Biological benchmarks and Reference Conditions Isabel Pardo Reference
Biological benchmarks and Reference Conditions Isabel Pardo Reference Condition WG meeting. Edinburgh 8 -9 February 2010
New Intercalibration Guidance (page 11): Practical implementation 13. It is important to ensure that the reference conditions of the surface water types being intercalibrated are comparable. The definition of the reference conditions must correspond to the criteria given in the REFCOND Guidance. If natural or near-natural reference conditions are not available or cannot be reliably derived for a certain type (for example, for large rivers) intercalibration needs to be carried out against an alternative reference / alternative benchmark (e. g. good ecological status for that surface water type). Annex III contains guidelines for deriving reference conditions and alternative benchmarks.
Where alternative benchmarks included in the WFD in relation with reference conditions? – In options for deriving WFD Reference conditions under Expert Judgement. Where there is a link to follow the Annex III from the new guidance. – The reference conditions WG has to work on this line and provide guidelines by the end of february for Annex III
New IC guidance. Annex III present statement Expert judgment : 18. Member States could base reference conditions on expert judgement where it is not possible to derive reference conditions based on a spatial Need to integrate in EXPERT network of reference sites or from modelling JUDGEMENT option Alternative 19. Expert judgement could alsothe be a part of theof process of selecting reference benchmarks sites, when background or to scientific are not (AB), data and referknowledge them to available, to assess the level of pressure corresponding to “very minor a certain level of pressures. We and need modifications of physico-chemistry, hydro-morphology biology” address this. Member in the. States newshould IC guidance 20. In makingto expert judgements, use as many sources of information as possible, including monitoring data and relevant information (e. g. historical or palaeological data, background levels identified by the international conventions), to improve confidence in their understanding of how the biological quality element responds to increased pressure and hence the values for that element under conditions of no or only very minor human disturbance.
Figure 1: Flow chart of the main steps of the intercalibration process (Part) NEED to link abiotic reference criteria with abiotic criteria representing selected environmental status
New IC guidance: Reference/alternative benchmark conditions • Comparable Reference or alternative benchmark conditions have to be established for common IC types • The definition of the reference conditions must correspond to the criteria given in the REFCOND Guidance • If natural or near-natural reference conditions are not available or cannot be derived for a certain type (for example, for large rivers) intercalibration needs to be carried out against an alternative benchmark (e. g. good ecological status for that surface water type) • The definition of reference or benchmark conditions shall be done using IC common dataset
New IC guidance: Reference/alternative benchmark conditions • The intercalibration benchmark shall preferably be derived from sites in near-natural reference conditions. Based on a harmonised set of reference Those were the conclusions from criteria, abiotic data in the intercalibration dataset have to be screened for the sites Oviedo September-2009 RC WG near-natural • For water types not having near-natural conditions. These types require a meeting. To develop this part the different benchmarking approach, that refer to the best available physical, WG on RC has to discuss and chemical and biological habitat conditions given today’s modified propose approaches to guide the landscape • LDC sitesintercalibration have to be identified work from thein common intercalibration dataset. the new This can be done by screening for sites meeting abiotic criteria that Guidance represent a similar low level of impairment. This approach also requires the review of the biological conditions. It is important to identify the position of the benchmark on the gradient of impact, i. e. to document the deviation of the selected benchmark from reference conditions. This allows for integrating the approach into the Cross-GIG harmonisation efforts for benchmarking (see Cross-GIG activity on reference condition refinement)
Proposed steps to integrate biological benchmarks within the WFD Reference conditions concept
High 1. RC and WFD Normative Definitions for Biological conditions: General definition for rivers Low Condition of the biotic community Water category / type specific 2. Reference Benchmark 3 4 1 Steps to establish status classes: 1. Application of RC criteria to sites 2. Reference benchmark 3. High/Good boundary 4. Good/Mod boundary 5. Mod/Def boundary 6. Def/Bad boundary 5 6 0. 8% Low Level of pressure/stressor i. e. Artificial land use High
High 2. RC and WFD Normative Definitions for Biological conditions: General definition for rivers (i. e. very large rivers) Low Condition of the biotic community Water category / type specific 2. Reference Benchmark 3 1 6 4 5 0. 8% Low Alternative Benchmark Steps to establish status classes for alternative benchmarks : 4. Application of RC criteria to benchmark sites 5. Establish abiotic characterisation on pressure level and deviation from RC for rivers (RC Large rivers? ) 6. Establish corresponding biological condition of AB (WFD ND) and identify corresponding class or boundary from reference 4% Level of pressure/stressor i. e. Artificial land use High
High 2. RC and WFD Normative Definitions for Biological conditions: General definition for rivers (i. e. very large rivers) Low Condition of the biotic community Water category / type specific 2. Reference Benchmark 3 1 6 4 Modelling 5 0. 8% Low Alternative Benchmark Steps to establish status classes for alternative benchmarks : 4. Application of RC criteria to benchmark sites 5. Establish abiotic characterisation on pressure level and deviation from RC for rivers (RC Large rivers? ) 6. Establish corresponding biological condition of AB (WFD ND) and identify corresponding class or boundary from reference 4% Level of pressure/stressor i. e. Artificial land use High
REAL Reference Benchmark, and VIRTUAL Reference benchmark? Alternative Benchmark 1 Alternative Benchmark 2 Low Condition of the biotic community Water category / type specific High 2. RC and WFD Normative Definitions for Biological conditions: General definition for rivers (i. e. very large rivers) 0. 8% Low 4% 9% Level of pressure/stressor i. e. Artificial land use High
Main challenges 1. 2. 3. To establish a RC benchmark for comparison of pressure levels (i. e. from a similar type within the same WC). Example, Large rivers RC for Very large rivers RC To establish comparable disturbance gradients for RC and AB: – Use REFCOND general pressures – Use relevant pressure indicators • Individually (common pressures) • Multiple pressures (built common disturbance gradients) To establish comparable biological conditions for RC and AB: – Use Normative definitions (derived Biological condition gradient definitions) – Use ICMs
- Slides: 13