Monitorização de Sistemas Ambientais

http://mosam.org

Monitorização de Sistemas Ambientais

J. Gomes Ferreira

http://ecowin.org/

2 de Novembro 2017

Universidade Nova de Lisboa

Bloco 1 – Água e Ecossistemas

http://ecowin.org/AE2010/


i. Compreender a ligação entre monitorização e planeamento em sistemas aquáticos,

particularmente no contexto DPSIR;

ii. Distinguir entre os conceitos de "outputs" e "outcomes" na elaboração e

implementação de planos de monitorização;

iii. Participar na elaboração de um caderno de encargos para planeamento de

monitorização em sistemas aquáticos e/ou avaliação de propostas;

iv. Participar na elaboração de um plano de amostragem, incluindo formulação de

hipóteses, dimensionamento espacial e temporal, e aspectos financeiros e logísticos;

v. Aplicar e interpretar modelos simples para a avaliação da qualidade de um sistema

aquático com base nos resultados de planos de monitorização;

vi. Enquadrar os pontos acima no contexto legal da União Europeia, optimizando os

meios existentes em Portugal face aos desafios das Directivas Europeias.

"Learning outcomes"

http://mosam.org

Após completar com sucesso esta parte da disciplina, um estudante será capaz de:

Ecossistemas Aquáticos – João Gomes Ferreira


i. Conceitos gerais: tipos de sistemas e variabilidade, objectivos de

monitorização, amostragem;

ii. Enquadramento na legislação ambiental, em particular na Directiva-Quadro

da Água e Directiva-Quadro da Estratégia do Meio Marinho - comparação

com modelos externos à União Europeia;

iii. Elaboração de planos, com exemplos concretos de casos de estudo

(Portugal e EUA).

Três sessões teóricas e três sessões práticas (2/11, 9/11, 16/11)

Ecossistemas Aquáticos – João Gomes Ferreira

Objectivos e âmbito

http://mosam.org


i. Ferreira et al, 2011. Overview of eutrophication indicators to assess environmental

status within the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Estuarine Coastal

and Shelf Science, 93, 117-131

ii. Ferreira et al, 2007. Monitoring of coastal and transitional waters under the EU Water

Framework Directive. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 135 (1-3), 195-216

iii. References cited in both papers, particularly the second one;

iv. Portuguese WFD monitoring plan, http//monae.org

v. Tilamook Bay monitoring plan, linked in the above site

vi. Barnegat Bay monitoring plan, linked in the above site

Recommended reading

http://mosam.org

http://mosam.org


J. Gomes Ferreira

http://ecowin.org/


Conceitos gerais - tipos de sistemas aquáticos, objectivos,

amostragem


Lecture outline

1. System equilibria, natural- and human-derived change, DPSIR

framework and limitations

2. Monitoring at different scales: the big directive scale (WFD example),

small-scale (e.g. aquaculture licensing)

3. Spatial and temporal variability

4. Sampling methods (water quality, plankton, sediment…)

5. Getting it right and saving cash: scales and variability

6. Summary

Lecture 1

http://mosam.org

Sustainability criteria: foundation in classical ecology

可持续的标准：在经典生态学中的依据

Drivers

Agriculture – loss of fertilizer, etc

Urban and industrial discharges

Aquaculture

Atmospheric deposition

Internal (secondary) sources (e.g. P from sediments)

Advection from offshore (e.g. N and P, certain types of HAB)

Response

Fertilizer reduction

WWTP (sewage, industry)

Emmission controls

Sediment dredging etc

Time...

Interdiction (e.g. HAB events)

Pressure

N and P loading to the

coastal system

HAB phytoplankton

“loading” from offshore

State

Primary symptoms

Decreased light availability

Increased organic decomposition

Algal dominance changes

Secondary symptoms

Loss of SAV

Low dissolved oxygen

Harmful algae

Monitoring model

DPSIR

Impact

Fisheries

Aquaculture

Tourism

Non-use value

Human impact on the Chesapeake Bay, U.S.A.

http://ian.umces.edu/neea/

14 million people, millions of lawns, 500 million chickens.

http://www.baystat.maryland.gov/

Eutrophication in European seas

Diaz, R.J. and R. Rosenberg. 2008. Spreading dead zones and consequences for marine ecosystems. Science 321:926-928

Coastal eutrophication is a widespread phenomenon in Europe.

Human influence and uncertainty

Understanding

Oil spill

Phytoplankton

biodiversity

Hum

an influence

MoreLess

More

Less

Elevated nutrients

HAB

Type 2

HAB

Type 1Harmful algal blooms (HAB)

of various types (see text)

Some issues are easier to link to human pressure, and to understand.

The Peter Pan syndrome

Duarte et al., 2007. Estuaries and Coasts

Resilience…

One-way systems also exist in nature.

Water Framework Directive

Water categories

Surface

waters

Lakes

Groundwater

Rivers

Transitional

waters

Coastal

waters

Monitoring must deal with interconnected systems.

WFD surface water categories

A comparative analysis

Parameter Rivers Lakes/reservoirs Transitional

waters

Coastal

waters

Depth Low High Medium High

Salinity 0 0 0-35 35

Turbidity High Low High Low

Water clarity Low High Low High

River input Yes Yes Yes No

Tides No No Yes Yes

Residence time Low High Medium High

Variability Seasonal Seasonal Daily Seasonal

Nutrients Low-High Low-High Low-High Low

Phytoplankton Low Low-High Low-High Low

Macroalgae Low Low-High Low-High Low

Different physics, different biogeochemistry, different monitoring.

Loading and internal processing

Diffuse pollution

from catchmentAtmospheric

deposition

Outflow

Direct

discharge

Sedimentation

Mw

Min

Mout

In the 1960s and 1970s, models such as Vollenweider or Dillon &

Rigler were widely used to predict water quality in lakes.

http://www.lwa.org/des_report/htm/dillon.riglerpermissibleloadingmodel.htm

Aquaculture growth in Brazil (1994-2009)

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009

An

nu

al p

rod

uct

ion

(to

n)

21 % annualized

growth

• Many reservoirs are used for tilapia cultivation – steel cages keep the

piranhas at bay;

• Typical culture practice: stocking density of up to 300 kg m-3, harvest at

800 g after a 9 month growth period;

• Carrying capacity is determined as 1/6 of the total allowable phosphorus

(30 mg L-1), determined using the Dillon & Rigler (1974) model.

High growth, high impact, fragile assessment.

Typical production

250 cages per hectare

200 kg m-3, 6 m3 cages:

300 ton ha-1 cycle-1

Point-source discharge

Main concerns are usually coastal effects, e.g. on bathing beaches.

Wave-break area

Amplitude (h) = z/1.3

Outfall

Outfall

plume

OCEAN

Thermal stratification

Plume mixes with cold water and is retained beneath the mixed layer.

Warm layer

Outfall

Outfall

plume

OCEAN

Thermocline

Cool layer

Plume dispersion – offshore wind

Offshore wind causes coastal upwelling of colder water.

Warm

layer

Outfall

Outfall

plume

OCEAN

Cool

layer

Offshore wind

Offshore current

Upwelling

Plume dispersion – onshore wind

Onshore wind causes downwelling of warm water on the shore.

Warm

layer

Emissário

submarino

Outfall

plume

OCEAN

Cool

layer

Onshore wind

Onshore current

Downwelling

Offshore current

General scheme of an estuary

Estuaries are the most complex surface water systems on the planet.

River Ocean

Low tide level

High tide level

Tidal prism

Q (m3 s-1)

Advection

& dispersionTide

http://insightmaker.com/insight/6659

http://insightmaker.com/insight/6659

Longitudinal distribution of salinity

The salinity gradient from river to mouth is not constant.

RiverOcean

510

25

15

35

Uniform transverse section

Laterally stratified estuary

The isohalines suggest the ebb occurs mainly in the southern part of the system.

RiverOcean

510

25

15

35

Vertical distribution of salinity in an estuary

A significant input of freshwater is needed to impose vertical stratification.

River

Ocean

5 10 2515 35

Vertical

stratification

S

Z (m)

Halocline

Well-mixed water column

Monitoring parameters

Different matrices for different substances.

• Physical – e.g. temperature, salinity, morphology,

current velocity;

• Chemical – e.g. dissolved oxygen, nutrients,

suspended particulate matter, xenobiotics, etc;

• Biological – e.g. phytoplankton, benthic grabs,

fish.

Sampling techniques 1

Bottles are lowered by rope to a set depth, closed by means of a messenger.

Sampling bottles: Niskin, Nansen, Van Dorn…

Sampling techniques IShipboard measurements using Niskin bottles

Water quality sampling in the North Sea.

Sampling techniques IIShipboard measurements using CTD deployment in Hawaii

In large operations, CTDs are mechanically and electronically operated.

Sampling techniques IIIShipboard measurements - CTD lab operations

Much of the processing is automated, with data being quality-controlled and

uploaded to databases.

Sampling techniques IVShipboard measurements - CTD recovery

A CTD is recovered from deep water in bad weather.

Sampling techniques VShipboard measurements using plankton net tows in Hawaii

Nets may be towed horizontally or vertically.

Sampling techniques VIAcoustic Doppler Current Profiler (ADCP) deployment

A sophisticated technique for obtaining current profiles in the water column.

This animation shows the ADCP

time-series data at the HOTs station

off Hawaii from March 24-28, 1996.

The layer depths are 30m, 50m,

100m, 200m from the sea surface.

The vertical profile fluctuates highly

in time and sometimes shows a

clockwise rotation, probably showing

inertial oscillations.

The current at 200m layer is highly

variable as well as in the upper

layers where the current should have

big time-dependent components

induced by wind drive currents or

Ekman currents

Sampling techniques VIISmith-McIntyre grab for benthic sampling

Benthic sampling in the Tagus Estuary.

Sediment traps

Different designs, same idea

http://jpac.whoi.edu/atsea/instrument.html

http://smithlab.ucsd.edu/Antarctic/

htt

p://w

ww

.fim

r.fi/

Sediment traps

Capture larger particles (faecal

pellets, etc) which fall at a rate of

hundreds of metres per day

Should not be placed too near the

bottom (resuspension) or too

near the surface (mixing)

May be scavenged by deep-sea

organisms

“Inhibitors” may be added to reduce

this effect

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

125 62 31 16 8 4F

all

ve

locity (

m d

-1)

Particle diameter (mm)

Copepod fecal pellet

Ø = 50-100 mm

Isotopic markers may be used to identify particle sources, using fallout

tracers and other approaches

Marine snow is the mechanism which accounts for rapid transport of

organic material to the deep sea and benthos.

Eulerian sampling approach

Fixed stations sampled over a tidal cycle.

Fixed station

Eulerian sampling - integration

Integration of velocity gives information on tidal excursion.

Peak flood velocity

t (s)

V (ms-1)

0

Peak ebb velocity

Slack tide

V dt = h/3 (y0+4y1+2y2+...+4yn-1+yn)

Sampling period and actual period

Actual period is double the apparent period.

-1.5

-1

-0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

200 400 600 800

Sampling window

Actual period

Apparent period

Sampling period and event occurrence

Event occurs seasonally (every 3 months) but appears to occur every six months.

2 4 6 8 10 12

Sampling occasions

Event

Month

0

Aerial surveys for bloom detectionEyes over Puget Sound (Wa., USA)



State of the art phytoplankton analysisFlowCAM – Eyes over Puget Sound (Wa., USA)

Image analysis is coming of age for biological monitoring.

http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/eap/mar_wat/eops/EOPS_2014_10_29.pdf

Data from long-term mooringsEyes over Puget Sound (Wa., USA)

Genetic probesAlexandrium is a genus of dinoflagellate than can cause paralytic shellfish

poisoning (PSP). Some species are toxic and some are not

Accumulation by shellfish results in closure of fishery for a period of time – in

Maine that costs hundreds of jobs and millions of dollars every year

Toxic species are part of the High Toxicity Low Biomass group, and are therefore

hard to detect

NCCOS project (2011-2014) has developed peptide nucleic acid probes and

other biosensors for rapid detection of Alexandrium

This will enable more rapid detection and safer shellfish

Toxic algal blooms are a challenge worldwide – the major effects on humans

are routed through the food chain.

http://coastalscience.noaa.gov/projects/detail?key=45

http://oceandatacenter.ucsc.edu/PhytoGallery/Dinoflagellates/alexandrium.html

Alexandrium catenella

Produces saxitoxin, a

highly potent neurotoxin

Case study: Welfaremeter operational model

Oppedal F., T. Dempster, L. H. Stien, 2010. Environmental drivers of Atlantic salmon

behaviour in sea-cages: a review. Submitted to Aquaculture.

• Coupled monitoring and modelling for

finfish cages

• A cage can contain one million USD of

fish, but little investment in monitoring of

environment and fish behaviour

• Automated assessment of fish welfare

in sea cages

• Instrumentation such as profiling CTD,

DO, echosounders

• Database for secure data storage and

retrieval

• Expert system software for data

analysis and modelling

• Web interface for easy visualisation of

data and expert system outputs

• Similar systems developed for gilthead

and bass in the east Mediterranean

Web application

Easy communication

between fishfarmer

and system

Database

Secure storage of data

Expert system

Automatic analysis of

fish welfare

Echosounder

Monitors fish behaviour

and fish position

Profiling CTD (SD204)

CTD-probe with additional

sensors for oxygen

saturation, turbidity and

fluorescence

Other

sensors

Loss of mangroves

in Nicaragua

Expansion of shrimp ponds

over a 13 year period in

Estero Real, Nicaragua

(UNEP, undated)

Real time modelling of wind patterns

Global models can complement local data.

Site suitability analysis for pond culture in Thailand

MCE based on slope, pH, land use, water temperature, water availability, towns and roads.

Jaguaribe Estuary (Ceará, Brazil)

The Jaguaribe has a huge

watershed, with over 4000

impoundments;

8 spatial stations and two fixed

stations, along 17 km of the

estuary (total of 34 km, limited by

a weir upstream);

upper estuary (Aracati) and

lower estuary (Fortim);

Two main urban centres.

Nutrient sources: urban

discharges, tilapia (from the

impoundments), shrimp culture,

cattle, agriculture.

Based on the area of shrimpponds, and predictions from the

POND model, an annual dischargeto the estuary of 60 tonnes N is

estimated, about 20% of the total nitrogen load

Source: Eschrique & Braga, 2011

Farm-scale models used to

improve loading estimates.

Underwater sensors and wifi communication

Realtime Aquaculture – salmon farming in Canada.

Sensors at Catalina Sea Ranch

Monitoring of environmental parameters – med mussel farm.

Synthesis

• Aquatic systems vary widely – in complexity, in time, and

in space

• Aquatic systems are interconnected, this is an important

management constraint

• Monitoring (like modelling) is never an objective. It is an

approach

• If you use a ship, that’s your highest cost – leverage it

• Data acquisition is rapidly changing (e.g. RNA probes,

smart dust)

Systems, objectives, and sampling

Concepts and science change more slowly than methods.

