River Monitoring in the EU Water Resources Framework Directive (WFD)

1. River monitoring in the EU Water Resources Framework Directive (WFD)by Prof Maria Lazaridou-DimitriadouEmail: mlazarid@bio.auth.grDepartment of Zoology, AUTH, 54006 Thessaloniki, GREECE

2. The new Directive represents anambitious and innovative approachto water management. Key elementsof the legislation include: • The protection of all waters -rivers, lakes, coastal waters andgroundwaters. • The setting of ambitiousobjectives to ensure that allwaters meet “good status” by2015. • The requirement for crossborder co-operation betweencountries and all involvedparties. • Ensuring the activeparticipation of allstakeholders, including NGOsand local communities, in watermanagement activities. • Requiring water pricing policiesand ensuring that the polluterpays. • Balancing the interests of theenvironment with those whodepend on it. So How the WFD will work?

3. Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) • Protectsall waters: groundwater and surface waters, including coastal waters • Goodwater status (environmental objective) by December 2015and effective river basin management plans (RBMP) • The Ecological status of aquatic ecosystems isemphasised • Quality is measured in ecological terms

4. Ecological quality elements MS must monitor parameters indicative of the status of each of the following relevant river quality elements: • Biological: fish, benthic invertebrate fauna, aquatic flora • Hydromorphological: hydrological regime (quantity & dynamics of water flow, connection to groundwater), river continuity, depth and width, river bed structure, riparian zone structure • Physico-chemical: thermal & oxygenation conditions, salinity, acidification status, nutrients, priority substances, other pollutants discharged in significant quantities

5. Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) • Water pricing as an incentive for the wise use of water • Getting citizens more closely involved into planning and decision taking processes • Streamlining legislation

6. River monitoring in the WFD • It covers volume and rate of flow, chemical status and ecological status/potential • Preliminary assessment of human impacts (end2004) • Accomodate monitoring programmes according to WFD (by end2006) • Maps produced and first results presented (by end2009, publication of RBMP) • Presentation of monitoring results in the first RBMP update (by end of2015 and every 6 yr. after that) [WFD Art.8 and Annex V (section 1.3 and 1.1, 1.2)]

7. Deadlines • December 2003. National and regional laws to be adapted to the WFD. River Basin co-operation to be made operational. • December 2004. An analysis of pressures and impacts on our waters has to be completed including an economic analysis. • December 2006. Monitoring programmes have to be operational as a basis for the water management. • December 2008. River Basin Management plans presented to the public. • December 2009. Publishing first River Basin Management Plans. • December 2015. Water to meet “good status”.

8. WFD River typology Bes. pol. Kontrolle/Regulierung von Marktgeschehen WFD monitoring methodologies and measures apply to all types of rivers • WFD classifies rivers into different types according to ecoregions (25) and ecotypes (System A and B, Annex II) • System Aclassifies rivers according to altitude, catchment size and geology • System Buses obligatory (altitude, size, geology, latitude, longitude) and optional factors Ziele mit Rückwirkung auf Struktur & Regulierung

9. Monitoring types • 3 types: surveillance, operational and investigative • Intensity of river monitoring isrisk and pressure proportional • General set of rules on frequency for surveillance monitoring are: biological parameters every 3y. (phytoplankton every 6 m.), hydromorphological every 6y. (hydrology continuously), physico-chemical every 3 m. (priority substances every 1m.) • BUT countries can adjust frequency and timing according to specific conditions and needs • Rivers providing drinking water monitored 4-12x a year Europäische Benchmarking aufbauen Umweltindikatoren im Benchmarking

10. Surveillance monitoring network • Why: - validate the impact assessment procedure • serve as basis for future monitoring programmes, • assess long-term changes in natural conditions and changes resulting from widespread anthropogenic activity • Where: at points of significant water flow (> 2 500 km² catchment area) • at rivers crossing a Member State boundary, • at sampling sites identified under the Information Exchange Decision 77/795/EEC • How often: - Physicochemical parameters every 3m. (priority substances every 1m) for a period of one year, • biological and hydromorphological once in the 6 years of the RBMP einmaliger Wettbewerb Marktmacht über mehrere Stufen Systemwettbewerb

11. Operational monitoring network • Why: establish and monitor the status of rivers being at risk to fail the environmental objectives • Monitor rivers that receive priority list substances • Where: At sufficient points according to the sources of pollution/disturbance (hot spots) • How often: frequency chosen by MS on a case-by-case basis. General set of rules for frequency should be used as a guideline

12. Investigative Monitoring • Why: - where reasons for any exceedances are unknown • - ascertain causes of failure of environmental • objectives • - ascertain magnitude and impact of accidental • pollution • Where and how often: Case-specific • Sampling points and frequencies shall be set according to the problem identified

13. Methods of river monitoring For sampling, sample handling, identification etc : • ISO and EN international standards • such already exist for macroinvertebrate sampling, physicochemical and hydromorphological parameters • for the other quality elements, such standards will be developed under the supervision of the WFD Committee • or equivalent national or international methods

14. Classification of ecological status • Rivers classified into 5 categories: high, good, moderate, poor,bad • The undisturbed (natural) status serves as reference (identification of reference biological communities for each type of water body) • Ecological Quality Ratios: These consist of the Observed value divided by the Expected value as derived from reference conditions (0=bad, 1=high ecological status)

15. High Good Moderate Poor Bad Result presentation • Results presented in maps for each River Basin District • Colour-coded for the five ecological status levels:

16. Chemical status: classification and presentation Two categories: • Good: when a river complies with all environmental quality standards of Annex IX, Art.16 and other relevant legislation • Failing to achieve good chemical status: when it does not comply with the above

17. Classification of ecological status • The ecological status will be represented by the lower of the EQR-values for the biological and physicochemical monitoring results for the relevant quality elements (principle One-out-All-out) • Intercalibration network to ensure comparability (by 2004). Resulting values for each Member State classification by 2006 • Important to select indicators for the biological quality elements (practicability and cost-effectiveness of monitoring)

18. Classification of ecological statusexample for the element: Benthic macroinvertebrates

19. Current River monitoring Different methodologies and systems in the various EU countries Most usual „problem“ is lack of coverage of biological parameters WWF „Water and Wetland Index“ report (rough estimate) : • Good: SF, S, B (Flanders), DK, CH, EST • With significant gaps: UK, B (Wallonia), A, D, HU, F, SK • Moderate: GR, E, Bulgaria, Turkey

20. Challenges • Assess existent information, resources and tools • Remodel of existing networks • Decide on most • cost-effective • practicable • best environmental solutions

21. On-going projects • Individual country pilot projects, e.g. Germany and Finland • Project AQEM running at a European level - www.aqem.de • Pan-European Working Group on Guidance to WFD Monitoring • It will assist MS in their interpretation of the general monitoring criteria and methods provided by the WFD (duration 2001-2006)

22. Pan-European Working Group Expected Outcome: • Recognise and describe the present monitoring network and organisation in each Member State • Prepare informal guidance documents on: • the design of a monitoring network (selection of monitoring sites, GIS representation etc) • Monitoring procedures/protocols in accordance to Annex V • Criteria for the assessment of ecological, chemical, quantitative status and ecological potential • Monitoring data management