Water Resource managemtn and Landmark Legislation:

The Clean Water Act

The Water Framework Directive

U1-m4-s2

Aquatic systems

Supply goods and services Long term degradation

Multiple pressures and impacts Threaten their stability and quality

A need to better characterise and protect aquatic habitats

Implement effective legislation and management plans Integrated “holistic” management

The futureWater resources and climate change

U1-m4-s3

MAN AND WATER SHARE A LONG AND CLOSE ASSOCIATION

U1-m4-s4

Commerce ,Industry, Energy productionTransport

Spiritual and religious importance

Rio Ganges, Índia

Agriculture - irrigation

Os ecossistemas aquáticos atraiam-nós

U1-m4-s6

Ecosystems goods and servicesDirect Services

supply., transport, recreation, fisheries

Indirect servicesFlood prevention, recycling of nutrients,

genetic resources, maintenance of wetlands

“Services - Existence” allow the permanence of habitats,

their ecosystems and species

Water is the the most threatened natural resource on the planet

The sustainable integrated management of water will be one of the most important areas of 21st century world politics

U1-m4-s8

Water resource management is EXTREMELY complex

Multiple uses

Multiple demands

Multiple conflicts

Multiple interests

Multiple impacts over multiple spatial scales

Costs!

U1-m4-s9

Diffuse pollution, changes in land use, soil loss

UrbanisationIndustrial and domestic discharge

Draining of wetlands

U1-m4-s10

Changes in land use Deforestation Habitat destruction Erosion of sediments Changes in nutrient flux Destruction of riparian habitats Channelisation of streams and

rivers

U1-m4-s11

Artificialisation of surface water bodies

Urbanisation Longitudinal, lateral and vertical connectivity Disturbance of water cycle

Decrease in biodiversity Ecosystem quality Sustainable goods and services

U1-m4-s12

There are multiple influences that interact to shape the structure and function of aquatic ecosystems

Analyses tend to be made from catchment level downwards

U1-m4-s13

There are multiple influences that interact to shape the structure and function of aquatic ecosystems and communities

organism

Habitat

Pressures

Physical condition or fitness

Availability of foodPredators

Heredity Aquatic organism or community

Competition

Need for effective, integrated, sustainable aquatic resource management and planning

U1-m4-s15

An integrated approach….An integrated approach….

SOCIO-ECONOMICS, STAKEHOLDERS, PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

ECOSYSTEM FUNCTION AND SERVICES, HABITATS, CHEMICAL & PHYSICAL PROPERTIES

U1-m4-s16

The Clean Water Act (CWA - USA)

1948 - Federal Water Pollution Control Act. 1972 – reorganized and expanded in 1972 - CWA.

Subsequent amendments 245 pages!!!

Basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the US waters and regulating quality standards for surface waters rivers, lakes, wetlands, and coastal waters.

“The objective…………to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.”

U1-m4-s17

Policy of the CWA

1. Discharge of pollutants into the navigable waters be eliminated by 1985;

2. Wherever attainable, an interim goal of water quality which provides for the protection and

propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife and provides for recreation in and on the water be

achieved by July 1, 1983;

3. Discharge of toxic pollutants in toxic amounts be prohibited;

4. Federal financial assistance be provided to construct publicly owned waste treatment works;

5. Area wide treatment management planning processes be developed and implemented to assure

adequate control of sources of pollutants in each State;

6. A major research and demonstration effort be made to develop technology necessary to eliminate

the discharge of pollutants into the navigable waters, waters of the contiguous zone and the

oceans; and

7. Programs for the control of nonpoint sources of pollution be developed and implemented in an

expeditious manner so as to enable the goals of this Act to be met through the control of both

point and nonpoint sources of pollution.

U1-m4-s18

THE WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE (WFD)

What it’s all about……………. briefly

U1-m4-s19

Why is the WFD so important?

Legislates to

Promote sustainable water consumption.

Obligate public involvement in the elaboration of River Basin

Management Plans

Protect the aquatic environment and associated wetlands: Establish monitoring programmes

Ecological monitoring

Prevent further deterioration

Protect and enhance status

Maintain “good” ecological status

mitigate the effects of floods and drought.

