Technical Report No. 3 Action Plan - Final

Technical Report No. 3  Action Plan - Final

Danish Environmental Protection Agency, DANCEE and

the Ministry of Environment of Latvia

DANCEE Project ref. No. M:128/023-004

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water

Framework Directive in Latvia

Technical Report No. 3

Action Plan -

How to define ecological status of surface water

Final

April 2004

Published

Project

Prepared

Approved

: April 2004

: 30.4480.02

: Loreta Urtane

: Mette Jeppesen

LEA

LHMA

LWM

MEP

MoE

RB

RBD

RBM

RBMA

RBMP

REB

SEI

SGS

ToR

TR

TN

CM

DANCEE

DEPA

DSD

EC

EIA

ELV

EP

EPD

ES

EU

FFD

GEP

GES

HES

HMWB

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

List of Abbreviations

AWB

BOD

CIS

Artificial Water Bodies

Biological Oxygen Demand

Common Strategy on the Implementation of the Water Framework

Directive

Cabinet of Ministers

Danish Co-operation for the Environment in Eastern Europe

Danish Environmental Protection Agency

Dangerous Substances Directive

European Commission

Environmental Impact Assessment

Emission Limit Value

Ecological Potential

Environmental Protection Department

Ecological Status

European Union

Fresh Water for Fish Directive

UWWTP

WB

WFD

WG

WQO

WQS

WRUP

Good Ecological Potential

Good Ecological Status

High Ecological Status

Heavily Modified Water Bodies

Latvian Environmental Agency

Latvian Hydrometeorological Agency

Latvian Law on Water Management

Maximum Ecological Potential

Ministry of Environment

River Basin

River Basin District

River Basin Management

River Basin Management Authorities

River Basin Management Plan

Regional Environmental Board

State Environmental Inspectorate

State Geological Survey

Terms of reference

Technical Report

Technical Note

Urban Waste Water Treatment Plant

Water Body

Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)

Working Group

Water Quality Objectives

Water Quality Standard

Water Resource Use Permit

1

1

2

3

4

5

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Table of contents

INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................1

WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS WITH REGARD

TO CLASSIFICATION OF WATER BODIES.....................................................................2

2.1

Classification of ecological status for surface water bodies ........................................2

2.1.1

Quality elements for assessment of ecological status ..........................................3

2.1.2

Evaluation of ecological status of surface water bodies and relations between the biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements ...................................................................................................7

2.2

Classification of chemical status for surface water bodies ........................................10

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF

CLASSIFICATION SCHEME..............................................................................................11

3.1.1

Rivers .................................................................................................................11

3.1.2

Lakes..................................................................................................................13

3.1.3

Transitional waters.............................................................................................16

3.1.4

Coastal waters ....................................................................................................18

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CLASSIFICATION SCHEME FOR SURFACE

WATER BODIES ...................................................................................................................20

4.1

Ecological classification of river types......................................................................20

4.2

4.3

Ecological classification of lake types.......................................................................22

Ecological classification of coastal water and transitional water types.....................26

ACTION PLAN FOR DEFINING OF ECOLOGICAL STATUS OF

SURFACE WATER................................................................................................................28

5.1

Implementation steps of the WFD in relation to ecological status of surface water..............................................................................................................28

5.2

5.3

Implementation deadline for classification of water bodies ......................................31

Defining of parametric values of indicative parameters that characterise each of the five quality classes ..................................................................................33

5.4

5.5

Recommendations for the establishment of classification scheme............................44

5.4.1

Data to be used for the definition of ecological status (ecological potential) of surface water .................................................................................44

5.4.2

Guidance documents to be used for the definition of ecological status

(ecological potential) of surface water...............................................................45

Recommendations for the classification of water bodies ..........................................46

5.5.1

Indicative parameters to be used for classification of water bodies...................46

5.5.2

Approach for the ecological classification of water bodies ...............................46

2

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Tables

Table 2-1: Biological quality elements to be used for the assessment of ecological status

(or ecological potential)........................................................................................................... 4

Table 2-2: Hydromorphological elements to be used for the assessment of ecological status (or ecological potential)................................................................................................ 5

Table 2-3: Chemical and physico-chemical quality elements to be used for the assessment of ecological status (or ecological potential) ...................................................... 7

Table 2-4: Summary of monitoring requirements of directives according to water type and matrix. ............................................................................................................................. 10

Table 3-1: Recommended parameters indicative of the quality elements for rivers....... 11

Table 3-2: Recommended parameters indicative of the quality elements for lakes ........ 13

Table 3-3: Recommended parameters indicative of the quality elements for transitional waters...................................................................................................................................... 16

Table 3-4: Recommended parameters indicative of the quality elements for coastal water ....................................................................................................................................... 18

Table 4-1: Preliminary classification of ecological status for rivers ................................. 21

Table 4-2: Preliminary classification of ecological status for lakes .................................. 23

Table 4-3: Preliminary classification of ecological status for coastal waters ................... 26

Table 5-1: Action plan to determine parametric values of indicative parameters of biological quality elements, hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements and chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the - rivers............. 33

Table 5-2: Action plan to determine parametric values of indicative parameters of biological quality elements, hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements and chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the - lakes .............. 35

Table 5-3: Action plan to determine parametric values of indicative parameters of biological quality elements, hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements and chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the - transitional waters...................................................................................................................................... 39

Table 5-4: Action plan to determine parametric values of indicative parameters of biological quality elements, hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements and chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the - coastal waters42

3

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Figures

Figure 1-1: List of project outputs......................................................................................... 1

Figure 2-1: Classification of surface water – implementation steps ................................... 3

Figure 2-2: The relations between the biological, hydromorphological and physicochemical quality elements for evaluation of ecological status of surface water bodies ..... 8

Figure 2-3: The relations between the biological, hydromorphological and physicochemical quality elements for evaluation of ecological potential of surface water bodies 9

Figure 5-1: Implementation steps of WFD in relation to ecological status of surface water and links between definite components of WFD...................................................... 29

Figure 5-2: Deadlines for implementation of requirements of the WFD in relation to classification of water bodies ................................................................................................ 31

Annexes

Annex 1 – Preliminary classification of ecological status for rivers

Annex 2 – Preliminary classification of ecological status for lakes

Annex 3 – Preliminary classification of ecological status for transitional waters

Annex 4 – Preliminary classification of ecological status for coastal waters

Annex 5 – Normative definitions of ecological status classifications

Annex 6 – Stepwise approach for the ecological classification

Annex 7 – Monitoring data used for the development of lake typology

1

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

1

Introduction

The present report is part of the reporting for the project financed by the Danish

Environmental Protection Agency (DEPA):

Transposition and implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive in Latvia.

The main objective of

TR 3 is to support MoE in preparation of Action Programme to complete the implementation of WFD and to provide general guidance on the assessment of ecological status (or ecological potential) leading to the overall ecological classification of water bodies for the purpose of the WFD.

Technical Report No.3:

Describes requirements of WFD with regard to classification of water bodies;

Provides proposed classification scheme, including proposal for indicative parameters which characterise quality elements and evaluation of current status for defining of parametric values to characterise quality elements;

Defines necessary further steps to define ecological status for surface water body types; and

Provides recommendations how to define the borders between good, high and moderate status.

In the list of main project outputs this report is numerate as

TR 3. Summary of main project outputs is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1-1: List of project outputs

Technical reports:

TR 1A: Typology of waters and procedure for characterisation of waters

TR 1B: Classification and presentation of status of waters

TR 2: Recommendations for the monitoring programs for surface, coastal and groundwater and CM Regulations on requirements for establishment of monitoring programs

TR 3: Draft Action Plan on how to define ecological status of fresh and coastal water;

TR 4: Revision of the draft Regulation on WRUP

TR 5: Elaboration of a specification of requirements and ToR for a data management/information system

Other outputs:

Draft legal acts for the transposition of Annexes II and V of the WFD

Assistance to MoE in preparation of information material on the WFD

Specification of requirements and ToR for a data management/information system

1

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

This TR are based on the following EU guidance documents:

Overall Approach to the Classification of Ecological Status and Ecological

Potential (ECOSTAT, Working Group 2 A);

Guidance on Establishing Reference Conditions and Ecological Status Class

Boundaries for Inland Surface Waters;

Guidance on Typology, Reference Conditions and Classification Systems for

Transitional and Coastal waters;

Guidance Document on Identification and Designation of Heavily Modified and Artificial Water Bodies; CIS Working Group 2.2; 10 December 2002.

2

Water Framework Directive requirements with regard to classification of water bodies

2.1 Classification of ecological status for surface water bodies

The Directive requires surface water classification through the assessment of ecological status (or ecological potential) and defines the quality elements (Annex V;

Table 1.1) that must be used for assessment of ecological status (or ecological potential), provides a general definition of ecological status (or ecological potential) for each of five quality classes (Annex V; Table 1.2.1-1.2.5).

For the purpose of classification of surface water the establishment of classification scheme and evaluation of ecological status are consecutive activities which are directly linked to classification of surface water (Figure 2-1)

From the implementation point of view it means that the classification scheme has to:

identify indicative parameters which will be measured or calculated in order to assess the condition of specific biological, hydromorphological and chemical & physico-chemical quality elements; and

define parametric values of indicative parameters that characterise each of five quality classes.

2

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Figure 2-1: Classification of surface water – implementation steps

Step 1:

Activities:

Establishment of classification scheme

Identification of indicative parameters for each of the specific biological, hydromorphological and chemical & physico-chemical quality element;

Defining of parametric values of indicative parameters characterised each of five quality classes;

Development of procedure how to express the results of biological monitoring (parametric values) as ecological ratio

Step 2: Assessment of ecological status

Estimation the condition of biological elements

Activities: Calculation of indices to evaluate ecological condition of biological elements

Step 3:

Activities:

Classification of water bodies

Evaluation of monitoring results (calculation of ecological ratio)

Development of maps to present classification of water bodies

2.1.1 Quality elements for assessment of ecological status

The purpose of typology is to group sites where the biology is similar in the absence of human impact, while purpose of classification is to address each of water body to one of five class of ecological status - high, good, moderate, poor and bad.

The WFD defines the quality elements that must be used for the assessment of ecological status (or ecological potential) and categorizes it into three groups:

Biological quality elements

Hydromorphological quality elements supporting the biological elements; and

Chemical and physico-chemical quality elements supporting the biological elements.

Taking into account that natural condition of river ecosystems is determined by physio-geographical condition of area the hydro-morphological and physico-chemical parameters are put in basement for typology. Therefore for characterisation of ecological status the WFD is focused on the biological elements, while hydromorphological elements, chemical and physicochemical elements are considered primarily as descriptive ones.

Descriptive quality elements means that the values of the physicochemical and hydromorphological quality elements are such as to support a biological community

3

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

of a certain ecological status, as this recognises the fact that biological communities are products of their physical and chemical environment.

According to EU guidance document - Overall Approach to the Classification of

Ecological Status and Ecological Potential: “The reference conditions of heavily modified (HMWB) and artificial water bodies (AWB) mainly depend on the hydromorphological changes necessary to maintain the specified uses listed in Article

4(3)(a), while maximum ecological potential (MEP), as the reference conditions for

HMWB&AWB, is intended to describe the best approximation to a natural aquatic ecosystem that could be achieved given the hydromorphological characteristics that cannot be changed without significant adverse effects on the specified use or the wider environment”.

Accordingly, the MEP biological conditions should reflect, as far as possible, the biological conditions associated with the closest comparable natural water body type at reference conditions, given the MEP hydromorphological and associated physico-chemical conditions (refer - HMWB Guidance Document Section 6.2.3).

(a) Biological quality elements for classification of ecological status

WFD provides a general definition for each of five classes of ecological status (Annex

V; Table 1.2) and more specific definitions for ecological status at high, good and moderate status (Annex V; Table 1.2.1 –1.2.5). The quality elements for the classification of ecological status (ecological potential) are listed in Annex V Section

1.1 of WFD.

For the purpose of classification of surface water the separate lists are provided for each of category of surface water:

Rivers

Lakes

Transitional waters

Coastal waters.

The biological quality elements for each of the surface water categories required by the WFD are summarised in Table 2-1.

Table 2-1: Biological quality elements to be used for the assessment of ecological status (or ecological potential)

1.

2.

3.

Rivers

Composition and abundance of aquatic flora (1);

Composition and abundance of benthic invertebrate fauna;

Composition, abundance and age structure of fish fauna

1.

2.

3.

(2);

Lakes

Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton;

Composition and abundance of other aquatic flora

Composition and abundance of benthic

Transitional waters

1.

Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton;

2.

Composition and abundance of other aquatic flora

(3);

3.

Composition and abundance of benthic

1.

2.

3.

Coastal waters

Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton;

Composition and abundance of other aquatic flora

(3);

Composition and abundance of benthic

4

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Rivers Lakes

Transitional waters

invertebrate fauna;

Coastal waters

invertebrate fauna;

4.

Composition, abundance and age structure of fish fauna

4.

Composition and abundance of fish fauna

Note: (1)- Phytoplankton as a biological quality element is essential and invertebrate fauna; representative only for large rivers. According to Regulation No.93 (adopted on February 17, 2004) “Regulations on surface water body types, their

characterization, classification and procedure for identification of

anthropogenic pressures” for Type 5: Big fast-floating river and Type 6: Big slow-running river is required;

(2)- The other aquatic flora for lakes are macrophytes and phytobentos;

(3)- The other aquatic flora for transitional waters & coastal waters are macroalgae and angiosperms

(b) Hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements quality elements for classification of ecological status

WFD provides a general definition for each of five classes of ecological status (Annex

V; Table 1.2) and more specific definitions for ecological status at high, good and moderate status (Annex V; Table 1.2.1 –1.2.5). The quality elements for the classification of ecological status (ecological potential) are listed in Annex V Section

1.1 of WFD.

