemination

26. Structure for rivers, lakes, marine ecosystems
Driver-Response-
Recovery-Chains
Large-scale empirical models
Catchment-based (empirical and mechanistic) models

27. Contents A short WISER pre-history Aims and structure Fieldwork
WISER contribution to intercalibration
WISER contribution to restoration strategies
Data needs and handling
Communication and dissemination

28. Data bases available

29. Metadata for each dataset
Data flow
Workpackage datasets
Partners' datasets
WP 3.1
WP 4.1
WP 5.1
WP 5.1
WP 6.1
51-L-C
Central database
WP 3.2
WP 4.2
WP 5.2
WP 6.2
53-LR-C
WP 3.3
WP 4.3
WP 5.3
WP 6.3
78-L-NC
WP 3.4
WP 4.4
WP 6.4
New data
Meta-database
Metadata for each dataset

30. Data needs
Monitoring data produced by member states, particularly for lakes and coastal / transitional waters, including:
Data on sampling stations
Taxa lists
Data on environmental parameters

31. Contents A short WISER pre-history Aims and structure Fieldwork
WISER contribution to intercalibration
WISER contribution to restoration strategies
Data needs and handling
Communication and dissemination

32. Website (

33. Intranet

34. Video communication tools

35. End user teams Small teams per WP or Module, including:
GIG experts covering all ecosystems types and as many ecoregions as possible
Local River Basin managers (case study River Basins)
Access to all draft documents
Two-way communication to advise modules / WPs

36. Water Bodies in Europe: Integrated Systems to assess Ecological Status and Recovery
Funded under FP7, Theme 6: Environment (including Climate Change) Contract No.: