1. MODULE 1 Water Framework Directive, Relation of WFD with Daughter Directives, River Basin Management Planning, Water Bodies, Typology, Classification Surface water bodies’ typology, Danube river basin countries and Ukraine experience Danube river basin countries and Ukraine experience Alexei Iarochevitch Antalya December 5, 2014

2. Content  Purpose of typology  Rivers typology (system A and system B, Danube, Turkey)  Lakes typology (system A and system B, Danube, Turkey)  Transitional WBs’ typology (system A and system B, Danube, Turkey)  Costal WB’s typology (system A and system B, Danube, Turkey)  Ukraine typology

3. Purpose of typology  The WFD requires to differentiate the relevant surface water bodies with respect to type and that Member States establish reference conditions for these types  The main purpose of typology is consequently to enable type specific reference conditions to be defined which in turn is used as the anchor of the classification system

4. Rivers All rivers are different by:  Catchment  Length  Hydrological regime  Morphological parameters

5. creek, Matra mountains, Hungary

6. Prut river, Carpathians, Ukraine

7. Fiumara d’Agro, Sicilia, Italy

8. Ikva river, north- west of Ukraine

9. Rivers have a different water quality depending on:  Geology (organic, siliceous, calcareous)  Pollution

10. Фотки Pripyat river, north of Ukraine

11. Pripyat river, north of Ukraine

12.  photo Sava river, Slovenia

13.  photo Confluence of Bodrog and Tisza rivers, Tokaj, Hungary

14. Rivers All rivers are different by:  Aquatic flora  Benthic invertebrate  Fish

15.  photo

19. Common Implementation Strategy

20. System A & system B  For each surface water category, the relevant surface water bodies within the river basin district shall be differentiated according to type. These types are those defined using either "system A" or "system B" identified in Section 1.2.  If System B is used, Member States must achieve at least the same degree of differentiation as would be achieved using System A. Accordingly, the surface water bodies within the river basin district shall be differentiated into types using the values for the obligatory descriptors and such optional descriptors, or combinations of descriptors, as are required to ensure that type specific biological reference conditions can be reliably derived

21. Rivers Dnipro river, Kyiv, Ukraine

22. Rivers typology (System A)

23. Rivers typology (System B)

25. River typology in the Danube river basin district  The typologies of the Danube tributaries were developed by the countries individually.  Stream types relevant on transboundary water courses were bilaterally harmonized with the neighbors.  Most countries in the Danube River Basin (Germany, Austria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, Bosnia and Herzegovina) have applied System B. The Slovak Republic and Ukraine have used System A.  The common factors used mostly in DRB typologies are ecoregion, altitude, catchment area and geology. In the Czech typology the ecoregions are not included, instead of ecoregion, sea drainage area (= river basin) is used. In Slovenia no altitude classes were used in river typology.

26. Rivers typology

27. Optional factors ParameterCountries Mean water slopeGermany, Slovakia, Bosnia i Herzegovina, Romania, Moldova Mean substratum composition Germany, Hungary, Bosnia i Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro, Romania, Bulgaria, Moldova, Ukraine River dischargeSlovakia, Bosnia i Herzegovina, Moldova Valley shapeGermany, Czech Republic, Bosnia i Herzegovina, Moldova Channel formGermany, Slovakia, Bosnia i Herzegovina, Moldova Hydrology / water flowGermany, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Bosnia i Herzegovina, Moldova Saprobiological Basic ConditionGermany, Austria Precipitation [mm p.a.]Romania Temperature [°C]Romania Fish ZonationRomania

28. Turkish river typology ( Turkish river typology (EU Twinning project “Capacity Building on water quality monitoring”)

29. Lakes Modre (Blue) lake, Imotski, Croatia

30. Lakes typology (System A)

31. Lakes typology (System B Lakes typology (System B)

32. Lakes typology in the Danube river basin district

33. Turkish lakes typology ( Turkish lakes typology (EU Twinning project “Capacity Building on water quality monitoring”)

34. Transitional waters Danube river delta, Romania-Ukraine

35. Transitional waters typology (system A)

36. Transitional waters typology (System B)

37. Transitional WB typology in the Danube river basin district

38. Turkish transitional WB typology ( Turkish transitional WB typology (EU Twinning project “Capacity Building on water quality monitoring”)

39. Coastal waters South coast, Seven Sisters, England

40. Coastal waters typology (System A)

41. Coastal waters typology (System B)

42. Coastal WB typology in the Danube river basin district

43. Turkish coastal WB typology ( Turkish coastal WB typology (EU Twinning project “Capacity Building on water quality monitoring”)

44. Conclusions & recommendations (1)  Water body types may be differentiated using ”System A” or ”System B”;  The two systems are similar in that they contain the same obligatory factors: geographic position, altitude, geology, size and (for lakes) depth;  Optional factors of System B can be used as desired by Member States and can be complemented with factors other than those mentioned in the Directive

45. Conclusions & recommendations (2)  The Directiveґs descriptors of geology (in System A) refer to the dominating character (calcareous, siliceous, etc.), expected to have the strongest influence on ecological quality of the water body;  The Directiveґs requirement that MS must achieve the same degree of differentiation with System B as with System A is interpreted to mean that if System B is used, it should result in no greater degree of variability in type specific reference conditions than if System A had been used. Hence, if a lower number of types, using System B, results in equally low or lower variability of reference conditions values as would be given by System A, this would be acceptable;

47. Ukraine, Tisza river basin (Danube sub-basin)

48. Ukraine, Buh river basin (Black sea)

49. Reference and useful links  Guidance document n.o 2 Identification of of Water Bodies. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water- framework/facts_figures/guidance_docs_en.htm  Guidance document n.o 10. River and lakes – Typology, reference conditions and classification systems http://ec.europa.eu/environment/water/water- framework/facts_figures/guidance_docs_en.htm  Chapter 4. Characterization of surface water bodies // Danube Basin Analysis (WRD roof report 2004) http://www.icpdr.org/main/publications/reports  Chapter 4. Characterization of surface water bodies //Tisza River Basin Analysis report 2007 http://www.icpdr.org/main/danube-basin/tisza-basinhttp://www.icpdr.org/main/danube-basin/tisza-basin

50. Thank you for attention!