For the purpose of classification of surface water the separate lists are provided for each of the categories of surface water:

Rivers

Lakes

Transitional waters

Coastal waters.

The biological quality elements for each of surface water category required by WFD are summarised in Table 2-2.

Table 2-2: Hydromorphological elements to be used for the assessment of ecological status (or ecological potential)

Rivers Lakes

Transitional waters

1- Hydrological regime

Coastal waters

1.

Quantity and dynamics of water flow;

2.

Connection to groundwater bodies

1.

Quantity and dynamics of water flow;

2.

Residence time;

3.

Connection to groundwater bodies

- -

5

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Rivers Lakes

Transitional waters

Coastal waters

1.

River continuity

2- River continuity

- - -

1.

2.

3.

River depth and width variation;

Structure and substrate of the river bed;

Structure of the riparian zone

3- Morphological conditions

1.

Depth variation;

2.

Quantity, structure and substrate of the lake bed;

3.

Structure of the lake shore

1.

2.

3.

Depth variation;

Quantity, structure and substrate of the bed;

Structure of the intertidal zone

1.

Depth variation;

2.

Structure and substrate of the coastal bed;

3.

Structure of the intertidal zone

-

4- Tidal regime

- 1.

Freshwater flow;

2.

Wave exposure

1.

Direction of dominant currents;

2.

Wave exposure

(c) Chemical and physico-chemical quality elements supporting the biological elements for classification of ecological status

The list of quality elements required by the Directive is subdivided into 3 groups of elements. One of mentioned subgroups are chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements, which includes:

General physico-chemical quality elements

1

;

Specific non-priority pollutants identified by Member States as being discharged in significant quantities; and

Specific priority pollutants as being discharged

2

Nevertheless it is noted in WFD Common Implementation Strategy document –

Overall Approach to the Classification of Ecological Status and Ecological Potential, that priority substances listed in Annex X “should only be taken into account in the classification of surface water chemical status and should

not be used as supporting

elements for the classification of ecological status”. Classification through the assessment of chemical status more detail is discussed in Chapter 2.2 of given Report and also in the report

TR1B.

The chemical and physico-chemical quality elements for the classification of ecological status (ecological potential) are listed in Annex V Section 1.1 of WFD and definitions of the condition of the quality elements in each status class for each surface water category are provided in Annex V Section 1.2.1 – 1.2.5.

The chemical and physico-chemical quality elements for each of the surface water categories required by WFD are summarised in Table 2-3. Guidance on getting better

6

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

results from classification of ecological status and chemical status are discussed in given Report and is provided in

TR1B.

Table 2-3: Chemical and physico-chemical quality elements to be used for the assessment of ecological status (or ecological potential)

Rivers Lakes

Transitional waters

Coastal waters

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Thermal conditions;

Oxygenation conditions;

Salinity;

Acidification status;

Nutrient conditions

1- General

1.

Transparency;

2.

Thermal conditions;

3.

Oxygenation conditions;

4.

Salinity;

5.

Acidification status;

6.

Nutrient conditions

1.

Transparency;

2.

Thermal conditions;

3.

Oxygenation conditions;

4.

Salinity;

5.

Nutrient condition

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Transparency;

Thermal conditions;

Oxygenation conditions;

Salinity;

Nutrient condition

2- Specific pollutants

1.

Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water;

2.

Pollution by other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities into the body of water

1.

Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water;

2.

Pollution by other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities into the body of water

1.

2.

Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water;

Pollution by other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities into the body of water

2.1.2 Evaluation of ecological status of surface water bodies and relations between the biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements

1.

Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water;

2.

Pollution by other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities into the body of water

The procedure defined by WFD anticipate that the values of the hydromorphological quality elements must be taken into account to asses high ecological status (or maximum ecological potential) class, while for other status (potential) classes given elements are required to have “conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified for the biological quality elements”. This is because if the values of biological quality elements characterising good, moderate, poor or bad status (or ecological potential) are achieved the condition of the hydromorphological quality

7

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

must be consistent with that achievement and therefore would not affect the classification of ecological status (or ecological potential).

The step by step evaluation of ecological status and the relations between the biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements are presented in Figure 2-2.

Figure 2-2: The relations between the biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements for evaluation of ecological status of surface water bodies

Do the estimated values for the biological quality elements meet reference conditions?

Classification of surface water bodies

Yes

Do the physicochemical conditions meet high status

Yes

Do the hydromorphological conditions meet high status

Yes

Classify as high status

No

No

No

Do the estimated values for the biological quality elements deviate only slightly from reference condition values?

No

Yes

Do the physico-chemical conditions (a) ensure ecosystem functioning and (b) meet the EQSs for specific pollutants?

Yes

No

Classify as good status

Classify on the basis of the biological deviation from reference condition

Is the deviation moderate?

Greater

Yes

Classify as moderate status

Is the deviation major?

Yes

Greater

Classify as poor status

Classify as bad status

Taking into account that reference conditions of heavily modified and artificial water bodies mainly depend on the hydromorphological changes of water body the evaluation of ecological potential status have to be start with evaluation of hydromorphological quality elements. The relations between the biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements when heavily modified water bodies and artificial water bodies are addressed to ecological potential class are presented in Figure 2-3.

8

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Figure 2-3: The relations between the biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements for evaluation of ecological potential of surface water bodies

Similarly with hydromorphological quality elements according to procedure defined by WFD the values of the chemical and physico-chemical elements quality elements must be taken into account to asses high ecological status (or maximum ecological potential) class, while for other status (potential) classes given elements are required to have “conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified for the biological quality elements”. This is because if the values of biological quality elements characterising good, moderate, poor or bad status (or ecological potential) are achieved the condition of the chemical and physico-chemical elements quality must be consistent with that achievement and therefore would not affect the classification of ecological status (or ecological potential).

9

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

2.2 Classification of chemical status for surface water bodies

Regarding to chemical status two quality classes is defined by WFD:

Good chemical status;

Failing to achieve good chemical status.

Chemical status has to be addressed to requirements defined by each definite dangerous substances daughter directive which will be repealed by the WFD from

December 2013. In the transition period until the WFD is fully implemented the requirements of mentioned directives are still in force and quality of water bodies have to characterised as good or failing to achieve good chemical status.

Requirements for water quality standards in the mentioned directives are addressed to all categories of surface water – rivers, lakes, coastal water and transitional water.

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity of each definite dangerous substance the WQS are defined either for water column (including suspended sediments) or sediment or biota.

Requirements of dangerous substances Daughter directives -

82/176/EEC

,

84/156/EEC,

83/513/EEC, 86/280/EEC, 84/491/EEC, 88/347/EEC, 90/415/EEC

, are summarised in Table 2-4.

Table 2-4: Summary of monitoring requirements of directives according to

water type and matrix.

EU dangerous substances daughter directives

82/176/EEC – for Mercury from Chlor-alkali

84/156/EEC – for Mercury from Other Sectors

83/513/EEC -

Cadmium

86/280/EEC - for Carbon Tetrachloride

84/491/EEC - for Hexachlorocyclohexane

88/347/EEC – for Aldrin, .etc.

90/415/EEC - for Dichloroethane, etc.

Rivers

Category of surface water

Lakes

Transitional water

Coastal water

W S B W S B W S B W S B

X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X

(1)

X

(1)

X X

(1)

X

(1)

X X

(1)

X

(1)

X X

(1)

X

(1)

X X X X X X X X X X X X

X X

(2)

X

(2)

X X

(2)

X

(2)

X X

(2)

X

(2)

X X

(2)

X

(2)

X X

(3)

X

(3)

X X

(3)

X

(3)

X X

(3)

X

(3)

X X

(3)

X

(3)

Notes: B – biota; S – sediment; W - water column; (1) - only for DDT and pentachlorophenol (PCP); (2) - only for aldrin, dieldrin, endrin and isodrin, hexachlorobenzene (HCB), hexachlorobutadiene (HCBD); (3) - only for trichlorobenzene (TCB)

Chemical status describes whether or not the concentration of any pollutant exceeds standards that have been set at the European level. That means that it is only for substances, where Environmental Quality Standards are adopted at the Commission level, chemical status are assessed. For other substances the EQS shall be established at the national level and then included in the assessment of ecological status (see also

TR1B).

10

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

3

Recommendations for the establishment of classification scheme

WFD requires monitoring of parameters indicative of the conditions of biological quality elements as part of established monitoring programmes

3

and assessment of the ecological status (or ecological potential) class of a water body based on the estimate of the condition of the quality elements provided by these monitored parameters. It means that obtained monitoring date initially have to be used for defining of parametric values for parameters indicative of the quality elements.

A list with all parameters and quality elements required by WFD is summarised in

Tables 2-1 to 2-3. In most cases achieving a reliable assessment of the condition of a particular quality element may require consideration of the monitoring results for several parameters indicative of that element. Therefore in practice mentioned list of quality elements could be interpreted in different ways and sorts of parameters may be useful for evaluation of ecological status additionally. The sorts of parameters that may be useful in estimating the condition of a biological element are summarised in

Tables 3-1 to 3-4.

Recommendations on parameters indicative of the quality elements was developed by project team based on:

Analyses of existing monitoring data;

Evaluation of existing scientific experience and knowledge;

Monitoring practice of Danish EPA and Swedish EPA; and

EU guidance documents.

Detailed Action plan how to define ecological status of surface water body types is presented in Chapter 5 of this Report.

3.1.1 Rivers

Table 3-1: Recommended parameters indicative of the quality elements for rivers

Quality element

Aquatic flora

General parameter required by WFD

1- Biological elements

Composition and abundance of macrophytes

Recommended indicative parameter

Composition and abundance of phytoplankton (1)

Overall surface coverage in percents;

-

Species composition;

-

Presence of

Potamogeton alpinus

Presence of blue green algae - % of biomass;

-

Presence of blue green algae – number of cells in %

) *

!"# & '( &

' + & ,

) (' ( *

(&

'

) ) &'-

11

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Quality element

General parameter

Benthic invertebrate fauna required by WFD

Recommended indicative parameter

Composition and abundance -

Saprobic index;

Fish fauna Composition, abundance and age structure

-

Some of diversity indexes;

Species composition

Shannon index

-

Number of native species

-

Age structure

-

Presence of sensitive taxa

Degree of abnormities, diseases, external parasites

2- Hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements

Hydrological regime Quantity and dynamics of water flow;

Connection to groundwater bodies

River continuity River continuity

Velocity;

-

Flow rate;

Water table height;

Surface water discharge

Morphological conditions River depth and width variation

Structure and substrate of the river bed

-

Number and type of barrier;

Provisions for passage of aquatic organisms

-

Depth;

-

Width

Substrate composition;

Size of particles

Structure of bed

Structure of the riparian zone Structure of the riparian zone

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

General

Thermal conditions

Oxygenation conditions

Salinity

Acidification status

Nutrient conditions

Specific pollutants Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water

Pollution by other substances identified as being

Water temperature

-

Dissolved oxygen;

-

BOD;

COD

conductivity

-

pH

Total P;

-

Total N;

-

N- NO3

-

N- NO2;

-

N-NH4

P- PO4

-

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in water; and/or

-

Concentration in sediment; and/or

-

Concentration in biota

Taking into account bioaccumulation

12

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Quality element

General parameter

quantities into the body of water

required by WFD

discharged in significant

Note: (1)- Phytoplankton as a biological quality element is essential and representative only for large rivers. According to Regulation No.93 (adopted on February 17, 2004) “Regulations on surface water body types, their

characterization, classification and procedure for identification of

anthropogenic pressures” for Type 5: Big fast-floating river and Type 6:

Big slow-running river is required

3.1.2 Lakes

Recommended indicative parameter

capacity for each definite pollutant

-

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

-

Concentration in biota

Table 3-2: Recommended parameters indicative of the quality elements for lakes

Quality element

Aquatic flora

Benthic invertebrate fauna

General parameter

1- Biological elements

Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton

Fish fauna Composition, abundance and age structure

Indicative parameter

Presence of blue green algae - % of biomass;

-

Presence of blue green algae – number of cells in %;

-

Nygaard – Thunmark’s index (1)

Some of diversity indices;

-

Presence of Chrysophyta;

-

Presence of Desmidiales;

Dominating taxa;

Bloom frequency/intensity

-

Overall surface coverage in percents;

Composition and abundance of macrophytes

Composition and abundance of phytobenthos

Species composition;

Presence of sensitive taxa

-

Presence of red algae;

-

Presence of filamentous algae;

Analyses of Diatoms (2)

Composition and abundance -

Saprobic index (3, 4);

Some of diversity indices;

Number of organisms;

Biomass;

Species composition

-

Shannon index

Number of native species

13

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Quality element General parameter Indicative parameter

Age structure

-

Presence of sensitive taxa

-

Degree of abnormities, diseases, external parasites

2- Hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements

Hydrological regime Quantity and dynamics of

Morphological conditions water flow;

Residence time

Connection to groundwater bodies

Depth variation

-

-

-

-

-

Quantity of water flow;

Dynamics of water flow

Residence time

water table height;

surface water discharge

mean depth;

-

max depth

Quantity of bed; Quantity, structure and substrate of the lake bed

Structure of the lake shore

-

Substrate composition;

-

Structure of bed

Length;

Bank features;

Vegetation cover

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

General

Transparency

Thermal conditions

Oxygenation conditions

Salinity

Acidification status

Nutrient conditions

Specific pollutants Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water

Pollution by other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities into the body of water

