REFERENCE VALUES experiences from the TMAP and QSR 2004

TMAP monitoring cycle Wadden Sea Targets Monitoring Common Package Target Assessment (QSR)

Reference values In Wadden Sea Plan (1997) Targets: – Direction of development – Values mostly non-explicit References values: –Explicit (e.g., hazardous substances) –Non-explicit

Some examples 1.Nutrients & Eutrophication 2.Hazardous substances 3.Salt marshes 4.Zostera fields 5.Blue mussel beds 6.Macrozoobenthos

1: Nu trients and Eutrophication Target: –A Wadden Sea which can be considered as a eutrophication non-problem area Evaluation criteria: –Decreased nutrient input & concentrations –Decreased chlorophyll levels –Low occurrence of phytoplankton blooms –Low occurrence of green macroalgae

Nutrients and Eutrophication – contd. Reference values –P- and N-concentrations: as in the 1960s –Chlorophyll levels:??? –Phytoplankton blooms: ??? –Green macroalgae:before 1980s Reference values based on long-term data

2: Hazardous substances Targets: –Natural micropollutants: Background concentrations in water, sediment and indicator species –Man-made substances: Concentrations as resulting from zero discharges Evaluation criteria: –Concentrations as in proper reference data

3: Salt marshes Targets: –An increased area of natural salt marshes –An increased natural morphology and dynamics, including natural drainage patterns, of artificial salt marshes, […….] –An improved natural vegetation structure, including the pioneer zone, of artificial salt marshes

S alt marshes – contd. Evaluation criteria: –Area of natural salt marshes:hectares –Natural morphology & dynamics, ha without incl. natural drainage patterns:artif.drainage –Natural vegetation structure:??? (alternative: diverse vegetation): (TMAP typology)

4: Zostera fields Target: –An increased area of, and a more natural distribution and development of [……] Zostera fields Evaluation criteria: –Increased area:ha & coverage –More natural distribution ….:??? (habitat maps) Reference: historic data (by region)

5: Blue mussel beds Target: –An increased area of, and a more natural distribution and development of [……] blue mussel beds Evaluation criteria: –Increased area:ha (harmonized method) –More natural distribution ….:??? (habitat maps) Reference: –Intertidal beds: historic data (range) –Subtidal beds:???

6: Macrozoobenthos Targets: –A natural dynamic situation in the Tidal Area –An increased area of geomorphologically and biologically undisturbed tidal flats and subtidal areas –Favourable food availability for migrating and breeding birds Evaluation criteria:???

Conclusions (1) WSP Targets: –Defined in rather general terms –Defined as ‘directions’ (increase, decrease) –Not well defined in terms of measurable parameters –Not specified for different regions

Conclusions (2) Evaluation criteria: –Not always well defined Reference values: –Partly available from long-term monitoring –Partly absent; to be defined

The way ahead Ministerial Declaration, Esbjerg 2001 –Implementation of § 81: “to further optimize the TMAP for future requirements, in particular with regard to the Targets, the EU Habitats Directive and the EU Water Framework Directive…” TMAG: three step approach

Definition of common monitoring objectives –Combining requirements of EU Directives and Targets Development of common monitoring programme –E.g., quantifiable monitoring objectives Streamlining of assessment & reporting activities –Multi-use of national, trilateral and EU-reporting