1. CIS - Project 2.4 Transitional and Coastal Waters
Uli Claussen
after
Claire Vincent
WFD Coast Guard
(Environment and Heritage Service
United Kingdom)

2. Introduction Timescales & Starting Point
WP1 Common Understanding of Terms
WP2 Typology
WP3 Reference Conditions
WP4 Classification
Summary
Steering
Group UK
Sweden
Germany
EEA
France

3. 2003 - Site selection, Intercalibration
Timescales….
Site selection, Intercalibration
Characterisation
Monitoring
Programmes
River Basin
District Plan
Characterisation includes
typology map,
an assessment of pressures and impacts inc.
a judgement on water bodies that may fail to meet good status
and
an economic analysis of water use.
MSs must aim ro meet good status
Good
Status
2015

4. Starting Point Typology No networks of reference condition types/sites
No existing classification schemes meeting all the need of WFD

5. Update from the Commission
ECOSTAT Cluster
2.3 REFCOND COAST –
2.5 INTERCALIBRATION
cross-cutting issues (defining high status, boundaries between high, good and moderate etc.)
Common Format of Guidance
Communication strategy
Tasks from the Commission

8. WP1 Common Understanding
Draft paper covering
Water categories, transitional and coastal
not prescriptive, outlining valid methods
Water Bodies
Types
Forwarded to the Commission
Draft for Water Directors, June
Assigning coastal waters to River Basin Districts
Lead WP1 - Germany and United Kingdom

9. Coastal Water Water Bodies As Management Units
(or Compliance Checking Units)
Type B
Type A
Protected
Area
(bathing
beach)
Protected
Area (SAC)
Low
Pressure
Coastal
Water
Significant
Pressure
Transitional
Water
Significant
Pressure
Low
Pressure

10. Assigning Coastal Waters to River Basin Districts
How to define water bodies (Management Units):
On the map, draw the following boundaries:
OSPAR HELCOM areas
MS borders
Ecoregion
Protected areas
River Basin District
Category changes
Type
HMW
Pressure changes
When drawing boundaries,
apply these principles:
Minimise number of boundaries
Try not to cut natural units (e.g. bays)

11. WP2 Typology Hierarchical approach
Mandatory factors
lat, long
tidal range
salinity
Venice
System
Optional factors
exposure
depth
the others
Lead WP2 - Germany

12. WP2 Typology
Lead WP2
Germany

13. WP2 Typology Lead WP2 - Germany
Identification of common Types continued in Stockholm (May 2002):
Eurotypes proposed
‘pan-European’ approach chosen – ecoregion approach removed from Guidance
Major step forward for Intercalibration
Lead WP2 - Germany

14. WP3 Reference Conditions
‘High ecological status’
undisturbed biology
no, or only very minor, anthropogenic alterations to the physicochemistry and hydromorphology of the water body
use predictive models or hind-casting, species or groups of species (indicators)
expert judgement
Anchor for classification schemes
Provide direction for restoration - not target
Member states to define ‘reference conditions’ within a water body type
Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

15. WP3 Reference Conditions
Agreed a draft ‘generic’ guidance
Principles of defining type specific reference conditions
Initiated pilot studies
Draft will be available for WD not including examples
Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

16. WP3 Reference Conditions
Initiated pilot studies - 7 received so far
high status sites
‘best of type’ sites - may not be of high status
These Pilot studies are located in:
DK (Randers Fjord)
POR (Mira Estuary & Ria Formosa)
N (North Sea Skagerrak Open Sea Coast)
UK (Strangford Loch, Lochs Creran & Ardbhair)
Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

17. Denmark Randers Fjord

18. Mira Estuary
Portugal
Ria Formosa

19. Norway
North Sea Skagerrak Open Rocky Coast

20. United Kingdom Strangford Lough Loch Creran Loch Ardbhair

21. WP3 Reference Conditions - Key issues
‘very minor disturbance’
the relationship between ecologically high status and supporting physico-chemical status (synthetic pollutants - below LOD)
Are there any high status sites in Europe?
‘other significant pressures’ - trawling - impact on benthic communities - good and moderate status
Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

22. WP3 Reference Conditions - Key issues
The discussions on Reference Conditions high-
lighted inter alia:
Reference conditions may be qualitative or quantitative (the latter is preferred);
Derivation and use of reference conditions are method-dependant;
Reference conditions should be formulated taking into account the classification systems.
Lead WP3 - United Kingdom

23. Classification schemes - Annex V
Fish
Phytoplankton
Ecological
Quality
Benthic
Infauna
Macroalgae
Angiosperms
Benthos - well developed, qa schemes inc NMMP
Phytoplankton - some monitoring, fisheries labs - shellfish hygiene, qa under development. Not in NMMP
Big plants - some monitoring, conservation agencies. Not wide spread. qa not developed. Not in NMMP
Fish (transitional waters only) - some monitoring, not all estuaries. qa not developed. Contaminants in fish NMMP

24. WP4 Classification Schemes
Collating information on
existing schemes
biological classification tools
national schemes
schemes from Conventions
Identify tools which are WFD compliant to be included in guidance
Go shopping, e.g. the harmonised OSPAR Eutrophication Assessment (MS should test those tools)
Lead WP4 - EEA/WTC

25. Timescale Stylise Further edits SCG & WD WD Meeting 2-3 May 10-12 June
3rd Working Group Meeting WD
Meeting
Steering Group Meeting
Steering Group Meeting
2-3 May
10-12 June
27-28 June
?? Sept
30 Sept

26. Summary Draft guidance June for WD meeting
CUT
Typology
Reference conditions
Classification
Horizontal Water Body guidance via SCG to WD meeting
Use the existing expertise from Conventions
Expert judgement will be a crucial element in marine systems

27. Claire´s Trident Always smiling Chair Claire (Coastguard)
Famous Assistant
Julia
Always smiling
Chair Claire
(Coastguard)

28. What we are aiming at?

29. Bedrock on NW coast of Rathlin Island with crayfish and grey sponge

30. Ecological Quality Ratio1
Status
Deviation
Relation of observed values of Biological
parameters
Very minor
High
Slight
Good
EQR = to
Moderate
Moderate
Reference values of
biological parameters
Poor
Bad

31. Biological Quality Elements
Benthic Invertebrate Fauna
Composition & abundance,
Disturbance sensitive & pollution indicator species
Macroalgae / angiosperms
Composition & abundance
Phytoplankton
Composition, abundance & biomass
Bloom frequency and intensity.
Fish
Disturbance sensitive species

32. Pragmatism
Sensible
Practical
Realistic
Logical
Systematic
Orderly

33. Tasks from the Commission
Plans for ‘Life after guidance’
Guidance on assigning coastal waters to River Basin Districts