Secchi depth;

-

Colour;

-

turbidity

Temperature of epilimnion;

Temperature in deepest horizonts

Dissolved oxygen;

BOD;

COD

-

- conductivity

pH

-

total P;

total N;

total N/total P

N- NO3

-

N- NO2;

-

P- PO4

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

-

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

-

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in water;

14

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Quality element General parameter Indicative parameter

and/or

-

Concentration in sediment; and/or

-

Concentration in biota

Note: (1) phytoplankton indices that characterise the condition in a lake, were based upon on the number of taxa from different classes or orders. Originaly

Nygaard – Thunmark’s index describes relation between Chloroccales and

Desmidiales. It is recommended that for Latvian condition the modified

Nygaard – Thunmark’s index developed in Estonian can be used;

(2) it is recommended by EU experts. There is no corresponding experience in Latvia;

(3) taking into account that species composition of bentic communities in litoral zone are presented by large number of taxa, while bentic communities of pelagic zone are presented mainly by Chironomus and Oligochaeta, it is recommended only characteristics of bentic communities of litoral zone to use as indicative parameters to evaluate quality of biological element – bentic invertebrate fauna;

(4) although saprobic index is used to evaluate water quality of running water this parameter can be used also for evaluation of biological quality of lakes if following precondition is considered:

sample are collected only in zone of wave where ecological conditions are similar with running water;

parameter cannot be used for shallow polyhumic lakes which are located in massive of rised bog;

15

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

3.1.3 Transitional waters

Table 3-3: Recommended parameters indicative of the quality elements for transitional waters

Quality element General parameter Indicative parameter

Aquatic flora

1- Biological elements

Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton

Composition and abundance of macroalgae

Species composition in spring season;

Species composition in summer season;

Species composition in autumn season;

Abundance in spring season;

Abundance composition in summer season;

Abundance composition in autumn season;

Biomass in spring season;

Biomass composition in summer season;

Biomass composition in autumn season

Depth limit of macroalgae

Depth limit of macroalgal community

Not present

Benthic invertebrate fauna

Composition and abundance of angiosperms

Composition and abundance of benthic invertebrate fauna

Fish fauna Composition and abundance of fish fauna

Biotic Coefficient;

Biotic Index

Abundance;

Species composition

2- Hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements

Morphological conditions

Tidal regime

Depth variation

Quantity, structure and substrate of the bed

Structure of the intertidal zone

Freshwater flow

Wave exposure

mean depth;

max depth

Quantity of bed;

Substrate composition;

Structure of bed

Structure of the riparian zone

Freshwater flow

Wave exposure

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

General Transparency Secci depth in spring season;

Secci depth in summer season

16

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Quality element General parameter

Thermal conditions

Oxygenation conditions

Salinity

Nutrient conditions

Specific pollutants Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water

Pollution by other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities into the body of water

Indicative parameter

Thermal conditions

Oxygen content (ml/l) in summer season;

Oxygen saturation (%) in summer season;

Salinity

Phosphate concentration

( mol/l) in winter (late

January – early February);

Nitrate concentration

( mol/l) in winter (late

January – early February);

Total phosphorus in winter

(late January – early

February), spring (late

April – early May) and summer (July – August)

Total nitrogen in winter

(late January – early

February), spring (late

April – early May) and summer (July – August)

Phosphate in spring (late

April – early May)

Nitrate in spring (late April

– early May)

Silicate concentration

( mol/l) in winter (late

January – early February)

Silicate in spring (late April

– early May)

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

17

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

3.1.4 Coastal waters

Table 3-4: Recommended parameters indicative of the quality elements for coastal water

Quality element General parameter Indicative parameter

Aquatic flora

1- Biological elements

Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton

Composition and abundance of macroalgae

Species composition in spring season;

Species composition in summer season;

Species composition in autumn season;

Abundance in spring season;

Abundance composition in summer season;

Abundance composition in autumn season;

Biomass in spring season;

Biomass composition in summer season;

Biomass composition in autumn season

Depth limit Furcellaria

lumbricalis (Baltic coast) or Fucus vesiculosus(Riga

Gulf)

Depth limit of macroalgal community

Presence

Benthic invertebrate fauna

Composition and abundance of angiosperms

Composition and abundance of benthic invertebrate fauna

Biotic Coefficient;

Biotic Index

2- Hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements

Morphological conditions

Tidal regime

Depth variation

Structure and substrate of the coastal bed

Structure of the intertidal zone

Direction of dominant currents

Wave exposure

mean depth;

max depth

Substrate composition;

Structure of bed

Structure of the intertidal zone

Direction of dominant currents

Wave exposure

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

General Transparency

Secci depth in spring season;

Secci depth in summer season

18

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Quality element General parameter

Thermal conditions

Oxygenation conditions

Salinity

Nutrient conditions

Specific pollutants Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water

Pollution by other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities into the body of water

Indicative parameter

Thermal conditions

Oxygen content (ml/l) in summer season;

Oxygen saturation ( %) in summer season

Salinity

Phosphate concentration

( mol/l) in winter (late

January – early February);

Nitrate concentration

( mol/l) in winter (late

January – early February);

Total phosphorus in winter

(late January – early

February), spring (late

April – early May) and summer (July – August)

Total nitrogen in winter

(late January – early

February), spring (late

April – early May) and summer (July – August)

Phosphate in spring (late

April – early May)

Nitrate in spring (late April

– early May)

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

-

Concentration in biota

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

-

Concentration in water; and/or

-

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

19

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

4

The establishment of classification scheme for surface water bodies

The defining of parametric values for indicative parameters which characterise quality elements is very essential activity to develop the classification scheme. The

Directive requires that classification scheme and classification of surface water bodies in practice have to be based on monitoring results. Nevertheless in order to evaluate applicability of existing monitoring data and to test recommended procedure for defining of ecological status of surface water bodies it was decided that project team in close cooperation with LEA will develop proposal for classification scheme (the first step of classification of water bodies), including:

Development of list of parameters indicative for the evaluation of condition of biological quality; and

Drafting proposal with parametric values describing quality classes for biological elements and chemical elements where data is available.

Taking into account that parametric values describing the parametric values of biological quality elements have to be defined based on monitoring results of water bodies the term “preliminary classification” is introduced and used to characterised present status for defining of ecological status of surface water.

The preliminary classification is also needed for the identification of water bodies at risk not to achieve good status. The identification shall be carried out as a part of characterisation during 2004.

4.1 Ecological classification of river types

The preliminary classification of ecological status was done by project team in close cooperation with Latvian Environmental Agency. The following monitoring data is used to define parametric values of indicative parameters that characterise chemical elements of ecological status and biological element - Saprobity index:

long-term monitoring database - number of stations: 67; period: 1991-2002;

chemical parameters: BOD5, COD, N/NH4, N/NO2, N/NO3, total N, P/PO4, total P, pH, conductivity, O2, biological parameter – saprobity index;

small rivers monitoring database - number of stations: 1477; period: 1995-

2002; chemical parameters: BOD5, N/NH4, N/NO2, N/NO3, total N, P/PO4, total P, pH, conductivity, O2; biological parameter – saprobity index;

small rivers monitoring database - number of stations: 134; period: 2002-

2002; chemical parameters: BOD5, N/NH4, N/NO2, N/NO3, total N, P/PO4, total P, pH, conductivity, O2; biological parameter – saprobity index

Hydrobiological monitoring database of Northern Vidzeme Biosphere reserve

- number of stations: 40; period: 1991-2002, 2003; biological parameter – species composition, coverage

20

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Table 4-1: Preliminary classification of ecological status for rivers

General parameter Indicative parameter

1- Biological elements

1.1- Aquatic flora

Composition and abundance of macrophytes

Overall surface coverage in percents:

Species composition:

3.1- General

Oxygenation conditions

Presence of Potamogeton alpinus

1.2- Benthic invertebrate fauna

Composition and abundance Saprobic index

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

Dissolved oxygen

BOD

R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C

R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C

R

R/C

R

R/C

R

R/C

R

R/C

R

R/C

R

R/C

Nutrient conditions Total P

R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C

R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C

R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C

Total N

N- NH4

R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C

R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C

Note: R – parametric values characterising reference condition is defined; C – parametric values characterising quality classes are defined

21

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Directive for rivers requires to define parametric values for 3 biological quality elements, 7 chemical and physico-chemical quality elements supporting the biological elements and 6 hydromorphological quality elements supporting the biological elements in total (refer Table 2-1 to 2-3). In order to characterised mentioned quality elements it is recommended use 36 (+ specific pollutants) indicative parameters in total, which is 12 (+ specific pollutants) indicative parameters of chemical and physico-chemical quality elements, 12 indicative parameters of hydromorphological quality elements and 12 indicative parameters of biological quality elements accordingly (refer Table 3-1).

Taking into account that existing network of surface monitoring was developed to characterise - the location of pollution sources and land use; structure and amount of emissions of polluting substances; economic importance of the region; transboundary pollution, existing monitoring data currently only partly can be used for characterisation purposes of water bodies. Table 4-1 summarise indicative parameters for which parametric values have been defined.

4.2 Ecological classification of lake types

The preliminary classification of ecological status was done by project team in close cooperation with Latvian Environmental Agency. In order to develop typology of

Latvian lakes monitoring data of

2407

lakes is used (refer Annex 1). The following monitoring data is used to define parametric values of indicative parameters characterised chemical and biological elements of ecological status:

Long-term monitoring data – number of lakes: 8; chemical parameters: total

N, total P, Secci depth, chlorophyll-a; biological parameter : phytoplankton biomass;

Summer season lake data – number of lakes: 165; chemical parameters: total nitrogen Ntot,, total phosphorus Ptot, Secci depth, chlorophyll-a; biological

parameter : phytoplankton biomass;

Monitoring data of Institute of Biology– number of lakes: 70 lakes; chemical

parameters: total N, Secci depth; biological parameter : phytoplankton biomass, species composition; species composition of machrophytes, coverage by macrophytes.

Lake survey database of Northern Vidzeme Biosphere reserve - number of

stations: 65; period: 1992; biological parameter – species composition, coverage.

22

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Table 4-2: Preliminary classification of ecological status for lakes

Quality element General parameter

1- Biological elements

1.1- Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Composition and

Indicator species abundance of macrophytes

Presence of indicator species

Indicator species coverage

1.1.2- Phytoplankton

Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton

Total coverage with macrophytes

Biomass

Dominating taxa

Presence of red algae (Rhydophyta)

Presence of blue algae

1.2- Benthic invertebrate fauna

Composition and abundance of benthic invertebrate fauna

Number of species

Number of organisms

Biomass

R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C

R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C

R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C

R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C R/C

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

R

23

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Quality element General parameter

Dominating taxa

R R R

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1- General

Nutrient conditions

Total P

R/C R R

R R R R R R

R R/C R/C R/C R R/C

Total N

Chlorophyll-a

R/C

R/C

R

R

R

R

R

R

R/C R/C R/C

R/C R/C R/C

R

R

R/C

R/C

Note: R – parametric values characterising reference condition is defined; C – parametric values characterising quality classes are defined

R

R

R

R

24

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Directive for lakes requires to define parametric values for 4 biological quality elements, 8 chemical and physico-chemical quality elements supporting the biological elements and 6 hydromorphological quality elements supporting the biological elements in total (refer Table 2-1 to 2-3). In order to characterised mentioned quality elements it is recommended use 51 (+ specific pollutants) indicative parameters in total, which is 16 (+ specific pollutants) indicative parameters of chemical and physico-chemical quality elements, 13 indicative parameters of hydromorphological quality elements and 22 indicative parameters of biological quality elements accordingly (refer Table 3-2).

Taking into account that existing network of lake monitoring was developed to characterise - the location of pollution sources and land use; structure and amount of emissions of polluting substances; economic importance of the region; transboundary pollution, existing monitoring data currently only partly can be used for characterisation purposes of water bodies. Table 4-2 summarise indicative parameters for which parametric values have been defined.

25

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

4.3 Ecological classification of coastal water and transitional water types

Table 4-3: Preliminary classification of ecological status for coastal waters

General parameter Indicative parameter

1- Biological elements

1.1- Aquatic flora

Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton

Species composition in spring season;

Species composition in summer season;

Species composition in autumn season;

Abundance in spring season;

Abundance in summer season;

Abundance in autumn season;

Biomass in spring season;

Biomass in summer season;

Composition and abundance of macroalgae

1.2- Benthic invertebrate fauna

Composition and abundance of benthic invertebrate fauna

Biomass in autumn season

Depth limit of macroalgae (1)

Depth limit of macroalgal community

Biotic Coefficient;

Biotic Index

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

N

R/C2

N

R/C2

NP

R/C2

NP

R/C2

R/C2

R/C2

R/C2

R/C2

R/C2

R/C2

R/C2

R/C2

R/C2

R/C3

R/C3

R/C3

R/C3

R/C3

R/C3

26

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

General parameter Indicative parameter

3.1- General

Transparency

Oxygenation conditions

Secci depth in summer season

R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2

Oxygen content (ml/l) in summer season;

R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2

Oxygen saturation ( %) in summer season; R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2

Nutrient conditions

Phosphate concentration ( mol/l) in winter (late January – early February);

Nitrate concentration ( mol/l) in winter

(late January – early February);

Total phosphorus in winter (late January – early February),

Total nitrogen in winter (late January – early February),

R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2

R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2

R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2

R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2 R/C2

Note: (1) - Depth limit of Furcellaria lumbricalis (Stony coast of Baltic Proper) or Fucus vesiculosus (Stony coast of Riga Gulf); N – is not required by WFD; NP – not present; R – parametric values characterising reference condition is defined; C2 – parametric values characterising 2 quality classes (high & good quality) are defined; C3 – parametric values characterising 2 quality classes (high & good & fair quality) are defined

27

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Directive requires to define parametric values for 4 (transitional water) and 3 (coastal waters) biological quality elements, 7 (transitional water) and 7 (coastal waters) chemical and physico-chemical quality elements supporting the biological elements and 5 (transitional water) and 5 (coastal waters) hydromorphological quality elements supporting the biological elements in total (refer Table 2-1 to 2-3). In order to characterised mentioned quality elements it is recommended use 38 and 34 (+ specific pollutants) parameters accordingly for transitional and coastal water indicative in total, which is 14 and 12 (+ specific pollutants) indicative parameters of chemical and physico-chemical quality elements, 8 and 7 indicative parameters of hydromorphological quality elements and 16 and 15 indicative parameters of biological quality elements accordingly (refer Table 3-3 and 3-4).

