1. Lake Intercalibration – IC Decision Annexes + what to do in future
Presented by Sandra Poikane Joint Research Centre Institute for Environment and Sustainability

2. Lake IC results – state of play
Many problems
What is included in the Decision ?
13 Lake GIG results included
2. Remained technical issues
SOLVED IN THE GIGs

3. Only Annex1 Or out of Decision
GIG
Alpine
Central
Baltic
Eastern
Continen
Mediter
ranean
Northern
PHYTO
In progress
MACROPH
Only methods
BENTHIC
FISH
Phyto
benthos
Only Annex1
Or out of Decision
Green – included in the Annex
Grey – not included in the Annex

4. Alpine GIG All BQEs intercalibrated What is changed ?
What is still missing ?

5. AT DE FR IT SI Slight adaptation of boundaries GIG
PHYTO
MACROPH
In progress
BENTHIC
FAUNA
Not relevant ?
FISH
PHYTOBENTHOS
Phytoplankton: FR withdrew their method
DE included 1st phase results
(macrophytes+phytobenthos)
Green – MS method included in the Decision
Orange and yellow – MS methods not included in the Decision
- Orange – MS method not developed, not participated in the IC (in some cases MS submitted the justification – that BQE (or part of the BQE in case of phytobenthos) is not relevant for the given MS water bodies)
- Yellow - MS method not included (different reasons, as FR discovered mistakes and withdrew the phytoplankton method, or problems with IC feasibility / compliance etc)
Slight adaptation of boundaries

6. Central Baltic GIG All BQEs intercalibrated, except FISH
What is changed ?
What is still missing ?

7. No IC results BE DE DK EE LT LV NL PL UK LT & LV not included
GIG BE DE DK EE LT LV NL PL UK
PHYTO
MACROPH
In progress
BENTHIC
FAUNA
FISH
No IC results
PHYTOBENTHOS
Not relevant ?
LT & LV not included
LT & LV included !!!
slight adaptation of boundaries
PL, DE - adaptation of boundaries

8. Eastern Continental GIG
No final results
What is changed ?

9. BG HU RO HU - adaptation of boundaries GIG
PHYTO
No IC results (HU & RO working)
MACROPH
BENTHIC
FAUNA
FISH
No IC results
Not relevant for common type ?
PHYTOBENTHOS
HU - adaptation of boundaries

10. Mediterranean GIG Only phytoplankton intercalibrated,
What is changed ?
What is still missing ?

11. FR, RO – excluded, re-calculation
GIG CY GR FR IT PT RO ES
PHYTO
MACROPH
No IC results
BENTHIC
FAUNA
FISH
Not relevant
Not relevant??
PHYTOBENTHOS
Not relevant ?
FR, RO – excluded, re-calculation

12. Northern GIG All BQEs intercalibrated What is changed ?
What is still missing ?

13. FI IE NO SE UK Types shared by MS
GIG FI IE NO SE UK
PHYTO
MACROPH
In progress
BENTHIC
FAUNA
Eutr/prof
Acid/litt
FISH NI
PHYTOBENTHOS
Types shared by MS
Correction of HA type (only UK,IE, Norway excluded)
slight - adaptation of boundaries

14. Summary 13 GIGs / 21 – results in the Decision
68 MS methods /145 in the Decision – < 50 %
Part – justified, part – working, part – unclear
Future – in the next presentation !

16. Lake IC results – state of play
What is not included in the Decision ?
8 Lake GIG results not included
What to do in future ?

17. GIG Alpine Central Baltic Eastern Continen Mediter ranean Northern
PHYTO
In progress
MACROPH
Only methods
BENTHIC
FISH
Phyto
benthos
Green – included in the Annex
Grey – not included in the Annex 22

18. Central Baltic FISH GIG
A lot of work, no final results, the main reason – too few methods were developed before 2010
the GIG : “We strongly recommend recognizing fish as a valuable BQE to assess the ecological status of lakes. Effective and WFD compliant lake assessment methods based on the fish communities are developed”
NL, DE, DK, LT, EE, PL, FR - finalized assessment methods in 2011

19. Central Baltic FISH GIG
Problem:
no GIG coordinator
No work at this moment
sent to IC experts, ECOSTAT:
Answer only from BE-FL (but participation)
From CB benthic fauna coordinator proposing approaches
How do we proceed ?
Who will pay to the GIG coordinator ?

20. GIG Alpine Central Baltic Eastern Continen Mediter ranean Northern
PHYTO
In progress
MACROPH
Only methods
BENTHIC
FISH
Phyto
benthos
Green – included in the Annex
Grey – not included in the Annex 25

21. Eastern Continental GIG
Work is going on :
3 BQEs (phytoplankton, macrophytes, benthic fauna)
2 countries: HU and RO, as BG postponed
The main gaps:
Method description
Method validation: pressure-response relationships
RC and boundary setting clarified
Benchmark standardization clarified
GIG: To provide work plans
Are there reference sites ?
Or these alternative benchmark sites ?
How RC are set ?

22. GIG Alpine Central Baltic Eastern Continen Mediter ranean Northern
PHYTO
In progress
MACROPH
Only methods
BENTHIC
FISH
Phyto
benthos
Green – included in the Annex
Grey – not included in the Annex 27

23. Eastern Continental GIG
Unclear what to do with Fish IC
HU stated: fish are in EC-1 type not relevant because of fisheries, recreation and high rate of invasive species
RO and BG no methods
RO plans to develop method
GIG: To provide workplan

24. GIG Alpine Central Baltic Eastern Continen Mediter ranean Northern
PHYTO
In progress
MACROPH
Only methods
BENTHIC
FISH
Phyto
benthos
Green – included in the Annex
Grey – not included in the Annex 29

25. Mediterranean GIG
No IC possible for natural lakes (for macrophytes and benthic fauna) ?
Italy has declared that there is “no possibility to intercalibrate natural Mediterranean lakes, because of the absence of common types with enough lakes.”
This view was supported by Spain, Greece, Portugal (by s)
GIG has to prepare document supporting this conclusion with data (national typologies, number of water bodies per each type etc)

26. GIG Alpine Central Baltic Eastern Continen Mediter ranean Northern
PHYTO
In progress
MACROPH
Only methods
BENTHIC
FISH
Phyto
benthos
Green – included in the Annex
Grey – not included in the Annex 31

27. Mediterranean GIG: Fish IC ?
Fish IC for natural lakes ? No, because not possible to define common natural lake type with a sufficient number lakes
Fish IC for Mediterranean reservoirs ? Probably, but not in one year
Only one method and only for natural lakes (Italy)
Explain your plans

28. Not possible due to lack of common type ?
GIG
Alpine
Central
Baltic
Eastern
Continen
Mediter
ranean
Northern
PHYTO
In progress
MACROPH
Not possible due to lack of common type ?
BENTHIC
FISH
Methods OK
No coordinator
Unclear
No methods
Phyto
benthos
Green – included in the Annex
Grey – not included in the Annex 33

29. Summary
3 EC GIGs: we can expect results if there is consistent work …. And the answers to reference and benchmark problems
2 Med GIGs (benthic fauna + macrophytes): probably no IC due to lack of common lake type with sufficient lake numbers = need to provide
EC and MED Fish GIGs: no methods developed - explain the plans
CB Fish GIG: a coordinator + MS input needed

30. Problems – some MS with no methods developed:
Some have provided justifications (This BQE is not relevant because ..)
Some of these justifications are scientifically sound, some ….
MS with methods but not IC-ed:
Compliance issues
Feasibility issues
How to deal with this ?