1 / 24

Monitoring and Assessment in France: Water Quantity, Quality, and Fish Populations Since the 1870s

This presentation explores the monitoring and assessment of water quantity, water quality, and fish populations in France since the 1870s. It discusses the existing monitoring networks, current shortcomings, and the design of the Water Framework Directive monitoring program. The presentation also highlights the costs and design of operational monitoring, as well as the water quality assessment systems used in France.

dbernal
Download Presentation

Monitoring and Assessment in France: Water Quantity, Quality, and Fish Populations Since the 1870s

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Monitoring and assessment in France René LalementWIS-France Taskforce

  2. Monitoring in France • water quantity since 1870s ? • water quality since 1971 • fish since 1993 • Multiple extensive networks

  3. Surface water quality Surface water quantity Groundwater quality Groundwater quantity Pluviometry Scale 1 : 500 000

  4. Current river quality network • 1700 sites • each year • basic chemicals 6 to 12 times a year in water • heavy metals + pesticides once a year in sediments on a selection of sites. • invertebrates once a year, • diatoms on half of the sites • fish populations on another network of 800 sites.

  5. Monitoring sites in the Loire river basinfor river quality

  6. Current shortcomings Monitoring sites are located more often on large or medium rivers than on small rivers, with an overall goal for the assessment of measures taken to reduce point source pollution in urban or industrial areas. There is presently no national network for lakes.

  7. The Water Framework Directivemonitoring programme: • an opportunity • to rebuild in a consistent way all monitoring activities • to include new needs (monitoring of lakes, better coverage of all rivers, priority substances, more biology) • to merge with other requirements (EIONet, OSPAR, MedPol, OECD/Eurostat, ...) • This presentation will focus on surface freshwater.

  8. Design of the WFD network for “surveillance monitoring”  • Use of research results from CEMAGREF and CSP • Several steps • Step 1: set a total of 1500 sites for France (not including overseas districts) • Step 2: use a key based on river basin area and river lengths to compute the number per district

  9. Step 3: within a hydrographic district, use a river size stratification (XS to XL) Rule: compute the minimum number of sites in each stratum to guarantee that the uncertainty on the ammonium parameter (identified to have the greatest variability) be less than 10%. This had to be tuned in some districts when upper size strata do not occur.

  10. Step 4: consider the water body type in every district and in every size stratum, the number of monitoring sites has been distributed among the ecological types, according to the total river length in each type, leading for instance to 2 sites in small rivers of armorican type (in Britanny). Step 5: use the local knowledge of the conditions to locate the sites, to ensure the best representativeness. Once defined, this monitoring network will be immutable.

  11. Tuning monitoring parameters and frequencies 1 (or less) / management plan (every 6 yrs, once): hydromorphological elements 2 / management plan (every 3 yrs, once a year): other pollutants and pesticides, in sediment 2 / management plan (every 3 yrs, 4 times a year): other pollutants and pesticides, in water 2 / management plan (every 3 yrs, monthly): priority substances 6 / management plan (every year, once): biological quality elements 6 / management plan (every year, 6 times a year): basic chemicals (O2, nutrients, TOC, ...).

  12. Costs • The estimated cost of the surveillance monitoring programme is • 77 M€ for rivers and • 8M€ for lakes • for a management plan, or • 50 k€ for rivers • 40 k€ for lakes • per site for a management plan, or • 150 €/km2 (rivers and lakes), or • 150 €/km (rivers).

  13. Design of operational monitoring • Operational monitoring is intended for water bodies which may fail to meet their environmental objectives in 2015, in order to evaluate the effectiveness of policies. • It will apply to water bodies to which the river basin management plan does not assign a good status objective in 2015, but: • an extended deadline (2015, 2021), • or a less stringent objective • The full design of the monitoring network, including operational monitoring, will be completed along with the first management plan, in 2008-2009.

  14. Water quality assessment in France • 1971 Water Quality Grid • 1999 Water Quality Evaluation System (SEQ-eau) • 2007 Water Status Evaluation System • needed for: • Knowledge • Water management • Policy assessment • Accountability

  15. 1971 Water Quality Grid • based on 13 physico-chemical determinants • 3 thresholds for every determinant • leads to 4 classes: high, good, poor, bad • the worst determinant wins • still has a regulatory scope (for setting objectives in the current river basin management plans) • ... but too « multipurpose », no ecology

  16. SEQ-eau • an assessment framework, • with several instances: • rivers, lakes, coastal waters, groundwaters, ... • use-oriented • uses: drinking water, leisure, irrigation, livestock watering, aquaculture + aquatic life • based on 15 suitability indicators • Indicators computed from 135 determinants • matrices: • determinants X indicators (computed from) • uses X indicators (significant for) • determinants X classes (threshold values)

  17. Results in • a class of suitability for each use • an index (and class) for overall quality • For each indicator, the worst determinant wins • For each use, the worst indicator wins • For each determinant, apply the percentile 90 • rule to multiple samples (not the average) • ... an in depth assessment for uses, • but little ecology : independant of « ecotype » !

  18. Water body status evaluation system • required by the Water Framework Directive • chemical status • based on environmental quality standards • ecological status • based on • type-specific reference conditions • indicators for relevant quality elements • ecological quality ratios (observation/reference) • division of the scale into 5 classes • intercalibration of high/good and good/moderate boundaries

  19. Biological quality elements • biological indicators should be made “WFD-compatible” by introducing the water body type in their definition • IBGN (Standard global biological index) for benthic invertebrates, • IBD (Diatom biological index) • IPR (River fish index) – defined to be type-dependant

  20. On the Web Portal for public information on water: http://www.eaufrance.fr Water information framework: http://www.sandre.eaufrance.fr French water policy: http://www.ecologie.gouv.fr

More Related