Existing monitoring data currently only partly can be used for classification of water bodies. Table 4-3 summarise indicative parameters for which parametric values have been defined.

5

Action plan for defining of ecological status of surface water

5.1 Implementation steps of the WFD in relation to ecological status of surface water

The main objective of

TR 3 is to support MoE in preparation of Action Program to complete the implementation of WFD and to provide general guidance on the assessment of ecological status (or ecological potential) leading to the overall ecological classification of water bodies for the purpose of the WFD.

From the implementation point of view the different components of directive (definite activities required by WFD) are closely linked to each other. With regard to classification of Water Bodies such components are:

Monitoring,

Classification of water bodies; and

Reference condition.

Reference conditions correspond to high ecological status and therefore can be addressed to be a part of the procedure for classification of water bodies as well.

Nevertheless the different deadlines for establishing type-specific reference condition and for classification of water bodies are set by the Directive. Existing monitoring data have to be used for determination of reference conditions, while data provided by new monitoring programmes have to be put as basement for development of classification scheme for water bodies.

However, taking into account that the same indicative parameters have to be used both for reference conditions and classification of water bodies, the development of classification scheme (Activity 1- identification of indicative parameters to characterise quality elements) have to be initiated together with determination of reference conditions (refer Figure 5-1). The preliminary classification shall also be used to identify water bodies at risk by the end of 2004. This activity is linked also to development of monitoring programmes (refer – Figure 5-1).

28

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Figure 5-1: Implementation steps of WFD in relation to ecological status of surface water and links between definite components of WFD

CLASSIFICATION OF WATER BODIES

Step 1: ESTABLISHMENT OF CLASSIFICATION SCHEME

Activity 1: Identification of indicative parameters for each of specific quality elements

COMPONENTS OF WFD

Develop a typology for water bodies

Output: List of

Indicative

Parameters

Output: Preliminary

Classification of Ecological

Status

Define typespecific reference conditions

Activity 2: Develop reference condition and preliminary classification - define temporary parametric values of indicative parameters for good and moderate ecological status (or potential);

Activity 3: Revision of List of Indicative

Parameters

Activity 4: Revision of preliminary classification

Identify pressures

Identify of water bodies at risk

Output:

Monitoring programs

Design of monitoring programs

Carried out monitoring

Activity 5: Develop classification (define parametric values of indicative parameters characterised each of five quality classes)

Output:

Surface water quality data

Activity 6: Development of procedure how results of biological monitoring (parametric values) expressed as ecological ratio

Output:

Water bodies are addressed to quality classes

Step 2: ASSESSMENT OF ECOLOGICAL STATUS

Activity 7: Estimation the condition of biological elements

Activity 8: Calculation of indices to evaluate ecological condition of biological elements

Step 3: CLASSIFICATION OF WATER BODIES

Activity 9: Evaluation of monitoring results (calculation of ecological ratio)

Activity 10: Development of maps to present classification of water bodies

Revision of monitoring programs

Maps with water bodies addressed to quality classes

29

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

The classification of water bodies is a step by step process consisting of the following steps:

Step 1- Establishment of classification scheme;

Step 2 - Assessment of ecological status; and

Step 3 - Classification of water bodies.

This is long lasting process and is closely linked to monitoring and reference condition components.

Step 1: Establishment of classification scheme – include the following activities:

Activity 1: Identification of indicative parameters for each of the specific quality elements;

Activity 2: Develop reference condition and preliminary classification - define temporary parametric values of indicative parameters for good and moderate ecological status (or potential);

Activity 3: Revision of lists of indicative parameters;

Activity 4: Revision of preliminary classification;

Activity 5: Develop classification (define parametric values of indicative parameters characterised each of five quality classes); and

Activity 6: Development of procedure how to express the results of biological monitoring (parametric values) as ecological ratio

Development of classification scheme is initiated already and proposal for indicative parameters (Activity 1) is developed by project team and discussed in Chapter 3 of this report. Similarly the proposal for reference condition (refer -

TR1B) and preliminary classification (Activity 2) is developed (refer Chapter 5.3 and Annexes 1-

4). The establishment of classification scheme will be complete when:

Parametric values will be defined for all indicative parameters; and

Preliminary values of indicative parameters will be test by using new data set

(new monitoring data)

Step 2: Assessment of ecological status - include the following activities:

Activity 7: Estimation the condition of biological elements; and

Activity 8: Calculation of indices to evaluate ecological condition of biological elements.

This is practical activities where monitoring data are used to assess the quality of water bodies. Primarily the values of the biological quality elements must be taken into account when water bodies are addressed to any of the ecological status

(ecological potential) classes (Activity 7). Expression of ecological quality ratio is the next step to evaluate status of water bodies and is used in order to ensure comparability the results of the biological monitoring systems (Activity 8).

Step 3: Classification of water bodies – include the following activities:

Activity 9: Evaluation of monitoring results (calculation of ecological ratio)

Activity 10: Development of maps to present the classification of water bodies.

30

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

This is final stage of classification which results in maps presenting status of the water bodies.

5.2 Implementation deadline for classification of water bodies

Figure 5-2 presents how different steps of classification of water bodies are linked to other components of the Directive and include implementation deadlines set by the

Directive as well.

Figure 5-2: Deadlines for implementation of requirements of the WFD in relation to classification of water bodies

Classification of surface water

Component of WFD Deadline

Step 1: Establishment of

classification scheme

Activity 1: Identification of indicative parameters for each of specific biological, hydromorphological and chemical & physico-chemical quality element;

Activity 2: Develop reference condition and preliminary classification - define temporary parametric values of indicative parameters

for good and moderate ecological status (or potential)

Activity 3: Revision of List of

Indicative Parameters

Activity 4: Revision of preliminary classification

2003

Identification the individual river basins. List of their competent authorities(Article 3, Annex I)

Implementation: laws, regulations and administrative provisions(Article 24)

2003-12-22

2003-12-22

2004

Analysis of river basin (characteristics, impact of human activity, economic analysis) (Article 5, Annex II, III)

List of priority substances

(Commission) (Article 16, Annex X)

2004-12-22, rev. 2012-

12-22 and every 6 years

Type-specific reference conditions and reference network

Identification of Pressures

Assessment of Impact

2004-12-22

2004-12-22

2004-12-22

Economic analysis

2004-12-22

Identification the water bodies at risk

List of protected areas (Article 6,

Annex IV)

2004-12-22

2004-12-22, rev. every 4 years

2006

Operational programmes for the

monitoring of water status (Article 8,

Annex V)

Environmental quality standards on priority substances(Article 16)

2006-12-22

2006-12-22, new substances 5 years after inclusion on the list

Public information and consultation:

(Article 14)

-

timetable and work programme

2006-12-22

31

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Classification of surface water

Component of WFD

Step 2: Assessment of ecological status

Activity 5: Defining of parametric values of indicative parameters -

for all of five quality classes

Activity 6: Development of procedure how results of biological monitoring

(parametric values) expressed as ecological ratio

2007

Public information and consultation:

(Article 14)

significant water management issues

2007-12-22

Activity 7: Estimation the condition of biological elements

Activity 8: Calculation of indices to evaluate ecological condition of biological elements

Step 3: Classification of water bodies

Activity 9: Evaluation of monitoring results (calculation of ecological ratio)

Activity 10: Development of maps to present classification of water bodies

2008

Public information and consultation:

(Article 14)

-

draft copies of the River Basin

Management Plan

2008-12-22

2009

Programmes of measures

-

-

established operational revised(Article 11, Annex VI)

River basin management plans(Article

13, Annex VII)

2009-12-22

2012-12-22 every 6 years

2009-12-22, rev. every 6 years

Reporting, art. 5, 8 and 13(Article 15) Within 3 months of their completion.

2010

Pricing, recovery of costs(Article 9,

Annex III)

2012

Discharges into surface waters are controlled according to the combined approach(Article 10, IX)

2015

Good surface water status (objectives for environmental quality fulfilled)

2010

2012-12-22

2015-12-22

32

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

(Article 4,1, Annex VI)

5.3 Defining of parametric values of indicative parameters that characterise each of the five quality classes

This section determines activities needed to develop classification of water bodies.

Determination of parametric values for indicative parameters which characterises quality elements is very essential for classification scheme. This is long lasting and resources consuming process which is based both on already existing monitoring data and as data sets obtained during implementation of new monitoring programs.

In order to develop Action Plan for classification of water bodies indicative parameters is categorized as:

Parameters which can be defined and tested based on already existing databases and monitoring data;

Parameters which can be defined based on new data set (new monitoring programmes).

Summary of the analyses is presented in Tables 5-1 to 5-4.

Table 5-1: Action plan to determine parametric values of indicative parameters of biological quality elements, hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements and chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the

- rivers

General parameter required by WFD

Recommended indicative parameter

Temporary parametric values are defined (1)

Temporary parametric values are defined as additional project task

(2)

Existing monitoring data can be used to determine parametric values

1- Biological elements

1.1-Aquatic flora

Overall surface coverage in

Composition and abundance of macrophytes percents;

Presence of

Potamogeton

alpinus

Composition and abundance of

Species composition

Presence of blue green algae - % of phytoplankton (1) biomass

1.2- Benthic invertebrate fauna

Composition and abundance

Saprobic index;

Monitoring data is needed to determine parametric values

33

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Some of diversity indexes;

Species composition

1.3- Fish fauna

Composition, abundance and age structure

Shannon index

Number of native species

Age structure

Presence of sensitive taxa

Degree of abnormities, diseases, external parasites

2- Hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements

2.1- Hydrological regime

Velocity

Flow rate

(3)

(3)

Quantity and dynamics of water flow;

Connection to water table height; groundwater bodies

surface water

2.2 -River continuity

discharge

River continuity number and type of barrier; provisions for passage of aquatic organisms

2.3 - Morphological conditions

River depth and width variation

Structure and substrate of the river bed depth width

Size of particles

Substrate

Thermal conditions Water temperature

Oxygenation conditions

Dissolved oxygen;

BOD;

COD

Salinity conductivity

Acidification status pH composition

Structure of bed

Structure of the riparian zone

Structure of the riparian zone

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1 - General

Nutrient conditions total P;

Total N;

N- NO3

N- NO2;

N-NH4

P- PO4

3.2 - Specific pollutants

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(5; 6)

(5; 6)

34

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water

Pollution by other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities into the body of water

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

Note : (1)- Parametric values are presented in Annex 1 ; (2) – Parametric values are presented in Technical Note “Proposal for Amendments of CM Regulation No.93

“Regulations on surface water body types, their characterization, classification and procedure for identification of anthropogenic pressures”; (3) Based on following data sources - long-term monitoring database (LEA); small rivers monitoring database

(LEA) , small rivers monitoring database (LEA) Hydrobiological monitoring database of Northern Vidzeme Biosphere reserve, River monitoring data (Latvian University;

Institute of Biology); (4) hydrological data base - (HMA); (5) hydrological data base -

(HMA); (6) data base (Geological Survey)

Table 5-2: Action plan to determine parametric values of indicative parameters of biological quality elements, hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements and chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the

- lakes

General parameter required by WFD

Recommended indicative parameter

Temporary parametric values are defined (1)

Temporary parametric values are defined as additional project task

(2)

Existing monitoring data can be used to determine parametric values

Monitoring data is needed to determine parametric values

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton

Presence of blue algae - % of biomass

Presence of blue algae – number of cells in %

Nygaard –

Thunmark’s index

Some of diversity indices

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

35

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Presence of

Chrysophyta

Presence of

Desmidiales

Dominating taxa

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

Composition and abundance of macrophytes

Bloom frequency/intensity

Indicator species

Presence of indicator species

Indicator species coverage

Total coverage

Composition and abundance of phytobenthos

Composition and abundance with macrophytes

Presence of red algae

Presence of filamentous algae

Analyses of

Diatoms

1.2 - Benthic invertebrate fauna

Saprobic index

Some of diversity indices;

Number of organisms;

Biomass;

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

Species composition

(3)

(3)

1.3 - Fish fauna

Composition, abundance and age structure

Shannon index

Number of native species

Age structure

Presence of sensitive taxa

Degree of abnormities,

(7)

(7)

(7)

(7)

(7)

Quantity and dynamics of water flow;

Residence time diseases, external parasites

2- Hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements

2.1 - Hydrological regime

Quantity of water flow

Dynamics of water flow

Residence time

Connection to groundwater bodies water table height surface water discharge

2.2. - Morphological conditions

Depth variation mean depth max depth

Quantity, structure and substrate of the

Quantity of bed

36

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Substrate composition

Structure of bed

Structure of the lake shore

Length

Bank features

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1. - General

Transparency

Vegetation cover

Thermal conditions

Oxygenation conditions

Secchi depth

Colour

Temperature of epilimnion

Temperature in deepest horizonts

Dissolved oxygen

BOD

Salinity

COD

- conductivity

Acidification status pH

Nutrient conditions total P total N total N/total P

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

(3)

