senatsverwaltung für gesundheit, umwelt und verbraucherschutz project meeting enwama in belfast,...
TRANSCRIPT
Senatsverwaltung für Gesundheit, Umwelt und Verbraucherschutz
Project meeting ENWAMA in Belfast, 10. March 2010
Christian Wolter, Tanja Pottgiesser, Jochem Kail, Martin
Halle, Ute Mischke, Klaus van de Weyer, Matthias
Rehfeld-Klein, Antje Köhler
PEWA:
Good Ecological Potential of
Waterways in the Elbe river basin
• about 2360 km waterways (except Elbe)
• rivers and lakes
• about 1500 km of waterways discussed in the project
• 70 % of these preliminary defined as "heavily modified water body" or "artificial water body"
Introduction
Waterways in Berlin
Objectives• Environmental sound / natural hydraulics
• Natural morpho-dynamics
• Connectivity
• Habitat quality of bed and banks
• Habitat quality of riparian zone and floodplain
• Natural flood protection
Human activities / claims• Navigation (freight VDE 17, tourists)
• Flood protection
• Industry
• Receiving water
• Settlement in river flood plains
• …
Objectives
Objectives of the project
• derivation of good ecological potential for federal- und landwaterways of the Elbe river basin
- development of a new method
- application on two examples
• guide for planning ecological measures
- assortment of effective and useful measures, which can be combined with the actual use (navigation, flood protection …)
- develope short but expressive descriptions of the measure characteristics
Employer
Employee
Biologists
Associated administration
Senat administration of health, environment
and consumer protection
Umweltbüro Essen
Biologists Associated administration
• The german federal instititute of hydrology
• Leibniz-institute of freshwater ecology and inland fisheries
• lanaplan - Macrophyte Services and Scientific Underwater Photography
• Administration of waterway new construction
• The german federal instititute of hydrology
• Water and navigation administration
• Federal waterways engineering and research institute
• The Federal Environment Agency
• Environment Agency Brandenburg
• Agency of flood protection and water resources management Sachsen-Anhalt
Defining good ecological potential
according to the „Prague approach“ (good practice paper)
Step 1: Measures to reach maximum ecological potential (MEP) Excluding measures having a significant adverse effect
Step 2: Measures to reach good ecological potential (GEP)Further excluding measures that, in combination, probably only deliver slight ecological improvement
Step 3: Abiotic conditions (GEP)Assessing the effect on hymorhpoligic and physico-chemical conditions
Step 4: Biological state (GEP)Assessing the biological state based on the abiotic conditions
Step 5: Programme of Measures (not part of Prague approach)Describing GEP measures in detailConsidering costsExtension of deadlines or defining less stringent objectives, if necessary
Ab
ioti
c co
nd
itio
ns
bio
log
ical
sta
te
(ME
P)
Prague approach
Strategy
Step 2: Mesures (GEP)
Step 3: Abiotic conditions (GEP)
Step 1: Mesures (MEP)
Step 2: Abiotic conditions (MEP)
Step 3: Biologic characteristics (MEP)
Step 4: Biologic state (GEP)
Step 5: Abiotic conditions(GEP)
Step 6: Maesures (GEP)
Step 7 respective 5: Programme of messures
according to the „Prague approach“ (good practice paper)
Defining good ecological potential …
... according to the HMWB code of practice
Step 4: Biologic state (GEP)
Grouping of water bodies Grouping of the waterways in the Elbe catchment
(= „HMWB classification“)
Measures
Abiotic conditions
Good ecological potential
Major steps
Major steps in defining GEP in the PEWA project
Grouping of water bodies based on natural conditions and specific uses:
• River width• Shipping lane width• Impoundments (impounded, free-flowing)• Land use (urban, non-urban)
(terrestrial development potential)• River width / shipping land width ratio
(aquatic development potential)
Case groups
17 groups
Group Characteristics
BW1 • Federal waterway • River width class: 10-25 m, >25-40 m und >40-70 m • Shipping lane width: about 30 m or about 40 m • River width / shipping land width ratio ≤2, low aquatic development potential • Impounded or artificial • Urban land-use; low terrestrial development potential
Example: BW 1 and BW 6
Type: Large sand- and clay characterized lowland rivers
Grouping of water bodies
Measures Selecting specific, effective combinations of measures
Abiotic conditions
Good ecological potential
Major steps
Major steps in defining GEP in the PEWA project
Measures
Catalogue of Measures
Main categories / objectives
1 Reestablishing ecological sound hydraulics
2 Promoting natural morphodynamics
3 Improving connectivity
4 Improving instream habitat quality
5 Improving offstream habitat quality
6 Promoting natural flood protection
Measures
Maesure characteristics
Allg
emei
ne B
esch
reib
ung
With judgement of realization (compatibility with human activity, maintenance effort, costs…)
•Human activity with relevance for environment shipping, flood protection…
•Deficit
•Description of measure
•Type of measureconstruction, sound maintenance
•Precondition for realization
•Combination possibility
•Relevance to group of waterbody
Measures
Maesure characteristics
Wirk
ung
der
Maß
nahm
e
•Hydromorphological consequences
•Effects on physico-chemical quality elements
•Effects on biologische quality elements
•Consequences for human activities
•Relevance for flood protection
•Maintenance effort
•Cost efficiency
Measures
Measure Effects on
Phyto- Macro- Macro- Fishplankton phytes invertebrates
Remove revetments 0 ++ +++ +++
Modify channel + +++ +++ +++
Construct bypass 0 0 ++ +++
Leave, introduce large wood 0 + ++ +
Allow bars + ++ +++ ++
Improve vegetation + +++ ++ ++
Parallel off-bank revetments 0 +++ +++ ++
Flow protected shallow littoral 0 +++ +++ +++
Allow, preserve pools 0 0 + ++
Ecolog. sound water maintenance 0 ++ +++ +++
Ecolog. sound navigation 0 + ++ +++ ….