An excellent framework for

developing biomonitoring

programmes

(but the WFD is not perfect)

U1-m4-s20

“The WFD is intended to cover all water bodies in Europe, and is therefore a very wide-ranging legislative tool. Although it will contribute to freshwater conservation, it is intended primarily for the management of the water environment.

It is therefore appropriate that, in contrast to the Habitats Directive, the needs of people and wildlife are balanced.

…The European Environment Agency (2006) encourages the view that economic development and wildlife conservation are compatible. Moreover, wise use of aquatic resources must recognize the important ecosystem goods and services they provide.”

HATTON-ELLIS (2008). The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Water Framework Directive. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 18: 111–116

U1-m4-s21

WFD – primary objective

An environmental approachBasin level management of aquatic resourcesRiver Basin Management Plans

record the current status of water bodies within the river basin district;

Programmes of measures to meet the objectives; Reporting mechanism to the Commission and the public

Environmental objectives Achieve "good status" for all waters by 2015

Ecological monitoring, evaluation and classification of surface water bodies

Public participationAn economic perspective

The gradual payment of the real cost of services provided by waterImplement the “Polluter pays” principal

U1-m4-s22

WFD

Protect and enhance the quality of surface freshwater

lakes, streams, rivers, highly modified or artificial water bodies Ecological status/potential

Chemical status Groundwaters

Chemical status Groundwater dependant ecosystems Estuaries Coastal waters

one mile from low-water

U1-m4-s23

The Water Framework Directive

Sustainable management of aquatic resources A “holistic” approach A spatial framework instead of an administrative framework.

River Basin District natural geographical and hydrological unit

• an analysis of its characteristics,• a review of the impact of human activity on the status of surface waters and

on groundwater• an economic analysis of water use

biological elements & support elements Assess ecosystem status of surface water bodies programme of measures

U1-m4-s24

The Water Framework Directive - WFDThe Water Framework Directive - WFD

Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for

Community action in the field of water policy 23 October 2000

“Water is not a commercial product like any other but, rather, a heritage which must be protected,

defended and treated as such.”

“Waters in the Community are under increasing pressure from the continuous growth in demand

for sufficient quantities of good quality water for all purposes.

On 10 November 1995, the European Environment Agency in its report “Environment in the

European Union – 1995” presented an updated state of the environment report, confirming the

need for action to protect Community waters in qualitative as well as in quantitative terms.”

U1-m4-s25

U1-m4-s26

Transposed into national law (Portugal) Lei n.º 58/2005, de 29 de Dezembro

“A lei de água”

U1-m4-s27

River Basin Management Planning Process

U1-m4-s28

“in preparing its policy on the environment, the Community is to take

account of available scientific and technical data, environmental

conditions in the various regions of the Community, and the economic

and social development of the Community as a whole and the balanced

development of its regions as well as the potential benefits and costs of

action or lack of action.”

“WFD reflects strongly the history behind current European freshwater ecological

monitoring methods. Dating back to the late nineteenth century, major European countries

such as Germany, France, Belgium and Great Britain underwent considerable periods of

industrialisation and development, concomitant with substantial environmental degradation,

….

Further, major trans-national European rivers such as the Rhine carry wastes of these

activities across political boundaries, forcing neighbouring countries to collaborate or at

least work in parallel in implementing monitoring programmes and remedial measures..”

Hughes SJ and Malmqvist B. (2005) Atlantic Island freshwater ecosystems: challenges and considerations following the

EU Water Framework Directive. Hydrobiologia 544: 289-297. DOI 10.1007/s10750-005-1695-y

U1-m4-s29

Article 1

Establish a framework for the protection of inland surface waters, transitional waters, coastal

waters and groundwater which:

a)prevents further deterioration and protects and enhances the status of aquatic ecosystems and,

with regard to their water needs, terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands directly depending on the

aquatic ecosystems;

b)promotes sustainable water use based on a long-term protection of available water resources;

c)aims at enhanced protection and improvement of the aquatic environment, inter alia, through

specific measures for the progressive reduction of discharges, emissions and losses of priority

substances and the cessation or phasing-out of discharges, emissions and losses of the priority

hazardous substances;

d)ensures the progressive reduction of pollution of groundwater and prevents its further pollution,

and 

e)contributes to mitigating the effects of floods and droughts.

