1 / 15

Northern GIG, river macroinvertebrates

This milestone report provides an overview of the methods used for intercalibration of Northern river macroinvertebrates, their feasibility, and future considerations for improvement. The report includes participants from Ireland, Finland, Italy, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

jeweld
Download Presentation

Northern GIG, river macroinvertebrates

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. Northern GIG, river macroinvertebrates Martin McGarrigle, Irish EPA Ansa Pilke, Finnish Environment Institute (SYKE) Ispra, Italy 22.6.2011

  2. Milestone report(s) participants • IE, Martin McGarrigle, • FI, Jukka Aroviita, Ansa Pilke, IC I Kari-Matti Vuori, Heikki Mykrä • NO, Steinar Sandøy, IC I Ola Glesne, Torleif Bäcken • SE, Leonard Sandin, Mikaela Gönczi • UK, Willie Duncan, IC I Roger Owen, John Murray Bligh, Cathy Bennet

  3. Milestone Report Q2. • 2. Overview of Methods to be intercalibrated: All methods intercalibrated in first round of Intercalibration.

  4. Methods Intercalibrated in Round 1

  5. Milestone Report Q3. • Methods’ intercalibration feasibility check, Do all national methods address the same common type(s) and pressure(s), and follow a similar assessment concept? • Yes for IE, FI, SE, UK, NO • Is the Intercalibration feasible in terms of typology ? • Yes – while the intercalibration was carried out on particular types it is likely that the methods have wider application than the specific intercalibration typologies listed above.

  6. Milestone Report Q4. • Is the Intercalibration feasible in terms of pressures addressed by the methods? Yes • Is the Intercalibration feasible in terms of assessment concepts? Yes • All methods use the sensitivity of aquatic macroinvertebrates to pollution organic enrichment and ‘general degradation’. A range of weightings methods are used to assess departure from reference conditions but the overall approach is similar for each method. The sampling methods conform to CEN Standards.

  7. Milestone Report - Q5, data

  8. Milestone Report Q5. - data

  9. Milestone Report - Q6 • Benchmarking: Reference conditions or alternative benchmarking (October 2010 + later updates) • Additional annex with reference screening for individual reference sites • UK, FI, NO, SE already submitted to I. Pardo review of reference conditions (plus now additional IE data).

  10. Milestone Report – Q7 • Design and application of the IC procedure • Basically Option 2 – ICMi v national methods • ICMi same as CBGIG Buffagni et al

  11. Milestone Report – Q8 • Boundary setting / comparison and harmonization in common IC type • As per final Round 1 Milestone Report and IC decision

  12. Milestone Report – Q9

  13. Future IC? • Need clear guidance for intercalibrating • New methods • Revised methods • New typologies • New MS

  14. Summary • Round 1 Intercalibration stands • No major revisions at this stage • Future may bring changes • WFD Monitoring bringing lots of new data • Will highlight areas for improvement • Need clear guidance on future Intercalibration • Will new people be able to follow the methodology?

More Related