The two centimeter

probes float freely

underwater, measure

local temperatures

down to a millionth

of a degree Kelvin,

and send it all back

wirelessly.

http://mosam.org


J. Gomes Ferreira

http://ecowin.org/


Enquadramento na Directiva-Quadro da Água, Directiva-Quadro da

Estratégia do Meio Marinho, e outras "visões" (e.g. E.U.A.)


Lecture outline

1. The legislative framework: EU, US, China

2. Europe: older generation (sectorial) directives, integrative directives

3. Monitoring framework of the WFD

4. Sampling frequency requirements, interpretation, costs

5. WFD and the Marine strategy

6. Summary

Lecture 2

http://mosam.org

International legislation

EU: Water Framework Directive (WDF), Habitats, Nitrates, Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive (UWWTD), Shellfish Directives, Marine Strategy Framework Directive;

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/

US: Clean Water Act, State legislation. The CWA established basic structureregulating discharges of pollutants into US waters. It gave EPA the authority to implement pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards for industry; establish TMDLs. CWA continued requirements to set water qualitystandards for all contaminants in surface waters. The Act made it unlawful for any person to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters, unless a permit was obtained. Funded the construction of sewage treatmentplants and recognized the need for planning to address the critical problemsposed by nonpoint source pollution;

China: Sea Water Quality Standard (1998), Marine Environmental Protection Law (2000), Fisheries Law and its application measures (2000), Water Quality Standard for Fisheries (1990), Integrated Wastewater Discharge Standards (1998).

http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/

WFD - key points

Spatial integration, variable thresholds, cost of water.

protects all waters, surface and ground waters in a holistic

way

good quality (‘good status’) to be achieved by 2015

integrated water management based on river basins

combined approach of emission controls and water quality

standards, plus phasing out of particularly hazardous

substances

economic instruments: economic analysis, and getting the

prices right - to promote prudent use of water

gets citizens and stakeholders involved: public participation

Concept

Integration of first generation directives (e.g. UWWTD and Nitrates).

urban waste Watertreatment

nitrates IPPC &

otherindustrydischarges

chemicals

pesticides

biocides

landfills

sewagesludge

drinking water

bathing water

Measures under


Coordination of all other measures

Some key WFD Definitions

"Transitional waters" are bodies of surface water in the vicinity of river mouths which are partly saline in character as a result of their proximity to coastal waters but which are substantially influenced by freshwater flows;

"Coastal water" means surface water on the landward side of a line every point of which is at a distance of one nautical mile on the seaward side from the nearest point of the baseline from which the breadth of territorial waters is measured, extending where appropriate up to the outer limit of transitional waters;

Member States should aim to achieve the objective of at least good water status by defining and implementing the necessary measures within integrated programmes of measures, taking into account existing Community requirements. Where good water status already exists, it should be maintained.

Water categories, types, water bodies

More types, more reference conditions, more water bodies, more €€€

Typology reality check

(a) regulatory reality

What the regulator likes: one size fits all.

Symptom level

Fre

qu

en

cy

(sp

ati

al/

tem

po

ral

vari

ab

ilit

y)

Natural

conditions

Stressors

(pressure)

Thresholds

Typology reality check

(b) ecosystem reality

What ecosystems really are: diverse and sometimes unique.

Symptom level

Fre

qu

en

cy

(sp

ati

al/

tem

po

ral

vari

ab

ilit

y)

Natural

conditions

Stressors

(pressure)

Threshold A

A

B

C

Threshold C

A

B

C

Biological and supporting quality elements

An ecosystem approach: BQE, then SQE, then hydromorphology.

Do the estimated values

for the biological quality

elements meet reference

conditions?

Do the estimated values for

the biological quality

elements deviate only

slightly from reference

condition values?

Classify on the basis of the

biological deviation from

reference conditions

No

No

Do the physico-chemical

conditions meet high

status?

Do the physico-chemical

conditions (a) ensure

ecosystem functioning

and (b) meet the EQSs for

specific pollutants?

Is the deviation moderate?

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes Classify as

moderate status

Classify as

bad status

Is the deviation major?Classify as poor

status

Yes

Greater

No

Yes

YesDo the hydro-

morphological

conditions meet high

status?

Classify as good

status

No

Classify

as high

status

Yes

BQE

SQE

BQE

SQE

BQE

SQE

BQE

SQE

BQE

SQE

Yes

BQE

SQE

BQE

SQE

Greater


Quality indices

If the EQR is below Good Status, there is an associated cost.

Ecological Quality Ratio (EQR),

i.e. the ratio between measured

value and reference condition

for High Status

The EQR must be between 0

(worst) and 1 (best)

Maps prepared in GIS for each

water body with the

classification for ecological

status and chemical status

Reporting of results EQR

EQR =

Colour code

High

Good

Moderate

Poor

Bad

Measured value

Ref. condition

WFD River Basin Management Plans

In general, every six years, one year surveillance monitoring.

Article 13

6. River basin management plans published at the latest nine years after date of WFD.

7. River basin management plans reviewed and updated at the latest 15 years after date of WFD and every six years thereafter.

Annex V

Surveillance monitoring carried out for each monitoring site for a period of one year during period covered by a river basin management plan for:

• parameters indicative of all biological quality elements,

• parameters indicative of all hydromorphological quality elements,

• parameters indicative of all general physico-chemical quality elements,

• priority list pollutants which are discharged into the river basin or sub-basin, and

• other pollutants discharged in significant quantities in the river basin or sub-basin,

unless previous surveillance monitoring exercise showed water body reached good status and there is no evidence from the review of impact of human activity in Annex II that the impacts on the body have changed. In these cases, surveillance monitoring shall be carried out once every three river basin management plans.

Monitoring

Relating pressure, state and response

Data to information, information to knowledge, knowledge to wisdom?

▪ Data conversion to information (e.g. indicators)

▪ Indices e.g. ASSETS, COMPP, AMBI, ITI...

▪ Model change in pressure (due to response)

▪ Model state (choose appropriate state variables,

e.g. DO, Chl a, xenobiotics)

▪ Compare to monitoring data and assess success

of measures

Monitoring caveats

i. What, where, when, how, and… why?

ii. Deus ex machina – monitoring for its own sake;

iii. Bias – e.g. no bacterial analysis on Fridays?

iv. Rote measurements – frequency should be

determined by gradient (variance) – but how do

we flag gradient?

Ask the right questions

Caveat emptor – buyer beware

Avoid the usual pitfalls, be creative, spend money wisely.

Types of monitoring

Different tools, different aims. Investigative monitoring = research

Surveillance monitoring1. Supplementing and validating the impact assessment procedure detailed in

Annex II2. The efficient and effective design of future monitoring programmes3. The assessment of long-term changes in natural conditions4. The assessment of long-term changes resulting from widespread

anthropogenic activity.Operational monitoring1. Establish the status of those bodies identified as being at risk of failing to

meet their environmental objectives2. Assess any changes in the status of such bodies resulting from the

programmes of measures.Investigative monitoring1. Where the reason for any exceedances is unknown2. Where surveillance monitoring indicates that the objectives set out in Article 4

for a body of water are not likely to be achieved and operational monitoring has not already been established, in order to ascertain the causes of a water body or water bodies failing to achieve the environmental objectives

3. To ascertain the magnitude and impacts of accidental pollution

Decision-tree for monitoring priorities

Monitoring is resource-limited. Spend money wisely.

Identification of water bodies at risk and

verification of measures

Verification is challenging due to natural variability and non-linearity.

▪ The first objective ( screening) is concerned with further investigation

into a water body which is at risk of non-compliance with environmental

objectives, i.e. which appears from surveillance monitoring data to be at

moderate, poor or bad status for one or more quality elements.

Operational monitoring is interpreted in MONAE to be applicable mainly

for water bodies diagnosed as being at moderate status, where more

detailed studies will help establish the status of the water body.