N- NO3

N- NO2

P- PO4

3.2 - Specific pollutants

Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each

Pollution by other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities into the body of water definite pollutant

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

Note: (1)- Parametric values are presented in Annex 2; (2) – Parametric values are presented in Technical Note “Proposal for Amendments of CM Regulation No.93

“Regulations on surface water body types, their characterization, classification and procedure for identification of anthropogenic pressures”; (3) Based on following data sources - long-term monitoring database (LEA); small rivers monitoring database

(LEA), small rivers monitoring database (LEA) Hydrobiological monitoring database

37

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

of Northern Vidzeme Biosphere reserve,Lake monitoring data (Latvian University;

Institute of Biology); (4) hydrological data base - (HMA); (5) hydrological data base -

(HMA); (6) data base (Geological Survey); (7) Data base of Fish Research Institute

38

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Table 5-3: Action plan to determine parametric values of indicative parameters of biological quality elements, hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements and chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the

- transitional waters

General parameter required by WFD

Recommended indicative parameter

Temporary parametric values are defined (1)

Temporary parametric values are defined as additional project task

(2)

Existing monitoring data can be used to determine parametric values

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1 - phytoplankton

Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton

Species composition in spring season

Species composition in summer season

Species composition in autumn season

Abundance in spring season

Abundance composition in summer season

Abundance composition in autumn season

Biomass in spring season

Biomass composition in summer season

Biomass composition in autumn season

1.1.2 - macroalgae

Composition and abundance of macroalgae

Depth limit of macroalgae

Depth limit of macroalgal community

Not present Composition and abundance of angiosperms

1.2 - Benthic invertebrate fauna

Biotic Coefficient;

Biotic Index

Composition and abundance of benthic invertebrate fauna

1.3 - Fish fauna

Composition and abundance of fish

Abundance

Monitoring data is needed to determine parametric values

39

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Species composition

2- Hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements

2.1 - Morphological conditions

Depth variation mean depth

Quantity, structure and substrate of the bed max depth

Quantity of bed

Substrate composition

Structure of bed

Structure of the intertidal zone

2.2 - Tidal regime

Freshwater flow

Wave exposure

Structure of the riparian zone

Freshwater flow

Wave exposure

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1 - General

Transparency Secci depth in spring season

Secci depth in summer season

Thermal conditions Thermal conditions

Oxygenation conditions

Oxygen content

(ml/l) in summer season

Oxygen saturation

Salinity

Nutrient conditions

(%) in summer season

Salinity

Phosphate concentration

( mol/l) in winter

(late January – early February)

Nitrate concentration

( mol/l) in winter

(late January – early February

Total phosphorus in winter (late

January – early

February)

Total phosphorus in spring (late April

– early May)

Total phosphorus in summer (July –

August)

Total nitrogen in winter (late

January – early

February)

Total nitrogen in spring (late April – early May)

40

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Total nitrogen in summer (July –

August)

Phosphate in spring

(late April – early

May)

Nitrate in spring

(late April – early

May)

Silicate concentration

( mol/l) in winter

(late January – early February)

Silicate in spring

(late April – early

May)

3.2 - Specific pollutants

Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in

Pollution by other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities into the body of water water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

Note: (1)- Parametric values are presented in Annex 3; (2) – Parametric values are presented in Technical Note “Proposal for Amendments of CM Regulation No.93

“Regulations on surface water body types, their characterization, classification and procedure for identification of anthropogenic pressures”

41

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Table 5-4: Action plan to determine parametric values of indicative parameters of biological quality elements, hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements and chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the

- coastal waters

General parameter required by WFD

Recommended indicative parameter

Temporary parametric values are defined (1)

Temporary parametric values are defined as additional project task

(2)

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1 - Pytoplankton

Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton

Species composition in spring season

Species composition in summer season

Species composition in autumn season

Abundance in spring season

Abundance composition in summer season

Abundance composition in

Composition and abundance of macroalgae

Composition and abundance of angiosperms

1.2 - Benthic invertebrate fauna

Composition and abundance of benthic invertebrate fauna autumn season;

Biomass in spring season

Biomass composition in summer season

Biomass composition in autumn season

Depth limit of macroalgae (3)

Depth limit of macroalgal community

Not present

Biotic Coefficient

Biotic Index

(4)

(4)

2- Hydromorphological elements supporting the biological elements

2.1 - Morphological conditions

Existing monitoring data can be used to determine parametric values

Monitoring data is needed to determine parametric values

42

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Depth variation mean depth

Structure and substrate of the coastal bed

Structure of the intertidal zone

2.2 - Tidal regime

Direction of dominant currents

Wave exposure max depth

Substrate composition

Structure of bed

Structure of the intertidal zone

Direction of dominant currents

Wave exposure

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1 - General

Transparency Secci depth in spring season

Secci depth in summer season

Thermal conditions Thermal conditions

Oxygenation conditions

Oxygen content

(ml/l) in summer season;

Salinity

Nutrient conditions

Oxygen saturation

( %) in summer season

Salinity

Phosphate concentration

( mol/l) in winter

(late January – early February);

Nitrate concentration

( mol/l) in winter

(late January – early February

Total phosphorus in winter (late

January – early

February)

Total phosphorus in spring (late April

– early May)

Total phosphorus in summer (July –

August)

Total nitrogen in winter (late

January – early

February)

Total nitrogen in spring (late April – early May)

Total nitrogen in summer (July –

August)

Phosphate in spring

(late April – early

43

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Pollution by all priority substances identified as being discharged into the body of water

May)

Nitrate in spring

(late April – early

May)

3.2 - Specific pollutants

Taking into account bioaccumulation

Pollution by other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities into the body of water capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

Taking into account bioaccumulation capacity for each definite pollutant

Concentration in water; and/or

Concentration in sediment; and/or

Concentration in biota

Note: (1)- Parametric values are presented in Annex 4; (2) – Parametric values are presented in Technical Note “Proposal for Amendments of CM Regulation No.93

“Regulations on surface water body types, their characterization, classification and procedure for identification of anthropogenic pressures”; (3) Depth limit of

Furcellaria lumbricalis (Stony coast of Baltic Proper) or Fucus vesiculosus (Stony coast of Riga Gulf); (4) - are defined only for TYPE 3: Gulf of Riga sandy Coast and

TYPE1

: South-eastern exposed Sandy coast

5.4 Recommendations for the establishment of classification scheme

The normative definitions of the ecological status of surface water provides the basis for classifying the ecological status (or potential) of surface water bodies. Normative definitions of the ecological status of surface water, mentioned above, are defined by

Directive - Annex V, Table 1.2, and national legislation – Cabinet Ministers

Regulation No.93 (adopted on February 17, 2004) “Regulations on surface water

body types, their characterization, classification and procedure for identification of

anthropogenic pressures” (refer Annex 5 of this Report).

5.4.1 Data to be used for the definition of ecological status (ecological potential) of surface water

In order to collect data needed to establish a coherent and comprehensive overview of water status within each river basin district and to permit the classification of all surface water bodies into one of five classes and groundwater into one of two classes the Monitoring programmes will be developed until the end of 2006.

44

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

The legal basis for the development of the mentioned Monitoring programme is

Cabinet of Ministers Regulation No.92 (adopted on February 17, 2004)

Requirements for monitoring of surface waters, groundwater and protected areas

and development of monitoring programmes”, which defines the requirements for:

Monitoring of Ecological Status and Chemical Status for Surface Waters;

Monitoring for Groundwater Quantitative Status; and

Monitoring of Groundwater Chemical Status.

The definition of the parametric values to characterise ecological status (or potential) has to be based on results obtained during implementation of programmes mentioned before. Nevertheless the assessment of available information carried out by the

Project demonstrates that there are sufficient amount of data already collected by different science and research institutions as well responsible authorities of MoE.

Therefore the existing information and data bases can be used to define ecological status as well (refer Tables 5.1-5.4).

Similarly, the considerable amount of data will be collected during implementation of

EU financed STAR project (Latvian project partner is Laboratory of Hydrobiology of

Institute of Biology). It is recommended by Project to use also the data of mentioned project for definition of parametric values of indicative parameters to be used for the ecological classification of surface water.

5.4.2 Guidance documents to be used for the definition of ecological status

(ecological potential) of surface water

Several guidance documents have been developed already by EU to support implementation of WFD. The ecological classification of surface water is discussed in the following EU guidance documents:

Overall Approach to the Classification of Ecological Status and Ecological

Potential (ECOSTAT, Working Group 2 A);

Guidance on Establishing Reference Conditions and Ecological Status Class

Boundaries for Inland Surface Waters;

Guidance on Typology, Reference Conditions and Classification Systems for

Transitional and Coastal waters;

Guidance Document on Identification and Designation of Heavily Modified and Artificial Water Bodies; CIS Working Group 2.2; 10 December 2002.

Taking into account that research and technological development play an important role for the implementation of the Water Framework Directive and in particular for definition of ecological status of surface water the 5th Framework Programme supports research in the field of surface water. The following research programmes which relate to ecological classification are defined as high priorities by EU

Commission:

The development of methods for indication and assessment of the ecological status of rivers (AQEM project & STAR project);

The development of methods for indication and assessment of the ecological status of shallow lowland lakes (ECOFRAME project);

The understanding of functional aspects within rivers in relation to their loads and other impacts from the catchment (TARGET project);

45

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

The assessment and prediction of anthropogenic pressures and their impacts on sensitive freshwater systems to acidification and their potential of recovery (RECOVER-2010 project) etc.

Three of projects mentioned before – AQEM project ( www.aqem.de

), STAR project

( www.eustar.at

) and ECOFRAME project (Contact Brian Moss, University of

Liverpool, UK), are estimated as the most applicable for purposes of ecological classification of surface water.

The STAR project will develop and test an assessment procedure for streams and rivers by using benthic macroinvertebrates. The method developed will be tested in many parts of Europe and will, hence, be applicable for selected stream types in most ecoregions in Europe. The Laboratory of Hydrobiology, Institute of Biology

(University of Latvia) acts as the Latvian STAR Project partner and is involved for testing mentioned methods in Latvian natural condition.

5.5 Recommendations for the classification of water bodies

Biological quality elements, as well as supporting hydromorphological and physicochemical quality elements have to be used for the assessment of ecological status or potential of water bodies (refer Table 2-1 -2.3). The relative roles of hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements are discussed in Chapter

2.1.2 and are illustrated in Figures 2-2 and 2-3.

5.5.1 Indicative parameters to be used for classification of water bodies

Taking into account that different parameters are sensitive to different pressures, it is recommended to estimate the ecological status of surface water by using several parameters that are indicative to definite quality elements (bearing in mind the normative definitions for the element).

In the latter case, the condition of the element should be estimated by the results for the worst affected parameter, or group of parameters, indicative of the effects of different pressures on the element.

5.5.2 Approach for the ecological classification of water bodies

WFD (Annex II Article 1.3) requires establishing the type-specific biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical conditions representing the values defined in Tables 1.2.1 – 1.2.5 of Annex V for a natural water bodies and for a heavily modified water bodies (HMWB) or an artificial water bodies (AWB).

It is required by Directive to define the ecological status for natural water bodies and ecological potential for HMWB or AWB. A slightly different approach has to be used for natural and for HMWB or AWB (refer Figures 2-2 and 2-3).

For the definition of ecological status (or potential) the following stepwise

approach defined by EU guidance document – Overall Approach to the Classification of

Ecological Status and Ecological Potential, shall be used:

Step 1: Definition of High Ecological Status and Maximum Ecological

Potential;

Step 2: Definition of Good Ecological Status and Good Ecological Potential;

46

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Step 3: Definition of Moderate Ecological Status and Moderate Ecological

Potential;

Step 4: Definition of Poor Ecological Status and Poor Ecological Potential;

Step 5: Definition of Bad Ecological Status and Bad Ecological Potential.

(a) High Ecological Status and Maximum Ecological Potential

For natural water bodies, the values of the relevant biological quality elements at high ecological status (HES) reflect those normally associated with that type under undisturbed conditions, and show no, or only very minor, evidence of distortion; i.e. the biological quality elements correspond totally, or nearly totally, to undisturbed conditions.

For HMWBs & AWBs, the values of the relevant biological quality elements at

Maximum Ecological Potential (MEP), reflect, as far as possible given the MEP hydromorphological and associated physico-chemical conditions, those of the closest comparable surface water body type.

The general precondition for the defining of HES or MEP is that only in case if the values for all the biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements reflect their type-specific conditions the High Ecological Status or

Maximum Ecological Potential can be defined.

The defining of the HES and MEP in details are discussed in Annex 6 of this Report.

(b) Good Ecological Status and Good Ecological Potential

For natural water bodies, the values of the relevant biological quality elements for the surface water body show low levels of distortion resulting from human activity, but deviate only slightly from those normally associated with the surface water body type under undisturbed conditions.

For an HMWB or AWB to be classified as being at “good ecological potential”

(GEP) there must be no more than slight changes in the values of the relevant biological quality elements as compared to their values at MEP.

The general precondition for the defining of “good ecological status”(GES) or GEP is that only if the values for the biological and physico-chemical quality elements reflect, as relevant, the values defined for GES or GEP should a water body be classified as GES or GEP.

The defining of the GES and GEP in details are discussed in Annex 6 of this Report.

(c) Moderate Ecological Status and Moderate Ecological Potential

A water body should be classified as moderate status/potential where:

The values for the biological quality elements differ moderately

10 from the type specific communities;

The values for the biological quality elements differ moderately and the physico-chemical quality element values are less than good or;

The values for the biological quality elements are better than moderate but the physicochemical quality element values are less than good.