U1-m4-s30

Annex II Characterisation

WFD Ecoregions for rivers and lakes

U1-m4-s31

Annex II Characterisation

System ASystem A

Fixed TypologyFixed Typology DescriptorsDescriptors

EcoregionEcoregion Ecoregion on map A in Annex XIEcoregion on map A in Annex XI

TypeType Altitude typologyAltitude typology high: >800mhigh: >800m mid altitude: 200 to 800mmid altitude: 200 to 800m lowland:<200mlowland:<200m

Size typology based on catchment areaSize typology based on catchment area small: 10 – 100 kmsmall: 10 – 100 km22

medium: >100 kmmedium: >100 km22 to 1000 km to 1000 km22

large: >1000 kmlarge: >1000 km22 to 10 000 km to 10 000 km22

very large: > 10 000 kmvery large: > 10 000 km22

GeologyGeology calcareouscalcareous siliceoussiliceous organicorganic

U1-m4-s32

System BSystem B

Alternative Alternative CharacteristicsCharacteristics

Physical and chemical factors that determine the Physical and chemical factors that determine the characteristics of the river.......and hence the characteristics of the river.......and hence the biological population structure and compositionbiological population structure and composition

ObligatoryObligatory AltitudeAltitudeLatitudeLatitudeLongitudeLongitudeGeologyGeologySizeSize

OptionalOptional Distance from sourceDistance from sourceEnergy of flowEnergy of flowMean water widthMean water widthMean water depthMean water depthMean water slopeMean water slopeForm and shape of main Form and shape of main river bedriver bedFlow categoryFlow categoryValley shapeValley shape

Transport of solidsTransport of solidsAcid neutralising capacityAcid neutralising capacityMean substratum compositionMean substratum compositionChlorideChlorideAir temperature rangeAir temperature rangeMean air temperatureMean air temperaturePrecipitationPrecipitation

Annex II Characterisation

U1-m4-s33

System B (WFD, Annex II), morphoclimatic regions* and mineralization classes

•Combination of obligatory and optional factors•http://dqa.inag.pt/dqa2002/port/docs_apoio/doc_nac/Manuais/Caracterizacao_rios.pdf

Defining typology for Portugal

N

S

TemperaturePrecipitationFlow AltitudeMorphocliamtic regionsGeology – mineralizationclasses

U1-m4-s34

Portugal continental - 12 tipologias

U1-m4-s35

U1-m4-s36

River Basin Districts

U1-m4-s37

WFD - typologies

U1-m4-s38

WFD – determining surface water status

Chemical status

determined by detecting concentrations of a range of pollutants identified as impacting the whole of Europe.

If levels of these pollutants are below the threshold values set, a “good chemical status” has been achieved.

Groundwater is subject to the additional criteria that its conductivity is not impeded, that it is not causing a deterioration of

the ecological and chemical quality of surface waters, and that terrestrial ecosystems relying on groundwater are not

impaired.

Ecological status

determined by identifying the types of fauna and flora that act as biological quality elements.

Support elements

“good ecological status" - composition of the four quality components of fish, invertebrates, plankton and aquatic plants is

only slightly different from reference conditions.

Ecological potential

Artificial or significantly modified bodies of water,

quality goal is “good ecological potential“.

determined by identifying all human influences that could be removed without a significantly negative restriction on the body of

water’s usage.

U1-m4-s39

Characterising and classifying surface water status

Determine typology

Rivers

Lakes

Transitional waters

Coastal waters

Artificial & heavily modified surface waterbodies

Quality elements for determining Ecological Status or Ecological Potential Biological Quality Elements (BQE)

Hydromorphological support elements

Physicochemical support elements

5 quality classes

Ecological status High, Good, Moderate, Poor & Bad

Ecological potential Maximum, Good, Moderate, Poor & Bad

Chemical status

2 quality classes

Good or Failing to achieve Good

U1-m4-s40

Determining Ecological Status/Potential

Sampling Biological Elements Protocols for collecting

Determine metrics based on measures or Composition

Abundance

Diversity

Measure or assess support elements Hidromorphological

Physicochemical

PhytoplanktonPhytoplanktonMacrophytes Macrophytes and and PhytobenthosPhytobenthos

MacroinvertebratesMacroinvertebrates

FishFish

U1-m4-s41

Quality elements to be used for the assessment of ecological status/potential based on the list in Annex V, 1.1, of the WFD

U1-m4-s42

Metrics used in Portugal - rivers

Large Rivers?