▪ The second objective ( verification) is to verify post-facto if

management measures are working, i.e. from a Pressure-State-

Response perspective, if a reduction in pressure due to management

response has resulted in the expected change in state.

Operational monitoring


Sampling frequency

Sampling frequency is not sufficient to correctly classify a water body.

Biological quality element Frequency

Phytoplankton abundance, biomass, and

composition (ABC)

6 months

Composition and abundance of other aquatic

flora

3 months

Composition and abundance of benthic

invertebrates

3 years

Composition and abundance of fish populations

(ichthyofauna) – only transitional waters

3 years


Sampling frequency

Sampling frequency is not sufficient to correctly classify a water body.

Supporting quality element Frequency

Morphology 6 years

Water temperature 3 months

Dissolved oxygen 3 months

Salinity (only transitional waters) 3 months

Nutrients 3 months

Priority substances monthly

Substances discharged in significant quantities 3 months

Monitoring frequency in TCW

For Portugal, MONAE proposed higher frequencies.

Annual monitoring costs

Portugal has spent much more, to little effect.

PPP€ measures the number of units of a country’s currency required to buy the same amount of goods and

services (in the domestic market) that the euro would buy in Europe. PPP€ has the same purchasing power

in the domestic economy as €1 has in Europe.

Costs over an 18 year period (3 RBMPs)

The overall net present costs for an 18 year period, discounted at Portugal’s long-term

interest rate of 4.2% would indicatively be €7,000,000 at 2004 PPP€ prices, assuming

operational and investigative monitoring is also carried out only for one year in every six;

The total cost of monitoring over an eighteen year cycle (three river basin management

plans) would be under 1€ per capita for the current (ten million) population of Portugal.

WFD Classification of rivers and lakes (EEA 2015)

Percentage of freshwater bodies affected by pressures.

WFD Classification of T&C waters (EEA 2015)

Percentage of T&C bodies affected by pressures.

European Environment Agency verdict 2017“The main aim of EU water policy is to ensure that a sufficient quantity of good quality water is

available for people’s needs and the environment. The Water Framework Directive (EU, 2000)

stipulates that EU Member States should aim to achieve good status in all bodies of surface

water and groundwater by 2015 unless there are grounds for exemption. The 7th EAP mirrored

this objective and called for all European water bodies to reach ‘good’ status by 2020.”

https://www.eea.europa.eu/airs/2016/natural-capital/surface-waters

Directive 2008/56/EC

Marine Strategy Framework Directive

The WFD and MSFD are two very different directives.

Marine waters: from the seaward side of the baseline from which territorial waters

are measured to the outmost reach of MS jurisdiction (1-3.1);

Preparation: (i) Status and impact assessment (2012); (ii) Good status classification

(2012), (iii) Environmental targets and indicators (2012); Monitoring programme

(2014). Measures: (i) Programme of measures (2015); (ii) Implementation of plan

(2016). Good status by 2020 (1-1.1, but see 29)

Ecosystem-based approach to management of human activities, enabling a

sustainable use of ecosystem goods and services (8, 1-1.3);

Exceptions: natural causes/force majeure (e.g. HAB Western Iberia) and

transboundary problems (Baltic, southern North Sea...) (30, 31);

No explicit typology like WFD, but MS should define Good threshold by marine

regions/subregions. Only two classes (Environmental Status), not five (WFD

Ecological Status) (13, 1-5, 1-6, 1-9.3);

Eleven holistic descriptors, based on functional principles such as biodiversity, food

webs, and eutrophication.

Marine Strategy Framework Directive

(2008/56/EC)

Ten descriptors have detailed guidance reports.

The MSFD is a complex legislative instrument

Criteria and methodological standards to be used by the Member States, which are designed to amend non-essential elements of this Directive by supplementing it, shall be laid down, on the basis of Annexes I and III

EC commissioned ICES/JRC to facilitate this procedure

Task Groups were set up for eight GES descriptors, work took place over 2009, with a final meeting in September 2009

The aim was to develop common understanding of GES, and how it should be quantified

The aim was not to prescribe boundaries between good and bad

Human-induced eutrophication is minimised, especially adverse effects

thereof, such as losses in biodiversity, ecosystem degradation, harmful

algae blooms and oxygen deficiency in bottom waters.

ETG (Task Group 5)

MSFD - eleven descriptors of state

• Biological diversity

• Non-indigenous species

• Populations of commercial fish and shellfish

• Marine food webs

• Eutrophication

• Sea floor integrity

• Alteration of hydrographic conditions

• Contaminants

• Contaminants in marine food

• Marine litter

• Energy and noise

Develop common understanding of GES, and how it should be

quantified. Not prescribe boundaries between good and bad.

Dissecting Annex I

Models can help, but only to an extent.

Loch Creran, Scotland Ria Formosa, PortugalDungarvan Harbour, Ireland

Definition Potential tools

Biological diversity is maintained WISE

Population distribution = healthy stock ERSEM, EcoWin

Balanced marine food webs Atlantis, EcoPath

Human-induced eutrophication ASSETS, EcoWin

FARM

Contrasting spatial scales

The difference in scale is enormous (200 nm to 1 nm). The ocean is 3D.

WFD MSFD

Fringing

coastline (1nm)

Open water

Watershed

Spatial Scope – Maritime boundaries (JRC)

Portugal has the largest MSFD zone in the EU.

MyOcean – A European site

Salinity, temperature, currents, chlorophyll…

Eutrophication Descriptor Group Tasks

• Interpretation (key terms, links, policy)

• Literature review and methods

• Spatial and temporal scales

• Framework for Environmental Status

• Monitoring for assessment of GES

• Research needs

Ten of the descriptors were analysed using this approach,

which then led to a COM decision.

MSFD eutrophication guidance Effective guidance must be inclusive

Topic Comments

Oceanography Shallow/ deep water, high/low tidal range, big differences in

residence time, vertical mixing, seasonal runoff, and fetch

Temporal growth

patterns

Strongly seasonal in northern Europe; all year round in southern

Europe

Spatial variation Baltic and southern North Sea, eutrophication is a significant

concern; Mediterranean, parts are eutrophic at the WFD scale, but

at the MSFD scale the Mediterranean is oligotrophic

Symptoms vary Well beyond freshwater eutrophication criteria; SAV in shallow

water, offshore HAB

Methods Convention driven: OSPAR COMPP (N. Sea, NE Atlantic),

HELCOM HEAT (Baltic); Barcelona and Black Sea (?), national

methods, e.g. IFREMER, TRIX; non-EU, e.g. U.S. ASSETS model

Transboundary EEZ borders drive harmonization of criteria and methods; scale of

the issue varies greatly (no significant neighbours, EU neighbours,

EU and other countries)

From Poland to Portugal, something for everyone…

What is ‘Good Environmental Status’?

GES is achieved when the biological community

remains well-balanced and retains all necessary

functions in the absence of undesirable

disturbance associated with eutrophication, and/or

where there are no nutrient-related impacts on

sustainable use of ecosystem goods and services.

Upscaling Quality Descriptors

Combining descriptors into one final classification – a real challenge.

Quality

descriptors1 2 3 … n-1 n

Not good

Good

Broad class

range

Overall MSFD

status

Relationships – Handle with care

Dependence of global warming on piracy.

Bathers Non-bathers

Diseased 33 15

Healthy 27 25

Total 60 40

Probability Bathers Non-bathers

Diseased 0.55 0.375

Healthy 0.45 0.625

Total 1 1

No

swimming!