47

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

If the biological quality elements are at moderate status or potential, the condition of the physico-chemical and hydromorphological quality elements must, by definition, be consistent with the achievement of those biological values.

The defining of the moderate ES and moderate EP in details are discussed in Annex 6 of this Report.

(d) Poor Ecological Status and Poor Ecological Potential

In accordance with requirements of WFD (Annex V, Section 1.2), if the values for the relevant biological quality elements show evidence of major alteration from their type specific values, the water body must be classified as ”poor”.

The decision on whether a water body is at poor status/potential or not is dictated by the condition of the biological quality elements. The condition of the physicochemical and hydromorphological quality elements only affects that decision indirectly through their influence on the condition of the biological elements.

The defining of the poor ES and poor EP in details are discussed in Annex 6 of this

Report.

(e) Bad Ecological Status and Bad Ecological Potential

In accordance with requirements of the WFD (Annex V, Section 1.2), if the values for the relevant biological quality elements show evidence of severe alteration from their type specific values, the water body must be classified as bad”.

The decision on whether a water body is at bad status (or potential) or not is dictated by the condition of the biological quality elements. The condition of the physicochemical and hydromorphological quality elements only affects that decision indirectly through their influence on the condition of the biological elements.

The defining of the bad ES and bad EP in details are discussed in Annex 6 of this

Report.

48

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Annex 1 – Preliminary classification of ecological status for rivers

49

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Preliminary classification of ecological status for rivers

TYPE – 1: Fast-floating stream with medium size catchment area

Indicative parameter of quality element

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Dominant macrophyte communities

High Good Moderate

Hildebrandia

rivularis, Fontinalis antipyretica,

Amblystegium riparium,

Potamogeton alpinus;

Sparganium

emersum;

Cladophora agglomerations only sporadic

Cladophora agglomerations occurs;

Bryophytes present;

Sporadic presence of

Blue green algae on stones

Overall surface coverage in percents:

Never exceeds 30%

1.2- Benthic invertebrate fauna

Saprobic index

Never exceeds 30%

< 1,8 1,8 – 2,0 2,0 - 2,3

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1- General

Dissolved oxygen

BSP5 (mg/l)

N/NH4 (mg/l)

N kop (mg/l)

P kop (mg/l)

>8

<2,0

0,09

< 1,5

<0,04

6 - 8

2,0 – 2,5

0,09 - 0,12

1,5 - 2,0

0,04 – 0,065

4 - 6

2,5 – 3,0

0,12 – 0,15

2,0 – 2,5

0,065 – 0,090

Poor

Cladophora agglomerations occurs;

Bryophytes occassional

Blue green algae constitute mats on stones

2,3 – 2,7

2 - 4

3,0 – 3,5

0,15 – 0,18

2,5 – 3,0

0,090– 0,115

Bad

Blue green algae mats on stones;

Bryophytes absent

> 2,7

<2

> 3,5

> 0,18

>3,0

> 0,115

50

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

TYPE – 2: Slow-running stream with medium size catchment area

Characteristics of river:

Indicative parameter of quality element

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Dominant macrophyte communities

Overall surface coverage in percents:

High

Potamogeton

praelongus, Sium erectum, Sium latifolium

f.submersus;

Streams are slow-running (velocity is <0,2 m/s) and shallow with sandy and silty sediments which are covered by organic debris. Water temperature in summer months is over 20

Overall surface coverage 5 – 30%

Good

Potamogeton

perfoliatus,

P.praelongus, Sium latifolium f.submersus, Nuphar lutea, Sparganium

emersum;

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes never exceeds 30%

Moderate

Nuphar lutea,

Sparganium emersum,

Myriophyllum spicatum,

Potamogeton

canadensis;

0

C

pectinatus, Elodea

Cladophora agglomerations occurs

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes exceeds

30%

Poor

Nuphar lutea,

Sparganium emersum, Lemna

minor occasional;

Cladophora agglomerations in mass

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes less than

30%

Bad

Blue green algae mats on fallen trunks and twigs;

Macrophytes absent

1.2- Benthic invertebrate fauna

Saprobic index < 2,0 2,0 – 2,3 2,7 – 3,0 > 3,0 2,3 – 2,7

51

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Good Moderate Poor Indicative parameter of quality element

High

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1- General

>7

<2,0

<0,1

< 1,5

<0,045

5 - 7

2,0 – 3,0

0,1 - 0,16

1,5 – 2,5

0,045 – 0,090

3 - 5

3,0 – 4,0

0,16 – 0,24

2,5 – 3,5

0,090 – 0,135

1 - 3

4,0 – 5,0

0,24 – 0,32

3,5 – 4,5

0,135 – 0,180

Dissolved oxygen

BSP5 (mg/l)

N/NH4 (mg/l)

N kop (mg/l)

P kop (mg/l)

Bad

<1

> 5,0

> 0,32

>4,5

> 0,180

52

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

TYPE – 3: Fast-floating river with large size catchment area

Characteristics of river:

Indicative parameter of quality element

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1-

Macrophytes

Dominant macrophyte communities

Overall surface coverage in percents:

Rivers are fast-floating (velocity is >0,2 m/s) and medium deep with sandy and stony riverbed Water temperature in summer months is below 20

High

Hildebrandia

rivularis, Fontinalis antipyretica,

Amblystegium riparium, Butomus umbellatus f.submersus,

Schoenoplectus lacustris f.submersus,

Potamogeton praelongus, P alpinus, Callitriche

sp.

Overall surface coverage 5 – 30%

0

C

Good

Potamogeton

praelongus,

P.perfoliatus,

Ranunculus sp

Nuphar lutea,

Sparganium emersum, Butomus umbellatus f.submersus,

Schoenoplectus lacustris f.submersus,

Callitriche sp.;

Bryophytes present

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes never exceeds 30%

Moderate

Nuphar lutea,

Sparganium emersum,

Myriophyllum spicatum,

Potamogeton pectinatus, P.crispus,

Elodea canadensis,

Ranunculus sp.;

Cladophora agglomerations occurs;

Bryophytes present

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes exceeds

30%

Poor

Nuphar lutea,

Sparganium emersum,

Potamogeton pectinatus,

Myriophyllum

spicatum occasional;

Blue green algae constitute mats on stones;

Cladophora agglomerations occurs;

Bryophytes occassional

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes less than

30%

Bad

Blue green algae mats on stones;

Bryophytes absent

53

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

High Good Moderate Poor Indicative parameter of quality element

1.2- Benthic invertebrate fauna

Saprobic index < 1,7 1,7 – 2,0 2,0 - 2,3

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1- General

Dissolved oxygen

BSP5 (mg/l)

N/NH4 (mg/l)

N kop (mg/l)

P kop (mg/l)

>8

<2,0

0,09

< 1,8

<0,05

6 - 8

2,0 – 2,5

0,09 - 0,12

1,8 - 2,3

0,05 – 0,075

4 - 6

2,5 – 3,0

0,12 – 0,15

2,3 – 2,8

0,075 – 0,100

2,3 – 2,7

2 - 4

3,0 – 3,5

0,15 – 0,18

2,8 – 3,3

0,100– 0,125

Bad

> 2,7

<2

> 3,5

> 0,18

>3,3

> 0,125

54

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

TYPE – 4: Slow-running river with large size catchment area

Characteristics of river:

Rivers are slow-running (velocity is <0,2 m/s) and medium deep with sandy and silty sediments which are covered by organic debris. Water temperature in summer months is over 20

0

C

Indicative parameter of quality element

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1-

Macrophytes

Dominant macrophyte communities

High

Potamogeton

praelongus, P.lucens,

P.perfoliatus, Lemna trisulca, Sium erectum, Nymphaea sp., Hydrocharis

morsus- ranae;

Nuphar lutea,

Nymphaea sp.,

Potamogeton praelongus, P.lucens,

P.perfoliatus,

Sagittaria sagittifolia,

Lemna trisulca,

Schoenoplectus lacustris,

Hydrocharis morsus-

ranae;

Good Moderate

Nuphar lutea,

Sparganium emersum, Elodea canadensis,

Myriophyllum spicatum, P.crispus,

Lemna minor;

Cladophora agglomerations occurs

Poor

Nuphar lutea,

Sparganium emersum, Elodea canadensis,

Myriophyllum

spicatum;

Cladophora agglomerations occurs

Blue green algae mats on fallen trunks and twigs

Bad

Overall surface coverage in percents:

Overall surface coverage 5 –

30%

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes never exceeds

30%

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes exceeds 30%

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes less than 30%

55

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Indicative parameter of High quality element

1.2- Benthic invertebrate fauna

Good Moderate Poor

2,7 – 3,0 Saprobic index < 2,0 2,0 – 2,3 2,3 – 2,7

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1- General

Dissolved oxygen

BSP5 (mg/l)

N/NH4 (mg/l)

N kop (mg/l)

P kop (mg/l)

>7

<2,0

<0,16

< 2

<0,06

5 - 7

2,0 – 3,0

0,16 – 0,24

2,0 – 3,0

0,06 – 0,090

3 - 5

3,0 – 4,0

0,24 – 0,32

3,0 – 4,0

0,090 – 0,135

1 - 3

4,0 – 5,0

0,32

4,0 – 5,0

0,135 – 0,180

Bad

> 3,0

<1

> 5,0

0,32 -0,40

>5,0

> 0,180

56

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

TYPE – 5: Big fast-floating river with very large size catchment area

Characteristics of river:

Indicative parameter of quality element

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Dominant macrophyte communities

Overall surface coverage in percents:

Rivers are fast-floting (velocity is >0,2 m/s) and medium deep to deep with sandy and stony sediments. Water temperature in summer months is below 20

High

Hildebrandia

rivularis, Fontinalis antipyretica,

Amblystegium riparium, Butomus umbellatus f.submersus,

Schoenoplectus lacustris f.submersus,

Potamogeton praelongus,

P.perfoliatus,

Overall surface coverage 5 –

30%

Butomus umbellatus

f.submersus, Nuphar lutea, Schoenoplectus lacustris f.submersus,

P.perfoliatus,

Ranunculus sp.,

Sparganium

emersum,

Good

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes never exceeds

30%

0

C

Moderate

Myriophyllum

spicatum,

Potamogeton pectinatus, Elodea canadensis,

Ranunculus sp.;

Cladophora agglomerations occurs;

Bryophytes present

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes exceeds 30%

Poor

Nuphar lutea,

Sparganium emersum,

Potamogeton pectinatus,

Myriophyllum

spicatum occasional;

Cladophora agglomerations occurs;

Bryophytes occassional

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes less than 30%

Bad

Blue green algae mats on stones;

57

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Indicative parameter of High quality element

1.2- Benthic invertebrate fauna

Good Moderate Poor

2,7 – 3,0 Saprobic index < 2,0 2,0 – 2,3

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1- General

Dissolved oxygen

BSP5 (mg/l)

N/NH4 (mg/l)

N kop (mg/l)

P kop (mg/l)

>8

<2,0

0,09

1,8

<0,04

6 - 8

2,0 – 2,5

0,09 - 0,12

1,8 - 2,8

0,04 – 0,065

2,3 - 2,7

4 - 6

2,5 – 3,0

0,12 – 0,15

2,8 - 3,8

0,065 – 0,090

2 - 4

3,0 – 3,5

0,15 – 0,18

3,8 - 4,8

0,090– 0,115

Bad

> 3,0

<2

> 3,5

> 0,18

>4,8

> 0,115

58

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

TYPE – 6: Big slow-running river very large size catchment area

Characteristics of river:

Indicative parameter of quality element

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Dominant macrophyte communities

Rivers are slow-running (velocity is <0,2 m/s) and medium deep to deep with sandy and silty sediments which are covered by organic debris. Water temperature in summer months is over 20

High

Potamogeton

praelongus, P.lucens,

Lemna trisulca,

Butomus umbellatus,

Schoenoplectus

lacustris;

Good

Nuphar lutea,

Nymphaea sp.,

Sparganium emersum, Butomus umbellatus,

Schoenoplectus lacustris,

Potamogeton lucens,

P.perfoliatus,

Potamogeton pectinatus, Sagittaria

sagittifolia;

Moderate

0

C

Poor Bad

Blue green algae mats on fallen trunks and twigs;

Nuphar lutea,

Sparganium emersum, Elodea

Canadensis,

Potamogeton

pectinatus;

Nuphar lutea,

Sparganium emersum, Elodea

Canadensis, Typha

latifolia;

Overall surface coverage in percents:

Overall surface coverage 5 –

30%

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes do not exceeds

30%

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes exceeds 30%

Overall surface coverage with macrophytes less than 30%

59

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Indicative parameter of High quality element

1.2- Benthic invertebrate fauna

Good Moderate Poor

Saprobic index < 2,25 2,25 – 2,5

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1- General

Dissolved oxygen

BSP5 (mg/l)

N/NH4 (mg/l)

N kop (mg/l)

P kop (mg/l)

>7

<2,0

< 0,1

< 1,8

<0,045

5 - 7

2,0 – 3,0

0,1 - 0,16

1,8 – 2,8

0,045 – 0,090

2,5 – 2,75

3 - 5

3,0 – 4,0

0,16 – 0,24

2,8 – 3,8

0,090 – 0,135

2,75 – 3,0

1 - 3

4,0 – 5,0

0,24 – 0,32

3,8 – 4,8

0,135 – 0,180

Bad

> 3,0

<1

> 5,0

> 0,32

>4,8

> 0,180

60

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Annex 2 – Preliminary classification of ecological status for lakes