Metrics for macrophytes and

fish under development

U1-m4-s43

Hydromorphological support elements - rivers

U1-m4-s44

Metrics used in Portugal - reservoirs

“Zooplankton is crucial! Its omission in WFD lake monitoring is unwise”

“As a matter of surprise to lake ecologists all over Europe, zooplankton is not considered a biological quality element in the European Water Framework Directive.”

“Combined approaches to set reference conditions are more useful than single ones”

“This also imposes unprecedented implications on the continuity of long-term monitoring subject, for instance, to climate change research.”

Adapted from Zooplankton as indicators in lakes: a scientific-based plea for including zooplankton in the ecological quality assessment of lakes according to the European Water Framework Directive (WFD); by Erik Jeppesen et al. 2011, Hydrobiologia, DOI 10.1007/s10750-011-0831-0)

U1-m4-s45

Quality elements and parameters

U1-m4-s46

Determining ecological status

• Compare results of metrics with Reference Conditions (RC)

• Determine the Ecological Quality Ratio (EQR)EQRs have typically been derived from detailed statistical analysis of large ecological

datasets.

Used to set Environmental Quality Standards (EQSs) that establish class boundaries

U1-m4-s47

The importance of Reference Conditions

U1-m4-s48

Determining ecological status

Ecológical Status

High Azul

Good Verde

Moderate Amarelo

Poor Laranja

Bad Vermelho

• Compare results of metrics with Reference Conditions (RC)• Determine the Ecological Quality Ratio (EQR)

• Classify – Ecological Status• High, Good, Moderate, Poor & Bad

U1-m4-s49

Classification of Surface Water Status

One out all out

U1-m4-s50

Classification of status using biological elements

U1-m4-s51

One out all out

U1-m4-s52

Intercalibration

U1-m4-s53

Classification of surface water statusClassification of surface water status

Primary constraints

interactions among management

objectives,

time lines,

funding,

institutional constraints of participants.

Secondary constraints

survey design (geographic extent, sample

size, use of existing data)

logistics (sampling period, sample

shipping, information management, crew

expertise, field training),

suite of ecological indicators selected

(site-scale sampling design, field and

laboratory protocols).

Hughes RM & DV Peck (2008) Acquiring data for large aquatic resource surveys: the art of compromise among science, logistics and reality. J.N. Am. Benthol. Soc. 27(4): 837-859.

U1-m4-s54

Classification of surface water statusClassification of surface water status

What about the gaps?

Spatially explicit Modelling methodology Stochastic dynamic methodology (StDM)

U1-m4-s55

Ecological Potential

Ecological status – natural water bodies

Ecological potential – heavily modified or artificial water bodies ‘Artificial water bodies’

created by human activity a reservoir

‘Heavily modified water bodies’ (HMWB) a water body resulting from physical alterations by human activity,

which substantially changes its hydrogeomorphological character, e.g. a harbour.

Maximum “ecological potential” No reference conditions

U1-m4-s56

Classifiaction of Ecological Potential

EU Member States Phytoplankton – classification of lakes & reservoirs

Is it wise to monitor ecological quality using a single Biological Quality Element?

Classificação do potencial ecológico

Código de coresMassas de água artificiais Massas de água fortemente

modificadas

Bom e superior Riscas verdes e cinzentas claras Riscas verdes e cinzentas escuras

Razoável Riscas amarelas e cinzentas claras Riscas amarelas e cinzentas escuras

Medíocre Riscas laranja e cinzentas claras da Riscas laranja e cinzentas escuras

Mau Riscas vermelhas e cinzentas claras Riscas vermelhas e cinzentas escuras

Table

U1-m4-s57

At least “Good” status for all types of water bodies by 2015

U1-m4-s58

WFD

River Basin Management Planning

U1-m4-s59

Monitoring – classification - planning

U1-m4-s60

River Basin Managment Plans (RBMP)

River Basin District Geographically - not politically defined

management unit Planning and management instrument

Basis for management support Programme of measures

meet WFD environmental objectives Protection

& enhancement of environmental, social and economic factors

6 yearly cycle Public Participation

ORDENAMENTO

U1-m4-s61

Monitorização das Águas Interiores do Norte de Portugal

DQA Planos de Gestão das Regiões

Hidrográficas (PGRH)

Rios 171 locais de amostragem 6 tipologias

Albufeiras 15 locais de amostragem 2 tipologias

U1-m4-s62

River Basin Management Planning

U1-m4-s63

THE WFD IN DETAIL

U1-m4-s64

Excerpts from the WFD

“It is necessary to develop an integrated Community policy on water.”