Water-borne diseases

Children Adults

Bathers Non- Bathers Non-

bathers bathers

Diseased 30 6 3 9

Healthy 20 4 7 21

Total 50 10 10 30

Probability Bathers Non- Bathers Non-

bathers bathers

Diseased 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.3

Healthy 0.4 0.4 0.7 0.7

Total 1 1 1 1

60 40

Water-borne diseases

The effect of bathing has disappeared!

Human impact on San Francisco Bay, U.S.A.

http://ian.umces.edu/neea/

Agricultural and urban nutrient loading in northern California.

Suisun

San Pablo

South Bay

S. Francisco Bay (South Bay) – Chlorophyll a

No decadal trends. More samples, higher maxima.

01

234

56

78

01

234

56

78

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

05

1015202530354045

1977 1978 1979

1980

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1982

02468

1012141618

1984

05

101520

2530

3540

1985

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1987

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1989

05

101520

2530

3540

0 100 200 300 400

1996

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 100 200 300 400

1998

0

5

10

15

20

25

0 100 200 300 400

1999

#3

0 -

Red

wo

od

Cre

ek, 3

7o3

3.3

’N, 1

22

o11.4

’W, z

= 1

2.8

m

Max: 6.9

Max: 6.9 Max: 27.7

Max: 38.1 Max: 50.6 Max: 16.2

Max: 36.6

Max: 34.2

Max: 12.3

Max: 21.3?

Max: 53.2

Max: 113.31990s

1980s

1970s

Chlorophyll maximum as a function of

number of samples

In South Bay, like everywhere else, the more you measure…

Station 30 - Redwood Creek, 37o33.3’N, 122o11.4’W, z= 12.8m

PredictedObserved

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 10 20 30 40 50Samples per year

Cchlo

rophyll

a(m

g l

-1)

y=-1.3+1.24x

r=0.6 (P>0.99)

Synthesis

• Activities are regulated by legal frameworks – monitoring

is no exception

• In Europe, in the area of water those frameworks are the

WFD (2000/60/EC) and MSFD (2008/56/EC)

• The baseline is given by surveillance monitoring,

compliance is verified by operational monitoring, and what

you don’t know is a subject for research

• The two directives differ in scale, scope, and synthesis

approaches – one out all out is highly debatable

• How (when, where, what) you sample changes the results

you get

Legal frameworks

Surface water monitoring is legally binding in Portugal. Do it.

http://mosam.org


J. Gomes Ferreira

http://ecowin.org/


Case studies, preparation of monitoring plans


Lecture outline

1. Eutrophication as a case study

2. Different methods require different monitoring schemes

3. A detailed look at ASSETS

4. A review of the Portuguese situation

5. Monitoring plans worldwide

6. Presentation of results

Lecture 3

http://mosam.org

The Eutrophication Process

富营养化发生的过程

http://www.eutro.us http://www.eutro.org/register

From: Bricker et al.2007. National Estuarine Eutrophication Assessment Update

http://www.eutro.us/

http://www.eutro.org/register

This dense bloom of cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) occurred in the Potomac River estuary

downstream of Washington, D.C. Photo courtesy of W. Bennett USGS.

Elevated phytoplankton biomass

Harmful algal bloomsNoctiluca bloom– California, U.S.A.

Courtesy P.J.S. Franks, WHOI

In Florida Bay, this macroalgal bloom smothered seagrasses. SAV subsequently disappeared,

causing a loss of ecosystem goods and services. Courtesy Brian Lapointe, Harbor Branch

Oceanographic Institute.

Macroalgal blooms and loss of submerged aquatic vegetation

Florida bioluminescent HABs (Post 2014.10.27)

Nitrogen seepage from leaking septic tanks—developers oppose WWTP for cost reasons.

A model for harmful algal blooms from offshore

HAB development is highly complex and a serious challenge

to model. Monitoring is critical e.g. In shellfish waters.

Upwelling supplies a physical mechanism for

supporting larger cells (diatoms) and a chemical

mechanism for supply of nitrate from deep water

Upwelling relaxation stabilizes the water column (larger

cells sink, dinoflagellates outcompete them), and

dominant form of nitrogen is reduced (ammonia, urea)

There is considerable evidence that the increased supply of

reduced inorganic nitrogen (e.g. ammonia) and dissolved organic

nitrogen contribute to the development of harmful algal blooms

Secondary symptoms of eutrophication

Extension of hypoxic bottoms

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

Pristine Today

km

2

Six-fold increase!

2005

1905-06

Savchuk et al. 2008

Baltic Sea – dissolved oxygen

富营养化的次级症状——缺氧（波罗的海）

Indicators used by various assessment methodsIndicators （评价指标） Nutrient

Index I*

Nutrient

Index II*

EPA

NCA

OSPAR

COMPP

ASSETS

Nutrient (N,P) load, conc. X X X X X

Chemical oxygen demand X X

Chlorophyll a X X X X

Dissolved oxygen X X X X X

Water clarity X

HABs (nuisance/toxic) X X

Phytoplankton indicator sp. X

Macroalgal abundance X X

Seagrass loss X X

Zoobenthos-fish kills X

Temporal focus Unspecified Unspecified Summer Spring/winter Full year

Integration Additive Ratio Ratio Integration PSR

Methods with red crosses fall short of a full eutrophication assessment.

* Commonly applied in China

Adapted from: Xiao et al. 2007, Estuaries. and Coasts 30:901-918

MSFD guidance synthesisEutrophication assessment models

Method Biological

Indicators

Physico - Chemical

Indicators

Load related

to WQ

Integrated

final rating

TRIX Chlorophyll (Chl) DO, DIN, TP No Yes

EPA NCA

WQ Index

Chl Water clarity, DO, DIN, DIP No Yes

ASSETS Chl, macroalgae,

seagrass, HAB

DO Yes Yes

LWQI/TWQI Chl, macroalgae,

seagrass

DO, DIN, DIP No Yes

OSPAR COMPP Chl, macroalgae,

seagrass, PP indicator

spp.

DO, DIN, DIP, TP, TN, Yes Yes

UK “WFD” Primary production, Chl,

macroalgae, benthic

invertegrates, seagrass

Water clarity, DO, DIN, DIP,

TN, TPNo Yes

HEAT Chl, macroalgae, benthic

invertegrates, seagrass,

HAB

Water clarity, DO, DIN, DIP,

TN, TP, CNo Yes

IFREMER Chl, seagrass,

macrobenthos, HAB

Water clarity, DO, DIN, SRP,

TN, TP, sediment organic

matter, sediment TN, TP

No Yes

Some methods do not consider pressure-state relationships.

各种富营养化评价模型

Ferreira et al. 2011, Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science, 93, 117-131.

Phase 1 Approach: Nutrient Indices

Nutrient Index I

Nutrient Index II

Ni =CCOD CTN CTP CChla

SCOD STN STP SChla+ + +

Ni =CCODCDINCDIP

SC

Where: CCOD, CTN, CTP, CChla are measured concentrations of chemical oxygen demand (COD), TN, TP

(all in mg l-1) and Chla (ug l-1)

SCOD, STN, STP, and SChla are standard concentrations of COD (3 mg l-1), TN (0.6 mg l-1), TP (0.03 mg l-1)

and Chla (10 ug l-1)

Ni > 4is eutrophic

Ni > 1is eutrophic

Where: CCOD, CDIN, CDIP are measured concentrations of chemical oxygen demand (COD), DIN, DIP (mg l-1)

SC is mean product of standard concentrations of COD (1-3 mg l-1), DIN (0.2 – 0.3 mg l-1), DIP (0.01 – 0.02 mg

l-1), constant value of 4.5 x10-3

From: Xiao et al. 2007, Estuaries. and Coasts 30:901-918

Phase 1 methods ignore key symptoms of eutrophication.

第一阶段评价方法：营养盐指标

ASSETS screening model

A second generation framework for eutrophication assessment.

