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

Main pressure:

Hydro-morphological degradation

Waterways in the Elbe river basin

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

Last but not least

Thank you for your attention!