“On 29 May 1995 the Commission adopted a communication to the European Parliament and the Council on the wise use and

conservation of wetlands, which recognised the important functions they perform for the protection of water resources.”

“Community policy on the environment is to contribute to pursuit of the objectives of preserving, protecting and improving the quality of

the environment, in prudent and rational utilisation of natural resources, ……..preventive action should be taken, environmental

damage should, as a priority, be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay”

U1-m4-s65

“close cooperation and coherent action at Community, Member State and local level as well as on information, consultation and

involvement of the public, including users.”

“Further integration of protection and sustainable management of water into other Community policy areas such as energy,

transport, agriculture, fisheries, regional policy and tourism is necessary.”

“An effective and coherent water policy must take account of the vulnerability of aquatic ecosystems located near the coast and

estuaries or in gulfs or relatively closed seas, as their equilibrium is strongly influenced by the quality of inland waters

flowing into them.”

U1-m4-s66

“This Directive aims at maintaining and improving the aquatic environment in the Community. This purpose is primarily concerned

with the quality of the waters concerned. Control of quantity is an ancillary element in securing good water quality and therefore

measures on quantity…”

“…quantitative status of a body of groundwater may have an impact on the ecological quality of surface waters and terrestrial ecosystems

associated with that groundwater body.”

U1-m4-s67

“….Directive is to contribute to the progressive reduction of emissions of hazardous substances to water…”

“Common principles are needed in order to coordinate Member States' efforts to improve the protection of Community waters …… to promote

sustainable water use, to contribute to the control of transboundary water problems…..to protect aquatic ecosystems, and terrestrial

ecosystems and wetlands directly depending on them, ……………to safeguard and develop the potential uses of Community waters.”

“Environmental objectives ……………..to ensure that good status of surface water and groundwater is achieved throughout the Community and that deterioration in the status of waters is prevented at Community

level.”

U1-m4-s68

Member States should aim to achieve the objective of at least good water status by defining and implementing the necessary measures within

integrated programmes of measures, taking into account existing Community requirements.

In aiming to achieve the objectives set out in this Directive, and in establishing a programme of measures to that end, Member States may

phase implementation of the programme of measures in order to spread the costs of implementation

U1-m4-s69

“analyses of the characteristics of a river basin and the impacts of human activity as well as an economic analysis of water use. The development in water status should be

monitored by Member States on a systematic and comparable basis …”

U1-m4-s70

“Undertake analyses of the characteristics of a river basin and the impacts of human activity as well as

an economic analysis of water use. The development in water status should be monitored by

Member States on a systematic and comparable basis throughout the Community.”

Setting up a Monitoring Programme

Using the WFD as a guideline to developing biomonitoring programmes

U1-m4-s72

WHY DO WE NEED BIOMONITORING?

U1-m4-s73

Reasons for Monitoring Surface Waters

Monitoring information is needed for: Classification of status of all water bodies or groups of water bodies. To support risk assessment procedures. Design of future monitoring programmes. Assessment of long-term changes whose causes are both natural

and anthropogenic. Assessment of compliance with standards and objectives. Estimation of pollution load transfers across international boundaries

or into seas. Assessing the efficacy of measures applied to water bodies

designated as at risk. Ascertaining formerly unidentified reasons for failure to achieve

environmental objectives. Assessing the impact of accidental pollution. Use in inter-calibration exercises

U1-m4-s74

The WFD – provides an excellent framework Which biological, physical and chemical parameters should

be measured How deviations from reference condition should be defined

and enumerated design of monitoring programmes presentation of results timetables for completion of different tasks Recognises the importance of

Ecological factors Hydrology River continuity Morphological conditions

U1-m4-s75

The WFD - an excellent general framework for Ecological Status classification and biomonitoring criteria and programme development

Development of typologically appropriate monitoring and assessment methods.