Key aspects of the ASSETS approachThree stages...

S.B. Bricker, J.G. Ferreira, T. Simas, 2003. An integrated methodology for

assessment of estuarine trophic status. Ecol. Modelling 169: 39-60.

The ASSETS approach may be divided

into three parts:

✓Division of coastal systems

into homogeneous areas

✓Evaluation of data completeness

and reliability

✓Application of indices

Tidal freshwater (<0.5 psu)

Mixing zone (0.5-25 psu)

Seawater zone (>25 psu)

Spatial and temporal quality of

datasets: completeness

Confidence in results:

sampling and analytical

reliability

Influencing Factors (IF) index

Eutrophic Condition (EC) index

Future Outlook (FO) index

Pressure

State

Response

ASSETS Influencing Factors (Pressure)

Bricker, S.B., Ferreira, J.G. & Simas, T. - An Integrated Methodology for

Assessment of Estuarine Trophic Status. Ecol. Modelling 169: 39-60.

Calculate mh, the expected nutrient concentration due to land based sources (i.e. no ocean sources);

Calculate mb, the expected background nutrient concentration due to the ocean (i.e. no land-based sources);

Calculate OHI as the ratio of mh/(mh+mb);

Equations are based on a simple Vollenweider approach, modified to account for

dispersive exchange:

o

eseab

s

smm

o

eoinh

s

ssmm

Anthropogenic inputs Ocean inputs

Estuary

Class Thresholds

Low 0 to <0.2

Moderate low 0.2 to <0.4

Moderate 0.4 to < 0.6

Moderate high 0.6 to < 0.8

High >0.8

ASSETS – Assessment of State

Combinatorial matrix for primary and secondary symptoms.

Eutrophic condition

MODERATE

Primary symptoms high

but problems with more

serious secondary

symptoms still not being

expressed

MODERATE HIGH


and substantial

secondary symptoms

becoming more

expressed, indicating

potentially serious

problems

levels indicate serious

MODERATE

Level of expression of

eutrophic conditions is

substantial

conditionsin causing the conditions

LOW



minimal

Low secondary

symptoms

Moderate secondary

symptomsHigh secondary

symptoms

0 0.3 0.6 1

Low

prim

ary

sym

pto

ms

Modera

te p

rim

ary

sym

pto

ms

Hig

h p

rim

ary

sym

pto

ms

0.3

0.6

1

MODERATE


but problems with more

serious secondary

symptoms still not being

expressed

MODERATE HIGH


and substantial

secondary symptoms

becoming more

expressed, indicating

potentially serious

problems

levels indicate serious

HIGH

High primary and

secondary symptom

eutrophication

problems

HIGH

High primary and

secondary symptom

eutrophication

problems

MODERATE



substantial

HIGH

Substantial levels of

eutrophic conditions

occuring with secondary

symptoms indicating

serious problems

HIGH

Substantial levels of

eutrophic conditions

occuring

symptoms indicating

serious problems

MODERATE HIGH

High secondary

symptoms indicate

serious problems, but

low primary indicates

other factors may also

be involved in causing

MODERATE HIGH

High secondary

symptoms indicate

serious problems, but

low primary indicates

other factors may also

be involved in causing

conditionsin causing the conditions

LOW



minimal

Low secondary

symptoms

Moderate secondary

symptomsHigh secondary

symptoms

0 0.3 0.6 1

Low

prim

ary

sym

pto

ms

Modera

te p

rim

ary

sym

pto

ms

Hig

h p

rim

ary

sym

pto

ms

0.3

0.6

1

factors may be involved factors may be involved

MODERATE LOW

Moderate secondary

symptoms indicate

substantial eutrophic

conditions, but low

primary indicates other

MODERATE LOW

Moderate secondary

symptoms indicate

substantial

conditions, but low

primary indicates other

MODERATE LOW

Primary symptoms

beginning to indicate

possible problems

but still very few

secondary symptoms

expressed

MODERATE LOW

Primary symptoms

beginning to indicate

possible problems

but still very few

secondary symptoms

expressed

ASSETS Future Outlook matrix

Takes into account susceptibility and planned management actions.

Susceptibili

ty

in causing the conditions

0 0.3 0.6 1

Hig

hM

od

era

teLow

0.3

0.6

1

in causing the conditions

0 0.3 0.6 1

0.3

0.6

1

Future nutrient pressures

Decrease No change Increase

ImproveHigh

Worsen High

WorsenLow

Worsen Low

No change

ImproveLow

ImproveLow

No change

No change

ASSETS Approach: Pressure - State - Response

Moderate

Moderate

Low

Low

Moderate

High

Moderate

Low

High

Moderate

High

Moderate

Low

Influencing Factors (IF)

Nutrient Pressures

Low Moderate High

Low

Modera

teH

igh

Su

sc

ep

tib

ilit

y

Moderate

Moderate

Low

Low

Moderate

High

Moderate

Moderate

Low

High

High

Moderate

High

Eutrophic Condition (EC)

Secondary Symptoms

Low Moderate HighLow

Modera

teH

igh

Pri

ma

ry S

ym

pto

ms Improve

High

Improve

Low

Improve

Low

No

Change

No

Change

No

Change

Worsen

Low

Worsen

Low

Worsen

High

Future Outlook (FO)

Future Nutrient Pressures

Decrease No Change Increase

Hig

hM

odera

teLow

Su

sc

ep

tib

ilit

y

Susceptibility

Nutrient pressure changes

population , management,

watershed use (particularly

agricultural)

Susceptibility

dilution & flushing

+

Nutrient Inputs

land based or

oceanic

Influencing Factors

Primary Symptoms

Chl and Macroalgae

Average of ratings

Secondary Symptoms

D.O., HABs, SAV

change

Worst case

IF + EC + FO = ASSETS

Full accounting of eutrophication symptoms, including time and space.

Adapted from: Bricker et al. 2003, Ecological Modelling, 169(1), 39-60

ASSETS scoring system for PSRGrade 5 4 3 2 1

Pressure (IF) Low Moderate low Moderate Moderate high HighState (EC) Low Moderate low Moderate Moderate high HighResponse (FO) Improve high Improve low No change Worsen low Worsen high

Metric Combination matrix Class

P

S

R

5 5 5 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5

5 4 3 5 4 3

High

(5%)

P

S

R

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3

5 5 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 4 4 4 5 5 5 4 4 4

2 1 5 4 3 2 1 2 1 5 4 3 5 4 3 5 4 3

Good

(19%)

P

SR

5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1

3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 3 3

2 1 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 2 1 2 1 5 4 3 5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 5 5 4

Moderate

(32%)

P

S

R

4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2

5 4 3 2 1 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 2 1 4 3 2 1 3 2 1 5 4

Poor

(24%)

P

S

R

3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1

5 4 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1 3 2 1 5 4 3 2 1

Bad

(19%)

ASSETS

Tagus Estuary

http://eutro.org/

ASSETS – Strangford Lough, N. Ireland

High status system, classified as an SAC under UK law.

Indices

Influencing

Factors (IF)

ASSETS: 5

Eutrophic

Condition (EC)

ASSETS: 5

Future Outlook

(FO)

ASSETS: 4

Methods

Susceptibility

Nutrient inputs

Primary

Secondary

Future nutrient

pressures

Parameters Rating Expression

Dilution potential High Lowsusceptibility

Flushing potential Moderate

Low

Chlorophyll a Moderate

ModerateMacroalgae Problems

observed

Dissolved Oxygen No problems

Submerged Aquatic Losses Vegetation observed Low

Nuisance and Toxic NoBlooms

Future nutrient pressures decrease

Index

LOW

LOW

Improve Low

ASSETS: HIGH

ASSETS applicationUsed all over the world

Minimal data requirements, five languages, powerful analysis.