ecological effectivness: +++ = high, ++ = middle, + = low, 0 = little / none
Measures
Maesure combinations
17 17 17 19 15 Shallow littoral
0,6,6,516 151816 Off-bank revetments
1,6,5,51,6,5,416 18 16 Improve vegetation
1,5,6,50,5,6,42,5,5,418 16 Allow bars
1,6,6,61,6,6,52,6,5,52,5,6,518 Modify channel profile
0,5,6,60,5,6,51,5,5,51,4,6,51,5,6,6Remove revetments
Sh
allo
w
litto
ral
Off-
ban
k re
vetm
en
ts
Imp
rove
ve
ge
tatio
n
Allo
w b
ars
Mo
dify
ch
an
nel p
rofil
e
Re
mo
ve
reve
tme
nts
0,3,5,60,3,5,51,3,4,51,2,5,513 Construct bypass
0,3,4,60,3,4,51,3,3,51,2,4,510 Fish migration facility
Cons
truct
byp
ass
Fis
h m
igra
tion
fa
cilit
y
1,3,4,6
0,2,5,6 0,0,4,6
1,3,5,6
14
15
14
13
13
13
13
12
12
12
Value of effects per
taxaValue of effects total
Grouping of water bodies
Measures
Abiotic conditions Assessing the abiotic conditions after implementation of the measures
(hydromorphological, trophic, saprobic conditions)
Good ecological potential
Major steps
Major steps in defining GEP in the PEWA project
Grouping of water bodies
Measures
Good ecological potential
Abiotic conditions
Abiotic conditions of GEP
Ab
ioti
c C
on
dit
ion
s
Metthods
Results
Selection of habitats and parameters (Morphology: substrates, flow diversity, ....; water quality: trophic,
saprobic state) to describe abiotic conditions
Description of habitats and parameters at present state
Assessing effects of measures to habitats
Description of measure characteristic with reference to chosen case groups and type, effects for these
Description of abiotic conditions of GEP for chosen case groups and type characteristics
Grouping of water bodies
Measures
Abiotic conditions
Good ecological potentialDescribing good ecological potential for all biological quality elements
(fish, invertebrates, macrophytes, phytoplankton)
Major steps
Major steps in defining GEP in the PEWA project
Good ecological potential
GROUPING OF WATER BODIES
MEASURES
ABIOTIC CONDITIONS
Data on present and his-
torical colonization (literature study on biota)
Monitoring data
(PEWA monitoring) Other data
(Statistical) analysis
(considering e.g. new assessment methods and reference states)
Methods
Results
Describing good ecological potential for: all biological quality elements
selected groups of water bodies and stream types
GO
OD
EC
OLO
GIC
AL
PO
TEN
-TI
AL
Steps in describing good ecological potential
Résumé
Conclusion
• The method developed was applied on two case groups
with different aquatic potential of spatial development:
allows derivation of the good ecological potential
transferable to other waterbodies designated as HMWB or AWB
• Cooperation with Water and Navigation Administrations was essential
for success of project basis for following projects
Résumé
Conflicts• In Germany: federal states are responsible for implementation of WFD
Most waterways are property of german country
Water and navigation administration (WSV) – navigation
• WSV prefer „Prague approach“ + PEWA (more practicable)
• German federal environmental agency fear misuse of this approach
• Hardly any evaluation of measure effects/ cumulative, synergistic effects of
measure combinations
Approach to solution• Monitoring of best off sites in Elbe river basin (started)
• Follow-on project: testing method in practise
- Implementation of identified measure combination on project site possible?
- Evaluation of effects
• Cooperation with all affected