Ecological Status classification Integration of different types of information on

water bodiesBiological Quality ElementsChemical Physicochemical Quality ElementsHydromorphological Quality Elements.

U1-m4-s76

The seven habits of highly effective monitoring programmes

1. Design the program around clear and compelling scientific questions.

Questions are crucial because they determine the variables measured, spatial extent of sampling, intensity and

duration of the measurements, and, ultimately, the usefulness of the data.

2. Include review, feedback, and adaptation in the design.

The guiding questions may change over time, and the measurements should be designed to accommodate such

changes.

“Are our questions still relevant and are the data still providing an answer?”

Capacity to adapt to changing questions and incorporate changing technology without losing the continuity of its core

measurements.

3. Choose measurements carefully and with the future in mind.

Not every variable can be monitored.

Selected core measurements should be important as either basic measures of system function, indicators of

change, or variables of particular human interest.

Monitoring change in a statistical population, measurements should be carefully chosen to provide a statistically

representative sample of that population.

Measurements should be as inexpensive as possible because the cost of the program may determine its long-

term sustainability.

Lovett et al: Who needs environmental monitoring? Front Ecol Environ 2007; 5(5): 253–260

U1-m4-s77

The seven habits of highly effective monitoring programmes

4. Maintain quality and consistency of the data.

The best way to ensure that data will not be used is to compromise quality or to change measurement methods or collection sites repeatedly.

The confidence of future users of the data will depend entirely on the quality assurance program implemented at the outset.

Sample collections and measurements should be rigorous, repeatable, well documented, and employ accepted methods.

Methods should be changed only with great caution, and any changes should be recorded and accompanied by an extended period in which both the new and the old methods are used in parallel, to establish comparability.

5. Plan for long-term data accessibility and sample archiving.

Metadata should provide all the relevant details of collection, analysis, and data reduction. Raw data should be stored in an accessible form to allow new summaries or analyses if necessary. Raw data, metadata, and descriptions of procedures should be stored in multiple locations.

Data collected with public funding should be made available promptly to the public.

Policies of confidentiality, data ownership, and data hold-back times should be established at the outset. Archiving of soils, sediments, plant and animal material, and water and air samples provides an invaluable opportunity for re-analysis of these samples in the future.

Lovett et al: Who needs environmental monitoring? Front Ecol Environ 2007; 5(5): 253–260

U1-m4-s78

The seven habits of highly effective monitoring programmes

6. Continually examine, interpret, and present the monitoring data.

The best way to catch errors or notice trends is for scientists and other concerned individuals to use

the data rigorously and often.

Commit resources to managing data and evaluating, interpreting, and publishing results. These are

crucial components of successful monitoring programs, but planning for them often receives low

priority compared to actual data collection.

7. Include monitoring within an integrated research program.

An integrated program may include modeling, experimentation, and cross-site comparisons. This

multi-faceted approach is the best way to ensure that the data are useful and, indeed, are used.

Lovett et al: Who needs environmental monitoring? Front Ecol Environ 2007; 5(5): 253–260

U1-m4-s79

Annex II - Characterisation of surface water body types

SURFACE WATERSTypology

Ecoregion Fixed or alternative characterisation of surface water

bodies• Rivers• Lakes• Transitional • Coastal• Artificial or highly modified

Reference Conditions Pressures and Impacts

U1-m4-s80

Establishing Typology - Annex II

Ecoregion

Fixed or alternative characterisation of surface water bodies

U1-m4-s81

Rivers

U1-m4-s82

Rivers

U1-m4-s83

Lakes

U1-m4-s84

Lakes

U1-m4-s85

Defining Reference conditions - Annex II

Defining Reference conditions

US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

U1-m4-s86

Annex II - Identifying pressures and assessment of impact

U1-m4-s87

Annex V

Quality elements for the classification of ecological status

Normative definitions of ecological status classifications

Monitoring of ecological status and chemical status for surface waters

Classification and presentation of ecological status

U1-m4-s88

BQE – types of metrics that can be used.

U1-m4-s89

Bioassessment of Portuguese reservoirs using chironomid pupal exuviae

U1-m4-s90

THE WFD ISN’T PERFECT….

U1-m4-s91

DEFINING TYPOLOGY….