ASSETS multiple site comparisons

http://ian.umces.edu/neea http://www.eutro.us

The most recent assessment shows problems in the NEA and Gulf of Mexico.

ASSETS systems and gradesDistribution by region and classification

More information at http://eutro.org

Web-based ASSETS – Boston Harbor

eutro.org and eutro.us provide data on eutrophication of U.S. coastal systems.

ASSETS Pressure-State-Response

Influencing

Factors

Eutrophic

Condition

Future

Outlook ASSETS

Huang HeSanggou

Jiaozhou

Chiangjiang

Huangdun

Sanmen

Xiamen

DayaZhujiang

Worsen High

Worsen Low

No Change

Improve Low

Improve High

Unknown

Bad

Poor

Moderate

Good

High

Unknown or Not Applicable

High

Moderate High

Moderate

Moderate Low

Low or No Problem

Unknown

(WFD)

Top-down control

shellfish

aquaculture

贝类养殖的下行控制效应

压力状态反馈 ASSETS结果

ASSETS

Combination of research and screening models

Eutrophic

Condition (OEC)

ASSETS OEC: 4

Eutrophic

Condition (OEC)

ASSETS OEC: 4

Eutrophic

Condition (OEC)

ASSETS OEC:

Methods

PSM

SSM

PSM

SSM

PSM

SSM

Parameters Value Level of expression

Chlorophyll a 0.25

Epiphytes 0.50 0.57Macroalgae 0.96 Moderate

Dissolved Oxygen 0Submerged Aquatic 0.25 0.25Vegetation LowNuisance and Toxic 0Blooms

Chlorophyll a 0.25



Chlorophyll a 0.25



Index

MODERATE

LOW

MODERATE

LOW

MODERATE

LOW

28% lower

4(5)

Current monitoring status

In recent years, this situation has degraded, e.g. bivalve area classification.

At present, regular coastal

monitoring programmes are

carried out in Portugal for the

management of:

(i) Fisheries;

(ii) Biotoxins;

(iii) Priority substances;

(iv) Quality control of beaches;

(v) Hydro-morphology.

Institution Activities

IPMA TAC

Weekly fish-market “lota” sampling

2X year cruises pelagic/demersal, 90 samples

IPMA Weekly/fortnightly samples

between Minho & Guadiana estuaries.

Coastal water, estuaries and lagoons.

INAG Subcontracted to IH and IPIMAR,

heavy metals and organics

estuaries, lagoons and outfalls

Sampled twice-yearly

DRA/DRS Fortnightly, from 15 days before

the start of the bathing season

IH Hydromorphology, continuous tide

gauges, wave climate and water

temperature buoys

Stored data for Portuguese systems - BarcaWin

There are lots of data for Portuguese transitional and coastal systems.

Overview of system classification

Systems divided according to size.

Water bodies for Portuguese transitional

and coastal systems

More water bodies, lower quality, more sampling costs.

Questions a monitoring plan should address

The full DPSIR model is included in a monitoring plan.

Guidance for development of monitoring plans

WFD: Three different kinds of monitoring with different objectives.

Monitoring plans – Hypotheses and yardsticks

Any manager must ask questions, any plan must (aim to) answer them.

•Which questions should a specific monitoring plan address? An alternative

statement is: Which hypotheses should a plan test?

•Which is the most cost-effective approach to answering these questions? An

alternative statement is: Which Biological Quality Element(s) or Supporting

Quality Element(s) and approach (field sampling, experimental, modelling) is

best suited to understand the problem?

•What are the yardsticks of success in a monitoring plan? Two types: (i)

Implementation, i.e. are programme goals being met ? e.g. are the

designated parameters being measured? (ii) Effectiveness, i.e. does the plan

adequately identify whether the management measures are leading to

environmental success – e.g.: does the plan successfully identify whether

shellfish/finfish areas are increasing/decreasing?

Aims, indicators, indices and activities

Different publics, different approaches.

Aims

e.g. Establish

quality status

of waterbody

Indicators

e.g. Phytoplankton

composition, etc

Activities

e.g. Technical sampling program for Public participation in visual

chlorophyll a and species analysis or other types of sampling

Government, public

• Water Quality

• Conservation

• Human Use

Managers

• Biological Quality Elements

• Supporting Quality Elements

Indices

e.g. ASSETS,

AMBI, others

recommended in

TICOR etcTechnicians

• Biological Parameters

• Supporting Chemical

Parameters

• Hydromorphology

• Habitat

• …

Targets

Ag

gre

ga

tio

nD

eta

il

Objectives

Management objectives

Competing uses make for difficult compromises.

• Water quality objectives – e.g. (i) Restore and maintain a

productive ecosystem with no adverse effects due to

pollution; (ii) Minimize health risks associated with contact

water uses; (iii) Estimate adverse impacts of eutrophication;

• Conservation objectives – e.g. (i) Maintain on a landscape

level the natural environment of the watershed; (ii) Protect

existing habitat categories within the watershed - biodiversity;

• Human use objectives – e.g. (i) Support water-related

recreation and economic viability of commercial endeavours;

(ii) Encourage sustainable lifestyles within the watershed; (iii)

Empower citizens in the protection and stewardship of the

estuary and its watershed.

Targets which people understand and value

Sexy indicators help sell policy decisions.

• Tagus estuary – Restoration of the oyster

fishery (and export market) to the levels of the

1960’s

• Sado estuary – Conservation and

expansion of the bottlenose dolphin

population

• Guadiana estuary – Reappearance of

sturgeon

Primary and secondary indicators

Primary indicators appeal to the public and to managers.

Barnegat Bay (NJ) monitoring plan (abridged list)

Primary Indicators

(high-profile indicators)

Secondary Indicators

(internal indicators)

Submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV)

distribution, abundance, and health

Temperature and salinity

Land use/land cover change Dissolved oxygen and nutrients

Signature species Turbidity

Watershed integrity Phytoplankton ABC

Shellfish beds Shellfish & finfish abundance

Bathing beaches Macrophyte abundance

Freshwater inputs Benthic community structure

Water-supply wells/drinking water Xenobiotics in biota and sediments

Harmful Algal Blooms (HAB) Rare plant & animal populations

Monitoring - outputs and outcomes

Good outputs do not guarantee good outcomes, but it’s a start.

• Programme implementation (outputs). Verifiable targets related to the

plan terms of reference, i.e. are the goals and objectives of the plan

being met. Answers programmatic questions such as: (a) Is the

sampling covering the estuaries/coastal systems specified in the plan?

(b) Is the strategy defined for a particular system (e.g. sampling

according to a salinity gradient being followed?

• Programme effectiveness, i.e. environmental success (outcomes). A

distinct set of targets, based around specific ecological quality

achievements, must answer questions such as: (a) Are shellfish/finfish

areas increasing/decreasing? (b) Are salt marsh areas

increasing/decreasing? (c) How is the frequency/spatial scope of

elevated chlorophyll a evolving?

Tillamook Bay,

Oregon, USA

A small bay on the US NW

coast, about 10 X 3 km,

with depths of up to ~8 m.http://ocsdata.ncd.noaa.gov/BookletChart/18558

_BookletChart.pdf

Tillamook Bay monitoring plan - Outputs

Detail on parameters, time and space, methods, archiving, and cost.

Item Detail

Monitoring

Parameters

Terrestrial plants Sand/gravel, Green algae Mud/sand, Dense mixed algae Organic debris, Dense eelgrass Developed, Sparse eelgrass Water, Sparse mixed algae on dark substrates, Sparse mixed algae on light substrates

Stations The survey covers the extent of Tillamook Bay.

