1. Polsko-Norweski Fundusz Badań Naukowych / Polish-Norwegian Research Fund WBs assessment AFTER DISCUSSION Expert views Warsaw, 10.02.2011

2. Polsko-Norweski Fundusz Badań Naukowych / Polish-Norwegian Research Fund LAKES Phytoplankton Officially accepted assessment based on Chla. Method suggested for Polish lakes - 3 components. Boundary values for multimetric too stringent. Site-specific reference values (historical data) higher comparing to type-specific. We expect too much from Wel catchment lakes in terms of phytoplankton metrics for good status.

3. Polsko-Norweski Fundusz Badań Naukowych / Polish-Norwegian Research Fund Macrophytes ESMI, in its present form, overestimates assessment (raises status class). New boundary values will be set (Agnieszka’s presentation). New lake WBs classification more reasonable. Phytobenthos Low uncertainty of the multimetric value. Majority of WBs in good status based on phytobenthos. Phytobenthos provides rather local assessment of littoral zone than whole lake assessmnt.

4. Polsko-Norweski Fundusz Badań Naukowych / Polish-Norwegian Research Fund BMI Assesment method based on Chironomid pupal exuviae. Method developed within a project on relatively small database, additionally dominated by lakes of good water quality. Boundary values uncertain, too stringent. More data needed to rafine class boundaries. Fish Classification shows only hierarchy of Wel catchment lakes in respect of ecologica status. An attempt was made to transform this classification into „open system” compliant with WFD (Witold’s presentation).

5. Polsko-Norweski Fundusz Badań Naukowych / Polish-Norwegian Research Fund Waterbody name Type Hydromorphology Phys-chem parameters Phytoplankton (PMPL) Macrophytes (ESMI) Phytobenthos (OJ) BMI (BQI_CPET) Fish ("summ best") Dąbrowa Wielka3a14GOOD2,980,7080,70,530,81 Dąbrowa Mała2a14 GOOD 3,040,5160,820,431 Rumian3a14 GOOD 3,480,4150,70,380,61 Zarybinek3b14GOOD3,040,3170,590,360,35 Tarczyńskie3b12 Failing to achieve good 4,420,360,560,090 Grądy3a12 Failing to achieve good 3,490,3710,790,060,26 Lidzbarskie3a16 Failing to achieve good 3,290,3520,670,240,32 Kiełpińskie3a12GOOD 0,930,4250,690,591 Hartowieckie3b16GOOD 2,70,4810,780,310,29 Zwiniarz3b14 Failing to achieve good 4,090,280,850,280,19 LAKES - after discussion

6. Polsko-Norweski Fundusz Badań Naukowych / Polish-Norwegian Research Fund RIVERS Assessment based on fish most confusing. EFI+ method not applicable to headwater streams (if only one fish species present). EFI+ method does not work in river stretches connecting lakes - it downgrades such a river. EFI+ method is not sensitive to a presence of unexpected lake species (migrating from a lake) – it downgrades a river. Fish are very sensitive to hy-mo modifications, other BQEs not. Human pressure on fish includes recreational fishery, stocking, poaching, what does not influence other BQEs. EFI+ method shows moderate uncertainty.

7. Polsko-Norweski Fundusz Badań Naukowych / Polish-Norwegian Research Fund Waterbody nameTypeHydromorphology Phys-chem parameters Macrophytes (MIR) Phytobenthos (IO) BMI (IM)Fish (EFI+) Wel 118GOOD 46,80,660,71n/a Mała Wkra 218POORGOOD51,60,690,650,54 Wel 425HIGH GOOD430,740,61IBI Rumienica 518POOR Failing to achieve good 44,70,660,61Expert Wel 625GOOD 34,50,720,6IBI Wel 725GOOD 47,60,80,58IBI Płośniczanka 818BAD Failing to achieve good 380,570,630,16 Wel 925HIGH GOOD400,620,590,54 Wel 10, Wel 1120HIGH GOOD43,60,680,590,57 Dopływ spod Mroczna 12 17BADGOOD37,10,740,650,77 Dopływ z jeziora Kiełpińskiego 13 17POORGOOD37,70,520,68expert Wel 14; Wel 1520POOR GOOD33,50,620,580,32 Katlewka 1617HIGH Failing to achieve good 26,90,560,640,1 Struga 1718POOR Failing to achieve good 45,90,530,670,73 Prątnica (Wólka) 18, Prątnica (Linowiec) 19 18MODERATEGOOD37,90,490,680,88 Wel we wsi Bratian20 GOOD 0,630,620,9 RIVERS – after discussion