U1-m4-s92

Outdated Ecoregions

WFD Ecoregions for rivers and lakes

The outline made by J. Illies (1978) in Limnofauna Europaea (G. Fischer Verlag, Stuttgart) has been used as a basis for the WFD Ecoregions.

U1-m4-s93

LIMITED USE OF BIOLOGICAL QUALITY ELEMENTS FOR LENTIC SURFACE WATER BODIES

U1-m4-s94

Metrics used in Portugal - reservoirs

“Zooplankton is crucial! Its omission in WFD lake monitoring is unwise”

“As a matter of surprise to lake ecologists all over Europe, zooplankton is not considered a biological quality element in the European Water Framework Directive.”

“Combined approaches to set reference conditions are more useful than single ones”

“This also imposes unprecedented implications on the continuity of long-term monitoring subject, for instance, to climate change research.”

Adapted from Zooplankton as indicators in lakes: a scientific-based plea for including zooplankton in the ecological quality assessment of lakes according to the European Water Framework Directive (WFD); by Erik Jeppesen et al. 2011, Hydrobiologia, DOI 10.1007/s10750-011-0831-0)

U1-m4-s95

ARE EQR’S EFFECTIVE AS MEASURES OF ECOLOGICAL QUALITY?

U1-m4-s96

What are the EQR’s really measuring?

EQRs have typically been derived from detailed statistical analysis of large ecological datasets, used to set Environmental Quality Standards that

establish class boundaries. Are European environmental standards being

erected on the basis of statistical distributions or ecological impacts? Are the patterns real?

HATTON-ELLIS (2008). The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Water Framework Directive. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 18: 111–116

U1-m4-s97

CLIMATE CHANGE…..

U1-m4-s98

MEDITERRANEAN REGION: Reduced water availability, increased drought, severe biodiversity loss, increase in forest fires, reduced suitable cropping areas, increased summer energy demand, reduced

hydropower

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch12s12-4.html

Simulations based on a doubling in atmospheric CO2 predict a 1.7– 7 ºC

increase in air temperature by 2100 (IPCC, 2007).

U1-m4-s99

Future climate in Portugal

Global Climate Model (GCM) simulations Clear upward trend Significant warming in 21st century

Temperature increase of 4-7ºC by 2100 Tipping point – 2200?

U1-m4-s100

U1-m4-s101

Widely accepted climate change scenarios (Europe)

More frequent droughts in summer, as well as flash-flooding, uncontrolled discharges from urban areas to receiving water courses and estuaries.

Invasion by alien species migration of species within the UK adapting to changing temperatures and flow

regimes. Lower flows, reduced velocities

higher water residence times in rivers and lakes Enhance potential for toxic algal blooms and reduce dissolved oxygen levels.

Upland streams increased dissolved organic carbon and colour levels, requiring action at water

treatment plants to prevent toxic by-products entering public water supplies. Storms that terminate drought periods will flush nutrients from urban and rural areas or

generate acid pulses in acidified upland catchments. Policy responses to climate change, such as the growth of bio-fuels or emission controls,

will further impact freshwater quality.

Whitehead et al (2009). A review of the potential impacts of climate change on surface water quality. Hydrological Sciences–Journal–des Sciences Hydrologiques, 54(1)

U1-m4-s102

Rivers & streams

FunctionDecomposition, photosynthesis

autochthonous & allochthonous input

Reduced ecosystem services

Changes in vegetationRiparian gallery structure and

complexityPresence/expansion of exotics &

Invasive species

Biological elementsTaxonomic and trait shiftsGrowth rates/metabolism

Survival/ ExtinctionMicrobial activity

FlowConnectivity Recruitment

Habitat heterogeneityHydromorphology

Sediment transport

Physicochemical alterationsTemperature

DODilution of pollutants

Shifts in biodiversity and ecosystem resilience

U1-m4-s103

Climate change and reference conditions

U1-m4-s104

Guidance document No. 24“RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT IN A CHANGING

CLIMATE”

“Apart from exceptional circumstances, it is not expected that, within the timeframe of WFD implementation (i.e. up to 2027) and within the metrics used for status assessment, a climate change signal will be statistically distinguishable from the effects of other human pressures at a level requiring reclassification of sites.”

Modelling…………….

U1-m4-s105