Frequency Aerial surveys at least every five years.

Sample Collection Multispectral sensor imaging on aircraft. Four hours during extreme low tide, high

resolution (~1 meter) images. Three spectral bands mimic bands 1 (blue), 3(red), and 4

(infrared) of Landsat TM. More than 300 separate frames collected and georeferenced.

Color photographs at the same time to improve the classification of digital files.

Guidelines or imaging specify images taken only at low tide, during maximum

delineation of submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV), periods of low turbidity and low or

no wind and clouds, sufficient identifiable land area to assure accurate plotting of beds.

Ground-truthing for eelgrass extent and distribution to correlate with imaging will occur

through the Eelgrass, Oyster, and Burrowing Shrimp Study and incidentally by other

agencies, organizations, and individuals (e.g., during fish or benthic studies, or other

research).

Data Management ArcInfo/ArcView GIS

Related Monitoring

Programs

Coordinate with Ecological Interactions Among Eelgrass, Oysters, and Burrowing Shrimp. Coordinate with Riparian Assessment. Coordinate with Tidal Wetlands Assessment. Benthic Invertebrate Inventory (Bay) Fish Use of the Estuary

Anticipated Cost $40,000/survey

Tillamook Bay monitoring plan - Outcomes

Ask the right questions, state verifiable management objectives.

Item Detail

Program Objective

(Core)

Track the abundance and distribution of eelgrass beds in Tillamook Bay.

Monitoring

Question(s)

Is the spatial extent of eelgrass beds in the estuary changing over time scales of years to

decades?

Are there changes in eelgrass density or other visual indicators of changes in eelgrass

health over time scales of years to decades?

Plan Objective No net decline in eelgrass beds (baseline = 363 hectares).

Program

Description

Eelgrass (Zostera spp.) meadows contribute to estuarine water quality and provide

habitat for many aquatic species, including salmonids. Eelgrass has also been identified

as Essential Fish Habitat. In 1995, the TBNEP used a prototype airborne imaging system

to collect multispectral data for Tillamook Bay at a 1-meter spatial resolution to:

(1) accurately map eelgrass beds throughout Tillamook Bay in order to establish an initial

baseline of eelgrass bed density and distribution and (2) identify a means of monitoring

the Bay environment in terms of cover and substrate that is both accurate and cost

effective.

Vegetation was assigned to one of six classes, and substrate was assigned to one of

four classes. During this survey, eelgrass beds were found to cover nearly 11% of the

area (approximately 363 hectares) of Tillamook Bay with the majority of the dense beds

in the northern half of the bay. Field surveys as part of the eelgrass monitoring project

and as part of related benthic surveys verified the accuracy of this assessment.

Tillamook Estuaries Partnership - Outcomes

PEM determines if actions result in improved conditions.

Displaying the resultsHow can we use GIS techniques?

Web has generated an abundance of online GIS.

• Choice of technology depends on

• Audience

• What we want to do

• GoogleEarth

• Good for general displays and for outreach

• Easy to produce high quality visualisations

• Large existing user base

• ArcGIS

• More sophisticated and powerful

• Expensive

• Has a range of web extensions

Combination of GIS and Google Earth

Oyster trestle mapping data draped on a satellite image.

Dungarvan Bay,

southern Ireland

Google Earth – simple image display

Progressive zoom on chorophyll in Sanggou Bay.

Courtesy – Plymouth Marine Laboratory Remote Sensing Group

Google Earth visualizations

Huangdun Bay land classification draped over topography.



Huangdun Bay sampling stations and ID data in a relational database.


Courtesy – PML

Remote Sensing

Group

Linking Google Earth to the SPEAR database in

situ ammonium sampling locations


Huangdun Bay chlorophyll time series linked to spatial data.

Courtesy – PML

Remote Sensing

Group

Linking Google Earth to the SPEAR database in

situ ammonium sampling locations

Courtesy – PML

Remote Sensing

Group

In situ sampling locations – dynamic link

to database


Free apps such as Google Earth can be used to enhance visualisation.

Courtesy – PML

Remote Sensing

Group

Linking Google Earth to the SPEAR in situ

chlorophyll-a sampling locations


Representation of chlorophyll a in Huangdun Bay, China.

Courtesy – PML

Remote Sensing

Group

Display of chlorophyll-a

Google Earth visualisations

Courtesy – PML

Remote Sensing

Group

Web-based GIS – Ria Formosa

Use of ManifoldTM for displaying and exploring monitoring data.

goodclam.org/GIS

GIS for aquaculture sites

Shellfish aquaculture mapped out in GIS – Long Island Sound.

Aquaculture Mapping Atlas - Connecticut

GIS for WFD transitional water bodies

Live website from the European Environment Agency (DISCOMAP).

Data per country compiled in the WISE project

SPEAR – Model for Huangdun Bay, China

Presentation of multiple data layers from monitoring and modelling.

Assembly of key data layers

• Water quality bay and boundaries

• Currents

• Bathymetry

• Hydrology

• Aquaculture practice

• Aquaculture mapping

• Land cover

• Meteorology

• 湾内和边界的水质• 水流• 高程图• 水文• 养殖活动• 养殖图• 地表植被• 气候

DISMAR server – Web GIS layout

Modelling and monitoring of chlorophyll in Ireland (Bantry Bay)

Layers

Overview,

zoom, pan,

scale,

Updates,

Notes (inc

legend) or

News (RSS

feed)

Viewer

Courtesy –

Plymouth Marine

Laboratory Remote

Sensing Group

DISMAR server – HAB in the Skagerrak

Modelling and monitoring of aquaculture and HAB interactions

Courtesy – PML

Remote Sensing

GroupSatellite chl-a (PML) Ferrybox chl-a and in situ

HAB measurements (NIVA)

Aquaculture locations (blue) Modelled surface current (red) and

flagellates (green): both met.no

Displaying monitoring data

Triangles are easy to visualise.

Adaptation of the Sediment Quality Triad

1 1

22

3 3

1

10

100Total coliforms

Macrobenthos Heavy metals

Cala do Norte

Upstream channel

Tagus estuary

Chapman et al., 1997. General guidelines for using the Sediment Quality

Triad. Marine Pollution Bulletin 54(6):368-372

Displaying monitoring data

An amoeba has a weird shape, suggesting undesirable conditions.

The Amoeba

Reference condition

(circle)

Seals

DO

Example of application: Wefering, F.M., Danielson, L.E., White, N.M., 2000. Using the

AMOEBA approach to measure progress toward ecosystem sustainability within a shellfish

restoration project in North Carolina. Ecological Modelling, 130 (1-3) 157-166.

SAVPCBs

Deviation from reference

(amoeba)

Tillamook Estuaries Partnership – Reporthttp://www.tbnep.org/

Report cards are widely used in the USA.

Connecting people and dataEyes over Puget Sound (Wa., USA)

Flagging unusual patterns with a colour scale.

http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/eap/mar_wat/eops/EOPS_2014_10_29.pdf

Synthesis

• Beware of misleading data, and drawing the wrong

conclusions

• The importance of choosing the right model

• Converting monitoring data into information – examples

for eutrophication assessment

• Outputs and outcomes – make sure you get your money’s

worth

• Presenting information. If you can’t do it effectively, you’ve

lost the battle

Case studies and monitoring plans

Monitoring is much more than measuring.

The Holy Grail

Information

Data

Knowledge

Wisdom

Expensive to acquire

Time

Days Years Decades Centuries

Expensive to process

Soci

etal

inve

stm

ent

Mo

reLe

ssN

on

e

Consolidated experience

Rare and misunderstood

Somewhere between information and knowledge, things start to get useful.

Documents

Monitorização de Sistemas Ambientais