61

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Preliminary classification of ecological status for lakes

TYPE 1: Shallow lakes with hard water (>2 m) oligohumic

Indicative parameter of quality element

1- Biological elements

High Good

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Indicator species

Presence of indicator species

Indicator species coverage

Total coverage with macrophytes

Chara sp., Nitella sp., dominating

Najas marina,

Stratiotes aloides

dominating

>50%

>80%

Chara sp., Nitella sp.,

Cladium mariscus Najas marina

Stratiotes aloides

dominating

<50%

>80%

Moderate

Chara sp., Nitella sp.

frequently

10-30%

>80%

Poor

Chara sp., Nitella sp.

rare

<10%

>80%

Bad

absent

>80%

62

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

TYPE 2: Shallow lakes (>2 m) with hard water polyhumic

Indicative parameter of quality element

High Good

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Indicator species

Myriophyllum alterniflorum

Cladium mariscus

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

Najas marina

Cladium mariscus

Myriophyllum alterniflorum

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

Presence of indicator species

Indicator species coverage

Total coverage with macrophytes dominating

>50%

>50% frequently

>50%

>70%

Moderate

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

frequently

<10%

>70%

Poor

rare

<1%

>50%

Bad

absent

>50%

63

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

TYPE 3: Shallow lakes (<2 m) with soft water oligohymic

Indicative parameter of quality element

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Indicator species

High

Isoetes lacustris,

I.echinospora,

Lobelia dortmanna,

Litorella uniflora,

Subularia aquatica,

Sparganium affine

frequently

Good

Isoetes lacustris,

I.echinospora,

Lobelia dortmanna,

Litorella uniflora,

Subularia

aquatica,

Sparganium

affine frequently

Moderate

Isoetes lacustris,

I.echinospora,

Lobelia dortmanna,

Litorella uniflora,

Subularia

aquatica,

Sparganium

affine rare

Poor

absent Presence of indicator species

Indicator species coverage

Total coverage with macrophytes

>5%

<30%

<5%

<30%

<1%

>30% >30%

Bad

absent

>30%

64

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

TYPE 4: Shallow lakes (<2 m) with soft water polyhymic

Indicative parameter of quality element

High Good

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Indicator species

Sphagnum riparium fluitans

Utricularia minor,

Nuphar lutea

Sphagnum riparium fluitans

Utricularia minor,

Nuphar lutea

Moderate

frequently frequently

Sphagnum riparium fluitans

,

Utricularia minor,

Nuphar lutea

frequently Presence of indicator species

Indicator species coverage

Total coverage with macrophytes

>5%

<30%

<5%

<30%

<5%

<30%

Poor

rare

<1%

<30%

Bad

absent

<10%

65

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

TYPE 5: Medium depth lakes with hard water (2 – 9 m) oligohymic

Indicative parameter of quality element

High Good

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Indicator species

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

Myriophyllum alterniflorum,

Stratiotes aloides,

Potamogeton

lucens frequently

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

Myriophyllum alterniflorum

Stratiotes aloides,

Potamogeton

lucens frequently

Moderate

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

Myriophyllum alterniflorum

Stratiotes aloides,

Potamogeton lucens

frequently

Poor

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

Potamogeton lucens

rare Presence of indicator species

Indicator species coverage

Total coverage with macrophytes

>5%

>30%

<5%

>50%

<5%

>50%

<1%

>50%

Bad

absent

>50%

66

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Type 6: Medium depth lakes with hard water (2 – 9 m) polyhymic

Indicative parameter of quality element

High Good

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Indicator species

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

Myriophyllum alterniflorum,

Stratiotes aloides,

Potamogeton lucens

frequently

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

Myriophyllum alterniflorum,

Stratiotes aloides,

Potamogeton lucens

frequently

Moderate

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

Myriophyllum alterniflorum,

Stratiotes aloides,

Potamogeton lucens

rare

Poor

rare Presence of indicator species

Indicator species coverage

Total coverage with macrophytes

>5%

>30%

<5%

>50%

<5%

>50%

<1%

>50%

Bad

absent

>50%

67

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Type 7: Medium deep depth lakes with soft water (2 – 9 m) oligohymic

Indicative parameter of quality element

1- Biological elements

High Good Moderate Poor

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Indicator species

Isoetes lacustris,

I.echinospora,

Lobelia dortmanna,

Litorella uniflora,

Myriophyllum

alterniflorum frequently

Isoetes lacustris,

I.echinospora,

Lobelia dortmanna,

Litorella uniflora,

Myriophyllum

alterniflorum frequently

Isoetes lacustris,

I.echinospora,

Lobelia dortmanna,

Litorella uniflora,

Myriophyllum

alterniflorum rare absent Presence of indicator species

Indicator species coverage

Total coverage with macrophytes

>5%

>10%

<5%

>30%

<1%

>50% >50%

Bad

absent

>30%

68

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

TYPE 9: Deep lakes with hard water (>9 m) oligohymic

Indicative parameter of quality element

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Indicator species

Presence of indicator species

Indicator species coverage

Total coverage with macrophytes

High

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

present

>1%

<10%

Good

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

present

<1%

<10%

Moderate

Chara sp.,

Nitella sp.,

rare

<1%

>10%

Poor

absent

>10%

Bad

absent

>10%

70

TYPE 10: Deep lakes with soft water (>9 m) oligohymic

Indicative parameter of

High Good quality element

1- Biological elements

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1- Macrophytes

Indicator species

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Isoetes lacustris,

I.echinospora,

Lobelia dortmanna,

Litorella uniflora,

Subularia aquatica,

Myriophyllum alterniflorum

present

Isoetes lacustris,

I.echinospora,

Lobelia dortmanna,

Litorella uniflora,

Subularia aquatic

Myriophyllum alterniflorum a,

present

Moderate

Isoetes lacustris,

I.echinospora,

Lobelia dortmanna,

Litorella uniflora,

Subularia aquatica,

Myriophyllum alterniflorum

rare

Poor

absent Presence of indicator species

Indicator species coverage

Total coverage with macrophytes

>1%

<10%

<1%

<30%

<1%

>30% >30%

Bad

absent

>30%

71

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Annex 3 – Preliminary classification of ecological status for transitional waters

72

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Preliminary classification of ecological status for transitional waters

Transitional water of Riga Gulf

Indicative parameter of quality element

1- Biological elements

High

1.1 - Aquatic flora

1.1.1. Composition, abundance and biomass of phytoplankton

Species composition in spring season Bacillariophyceae

(60-75% of total biomass):

Achnanthes taeniata,

Thalassiosira spp.,

Aulacoseira spp.,

Chaetocerus spp.,

Nitzschia spp., Navicula spp., Sceletonema costatum, Diatoma spp.,

Fragillaria spp., etc.

Dinophyceae

(20-30% of total biomass):

Peridiniella catenata,

Protoperidinium spp.,

Gymnodinium spp.,

Glenodinium spp., etc.

Others

(5-10% of total biomass):

Scenedesmus spp.,

Pediastrum spp., Oocystis spp., Aphanizomenon

Good

Bacillariophyceae

(35-55% of total biomass):

Achnanthes taeniata,

Thalassiosira spp.,

Sceletonema costatum,

Aulacoseira spp.,

Chaetocerus spp.,

Nitzschia spp., Navicula spp., Diatoma spp.,

Fragillaria spp., etc.

Dinophyceae

(35-45% of total biomass):

Peridiniella catenata,

Protoperidinium spp.,

Gymnodinium spp.,

Glenodinium spp., etc.

Others

(10-20% of total biomass):

Scenedesmus spp.,

Pediastrum spp., Oocystis

Moderate Poor Bad

73

Indicative parameter of quality element

Species composition in summer season

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

High

flos-aquae, Teleaulax spp., etc.

Cyanophyceae

(60-80% of total biomass):

N2- fixing species (80-

90% of Cyanophyceae biomass):

Aphanizomenon flosaquae, Nodularia spumigena, Anabaena

spp., etc.

Not-N

2

-fixing species

(10-20% Cyanophyceae biomass): Snowella

lacustris, Woronichinia

compacta, etc.

Chlorophyceae

(5-10% of total biomass):

Oocystis spp., Pediastrum spp., Scenedesmus spp., etc.

Bacillariophyceae

(10-20% of total biomass):

Actinocyclus octonarius,

Good

spp., Aphanizomenon flos-aquae, Teleaulax spp., Ebria tripartita,

Eutreptiella spp.,

Pyramimonas spp., etc.

Cyanophyceae

(40-60% of total biomass):

N2- fixing species (60-

80% of Cyanophyceae biomass): Aphanizomenon

flos-aquae, Nodularia spumigena, Anabaena

spp., etc.;

Not-N

2

-fixing species

(20-40% Cyanophyceae biomass): Microcystis spp., Snowella lacustris,

Woronichinia compacta,

Merismopedia spp.,

Chroococcus spp., etc.

Chlorophyceae

(10-15% of total biomass):

Oocystis spp., Pediastrum spp., Scenedesmus spp.,

Monoraphidium spp., etc.

Bacillariophyceae

(20-30% of total biomass):

Actinocyclus octonarius,

Moderate Poor Bad

74

Indicative parameter of quality element

Species composition in autumn season

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

High

Thalassiosira spp.,

Coscinodiscus spp.,

Aulacoseira spp.,

Chaetocerus spp.,

Diatoma spp.,

Asterionella spp., etc.

Others

(5-10% of total biomass):

Dinophyceae: Dinophysis spp., Prorocentrum spp.,

Protoperidinium spp.,

Heterocapsa rotundata, etc.

Bacillariophyceae

(40-50% of total biomass):

Actinocyclus octonarius,

Coscinodiscus granii,

Chaetocerus spp.,

Thalassiosira baltica, etc.

Others

(50-60% of total

Good

Thalassiosira spp.,

Nitzschia spp.,

Skeletonema costatum,

Coscinodiscus spp.,

Aulacoseira spp.,

Chaetocerus spp.,

Diatoma spp.,

Asterionella spp., etc.

Others

(10-15% of total biomass):

Dinophyceae: Dinophysis

spp., Prorocentrum spp.,

Protoperidinium spp.,

Amphidinium spp.,

Heterocapsa rotundata,

Gymnodinium spp., etc.

Cryptophyceae: Teleaulax

spp., Plagioselmis spp., etc.

Prasinophyceae:

Pyramimonas spp., etc.

Bacillariophyceae

(50-70% of total biomass):

Actinocyclus octonarius,

Coscinodiscus granii,

Skeletonema costatum,

Chaetocerus spp.,

Thalassiosira baltica, etc.

Others

(30-50% of total

Moderate Poor Bad

75

Indicative parameter of quality element

Abundance in spring season

Abundance in summer season

Abundance in autumn season

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Biomass in spring season

Biomass in summer season

Biomass in autumn season

1.2.3 - Composition and abundance of angiosperms

Angiosperms

1.2- Benthic invertebrate fauna

Biotic Coefficient

Biotic Index

High

biomass):

Cyanophyceae:

Aphanizomenon flosaquae, Snowella spp.,

Woronichinia spp., etc.

Dinophyceae: Dinophysis

spp., Protoperidinium spp., Heterocapsa spp.,

etc., Chlorophyceae:

Pediastrum spp., etc.

1.5*10

6

-3.0*10

6 count.units/m

3

2*10

6

count.units/m

3

Good

biomass):

Cyanophyceae:

Aphanizomenon flosaquae, Microcystis spp.,

Snowella spp.,

Woronichinia spp., etc.

Dinophyceae: Dinophysis

spp., Protoperidinium spp., Ebria tripartita,

Heterocapsa spp., etc.

Chlorophyceae:

Pediastrum spp., etc.

Cryptophyceae: Teleaulax

spp., Plagioselmis spp.,

etc. Euglenophyceae:

Eutreptiella spp., Euglena

spp., etc.

3.0*10

6

-4.5*10 count.units/m

3

1*10

6

-2*10

6 count.units/m

6

1.5*10

6 count.units/m

3

1.5*10

6

3

-2.0*10

6

2000-7000mg/m

1000mg/m

1000mg/m

3

3

3 count.units/m

3

7000-14000mg/m

3

500-1000mg/m

3

1000-3000mg/m

3

Angiosperms not present

0-1

0-1

1-3

2

Moderate

>3

>2

Poor Bad

76

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Indicative parameter of quality element High

3 - Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements

3.1- General

Secci depth in summer season

Oxygen content (ml/l) in summer season;

Oxygen saturation (%) in summer season;

4-5 m

> 6 ml/l

>95%

Good

3-4 m

5.5-6.0 ml/l

>90%

Moderate Poor Bad

Phosphate concentration ( mol/l) in winter (late January – early February)

Total phosphorus in winter (late January – early February)

0.40-0.55 mol/l

0.55-0.75 mol/l

0.55-0.80 mol/l

0.75-1.10 mol/l

Nitrate concentration ( mol/l) in winter (late January – early

February)

3.5-5.5 mol/l

(6.5-9.0 mol/l)*

5.5-9.0 mol/l

(9.0-13.0 mol/l)*

Total nitrogen in winter (late January – early February)

8-13 mol/l

(16-22 mol/l)**

13-22 mol/l

(22-31 mol/l)**

Note: (*) - Total phosphorus and total nitrogen levels are calculated from phosphate and nitrate data, respectively applying the coefficient 1.31 for phosphorus and the coefficient 3.0 for nitrogen; (**) - Total nitrogen values are also calculated from the total phosphorus data using the coefficient

32

77

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Annex 4 – Preliminary classification of ecological status for coastal waters

78

N

N

N

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Annex 5 – Normative definitions of ecological status classifications

83

RIVERS

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Normative definitions of ecological status classifications – RIVERS

Phytoplankton

High status

Good status

Biological quality elements

Moderate status

The taxonomic composition of phytoplankton corresponds totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

The average phytoplankton abundance is wholly consistent with the type-specific physicochemical conditions and is not such as to significantly alter the type specific transparency conditions.

Planktonic blooms occur at a frequency and intensity which is consistent with the type specific physicochemical conditions.

There are slight changes in the composition and abundance of planktonic taxa compared to the type-specific communities. Such changes do not indicate any accelerated growth of algae resulting in undesirable disturbances to the balance of organisms present in the water body or to the physicochemical quality of the water or sediment.

A slight increase in the frequency and intensity of the type specific planktonic blooms may occur.

The composition of planktonic taxa differs moderately from the type specific communities.

Abundance is moderately disturbed and may be such as to produce a significant undesirable disturbance in the values of other biological and physico-chemical quality elements.

A moderate increase in the frequency and intensity of planktonic blooms may occur.

Persistent blooms may occur during summer months.

Macrophytes and phytobebenthos

The taxonomic composition corresponds totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

There are no detectable changes in the average macrophytic and the average phytobenthic abundance

There are slight changes in the composition and abundance of macrophytic and phytobenthic taxa compared to the type-specific communities. Such changes do not indicate any accelerated growth of phytobenthos or higher forms of plant life resulting in undesirable disturbances to the balance of organisms present in the water body or to the physico-chemical quality of the water or sediment.

The composition of macrophytic and phytobenthic taxa differs moderately from the type-specific community and is significantly more distorted than at good status.

Moderate changes in the average macrophytic and the average phytobenthic abundance are evident.

The phytobenthic community may be interfered with and, in some areas, displaced by bacterial tufts and coats present as a result of anthropogenic activities. The phytobenthic community is not adversely affected by bacterial tufts and coats present due to anthropogenic activity.

Benthic invertebrate fauna

The taxonomic composition and abundance correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

The ratio of disturbance sensitive

Fish fauna taxa to insensitive taxa shows no signs of alteration from undisturbed levels

There are slight changes in the composition and abundance of invertebrate taxa from the typespecific communities

The ratio of disturbance sensitive taxa to insensitive taxa shows slight alteration from type specific levels.

The level of diversity of invertebrate taxa shows slight signs of alteration

The level of diversity of invertebrate taxa shows no sign of from type specific levels. alteration from undisturbed levels.

Species composition and abundance correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

All the type specific disturbance sensitive species are present.

There are slight changes in species composition and abundance from the type specific communities attributable to anthropogenic impacts on physicochemical and hydro-morphological quality elements.

The composition and abundance of invertebrate taxa differ moderately from the type-specific communities.

Major taxonomic groups of the type-specific community are absent.

The ratio of disturbance sensitive taxa to insensitive taxa, and the level of diversity, are substantially lower than the type specific level and significantly lower than for good status.

The composition and abundance of fish species differ moderately from the type specific communities attributable to anthropogenic impacts on physicochemical or hydro-morphological quality elements.

84

RIVERS

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

High status

Good status

The age structures of the fish communities show little sign of anthropogenic disturbance and are not indicative of a failure in the reproduction or development of any particular species.

The age structures of the fish communities show signs of disturbance attributable to anthropogenic impacts on physicochemical or hydromorphological quality elements, and, in a few instances, are indicative of a failure in the reproduction or development of a particular species, to the extent that some age classes may be missing.

Moderate status

The age structure of the fish communities shows major signs of anthropogenic disturbance, to the extent that a moderate proportion of the type specific species are absent or of very low abundance.

Hydrological regime

River continuity

Morphological conditions

Hydro-morphological quality elements

The quantity and dynamics of flow, and the resultant connection to groundwaters, reflect totally, or nearly totally, undisturbed

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements. conditions.

The continuity of the river is not disturbed by anthropogenic activities and allows undisturbed migration of aquatic organisms and sediment transport.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Channel patterns, width and depth variations, flow velocities, substrate conditions and both the structure and condition of the riparian zones correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Physico-chemical quality elements

General conditions The values of the physicochemical elements correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

Nutrient concentrations remain within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions.

Levels of salinity, pH, oxygen balance, acid neutralising capacity and temperature do not show signs of anthropogenic disturbance and remain within the range normally associated with

Specific synthetic pollutants undisturbed conditions.

Concentrations close to zero and at least below the limits of detection of the most advanced analytical techniques in general use

Temperature, oxygen balance, pH, acid neutralising capacity and salinity do not

reach levels outside the range established so as to ensure the functioning of the type specific ecosystem and the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Nutrient concentrations do not exceed the levels established so as to ensure the functioning of the ecosystem and the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Concentrations not in excess of the standards set in accordance with procedure for the setting of chemical quality standards.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

85

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

RIVERS

Specific non synthetic pollutants

High status

Good status

Concentrations remain within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions

(background levels = bgl).

Concentrations not in excess of the standards set in accordance with procedure for the setting of chemical quality standards.

Normative definitions of ecological status classifications - LAKES

Moderate status

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

LAKES

Phytoplankton

Macrophytes and phytobenthos

High status

Good status

Biological quality elements

Moderate status

The taxonomic composition and abundance of phytoplankton correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

The average phytoplankton biomass is consistent with the type-specific physicochemical conditions and is not such as to significantly alter the type specific transparency conditions.

Planktonic blooms occur at a frequency and intensity which is consistent with the type specific physicochemical conditions.

There are slight changes in the composition and abundance of planktonic taxa compared to the typespecific communities. Such changes do not indicate any accelerated growth of algae resulting in undesirable disturbance to the balance of organisms present in the water body or to the physico-chemical quality of the water or sediment.

A slight increase in the frequency and intensity of the type specific planktonic blooms may occur.

The composition and abundance of planktonic taxa differ moderately from the type specific communities.

Biomass is moderately disturbed and may be such as to produce a significant undesirable disturbance in the condition of other biological quality elements and the physico-chemical quality of the water or sediment.

A moderate increase in the frequency and intensity of planktonic blooms may occur.

Persistent blooms may occur during summer months.

The taxonomic composition corresponds totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

There are no detectable changes in the average macrophytic and the average phytobenthic abundance.

Benthic invertebrate fauna

The taxonomic composition and abundance correspond totally or nearly totally to the undisturbed conditions.

The ratio of disturbance sensitive taxa to insensitive taxa shows no signs of alteration from undisturbed levels

The level of diversity of

There are slight changes in the composition and abundance of macrophytic and phytobenthic taxa compared to the type-specific communities. Such changes do not indicate any accelerated growth of phytobenthos or higher forms of plant life resulting in undesirable disturbance to the balance of organisms present in the water body or to the physicochemical quality of the water.

The phytobenthic community is not adversely affected by bacterial tufts and coats present due to anthropogenic activity.

The composition of macrophytic and phytobenthic taxa differ moderately from the type-specific communities and are significantly more distorted than those observed at good quality.

Moderate changes in the average macrophytic and the average phytobenthic abundance are evident.

The phytobenthic community may be interfered with, and, in some areas, displaced by bacterial tufts and coats present as a result of anthropogenic activities.

There are slight changes in the composition and abundance of invertebrate taxa compared to the type-specific communities.

The ratio of disturbance sensitive taxa to insensitive taxa shows slight signs of alteration from type specific levels.

The level of diversity of invertebrate taxa shows slight signs of alteration

The composition and abundance of invertebrate taxa differ moderately from the type-specific conditions

Major taxonomic groups of the type-specific community are absent.

The ratio of disturbance sensitive to insensitive taxa, and the level

86

Fish fauna

LAKES

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

High status

Good status Moderate status

invertebrate taxa shows no sign of alteration from undisturbed levels

Species composition and abundance correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

All the type specific sensitive species are present.

The age structures of the fish communities show little sign of anthropogenic disturbance and are not indicative of a failure in the reproduction or development of a particular species. from type specific levels.

There are slight changes in species composition and abundance from the type specific communities attributable to anthropogenic impacts on physicochemical or hydromorphological quality elements.

The age structures of the fish communities show signs of disturbance attributable to anthropogenic impacts on physicochemical or hydromorphological quality elements, and, in a few instances, are indicative of a failure in the reproduction or development of a particular species, to the extent that some age classes may be missing. of diversity, are substantially lower than the type specific level and significantly lower than for good status

The composition and abundance of fish species differ moderately from the type specific communities attributable to anthropogenic impacts on physicochemical or hydromorphological quality elements.

The age structure of the fish communities shows major signs of disturbance, attributable to anthropogenic impacts on physicochemical or hydromorphological quality elements, to the extent that a moderate proportion of the type specific species are absent or of very low abundance.

Hydrological regime

Morphological conditions

Hydro-morphological quality elements

The quantity and dynamics of flow, level, residence time, and the resultant connection to groundwaters, reflect totally or nearly totally undisturbed conditions.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Lake depth variation, quantity and structure of the substrate, and both the structure and condition of the lake shore zone correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Physico-chemical quality elements

General conditions The values of physico-chemical elements correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

Nutrient concentrations remain within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions.

Levels of salinity, pH, oxygen balance, acid neutralising capacity, transparency and temperature do not show signs of anthropogenic disturbance and remain within the range normally

Temperature, oxygen balance, pH, acid neutralising capacity, transparency and salinity do not reach levels outside the range established so as to ensure the functioning of the ecosystem and the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Nutrient concentrations do not exceed the levels established so as to ensure the functioning of the ecosystem and the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements. associated with undisturbed conditions.

Specific synthetic Concentrations close to zero and Concentrations not in excess of the Conditions consistent with the

87

Phytoplankton

Macroalgae

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

LAKES

pollutants

Good status

standards set in accordance with procedure for the setting of chemical quality standards.

Moderate status

achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Specific non synthetic pollutants

Concentrations not in excess of the standards set in accordance with procedure for the setting of chemical quality standards.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Normative definitions of ecological status classifications – TRANSITIONAL

WATERS

High status at least below the limits of detection of the most advanced analytical techniques in general use.

Concentrations remain within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions

(background levels = bgl).

TRANSIT.

WATERS

High status

Good status Moderate status

Biological quality elements

The composition and abundance of the phytoplanktonic taxa are consistent with undisturbed conditions.

The average phytoplankton biomass is consistent with the type-specific physicochemical conditions and is not such as to significantly alter the type specific transparency conditions.

There are slight changes in the composition and abundance of phytoplanktonic taxa.

There are slight changes in biomass compared to the typespecific conditions. Such changes do not indicate any

Planktonic blooms occur at a frequency and intensity which is consistent with the type specific physicochemical conditions.

accelerated growth of algae resulting in undesirable disturbance to the balance of organisms present in the water

The composition of macroalgal taxa is consistent with undisturbed conditions.

There are no detectable changes in macroalgal cover due to anthropogenic activities.

The composition and abundance of phytoplanktonic taxa differ moderately from type specific conditions.

Biomass is moderately disturbed and may be such as to produce a significant undesirable disturbance in the condition of other biological quality elements.

A moderate increase in the frequency and intensity of planktonic blooms may occur.

Persistent blooms may occur during summer months. body or to the physicochemical quality of the water.

A slight increase in the frequency and intensity of the type specific planktonic blooms may occur.

There are slight changes in the composition and abundance of macroalgal taxa compared to the type-specific communities.

Such changes do not indicate any accelerated growth of phytobenthos or higher forms of plant life resulting in undesirable disturbance to the balance of organisms present in the water body or to the physicochemical quality of the water.

The composition of macroalgal taxa differs moderately from typespecific conditions and is significantly more distorted than at good quality.

Moderate changes in the average macroalgal abundance are evident and may be such as to result in an undesirable disturbance to the balance of organisms present in the water body.

88

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Good status Moderate status TRANSIT.

WATERS

High status

Benthic invertebrate fauna

The level of diversity and abundance of invertebrate taxa is within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions.

All the disturbance sensitive taxa associated with undisturbed conditions are present.

Fish fauna Species composition and abundance is consistent with undisturbed conditions.

The level of diversity and abundance of invertebrate taxa is slightly outside the range associated with the type specific conditions

Most of the sensitive taxa of the type specific communities are present.

The level of diversity and abundance of invertebrate taxa is moderately outside the range associated with the type specific conditions.

Taxa indicative of pollution are present

Many of the sensitive taxa of the type specific communities are absent

The abundance of the disturbance sensitive species shows slight signs of distortion from type specific conditions attributable to anthropogenic impacts on physicochemical or hydro-morphological quality elements

A moderate proportion of the type specific disturbance sensitive species are absent as a result of anthropogenic impacts on physicochemical or hydromorphological quality elements

Tidal regime

Morphological conditions

Hydro-morphological quality elements

The freshwater flow regime corresponds totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Depth variations, substrate conditions, and both the structure and condition of the inter-tidal zones correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Physicochemical elements

General conditions

Specific synthetic pollutants

Specific non synthetic pollutants

Physicochemical elements correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

Nutrient concentrations remain within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions.

Temperature, oxygen balance and transparency do not show signs of anthropogenic disturbance and remain within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions.

Temperature, oxygenation conditions and transparency do not reach levels outside the ranges established so as to ensure the functioning of the ecosystem and the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Nutrient concentrations do not exceed the levels established so as to ensure the functioning of the ecosystem and the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Concentrations close to zero and at least below the limits of detection of the most advanced analytical techniques in general use.

Concentrations not in excess of the standards set in accordance with procedure for the setting of chemical quality standards.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Concentrations remain within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions (background levels = bgl).

Concentrations not in excess of the standards set in accordance with procedure for the setting of chemical quality standards.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

89

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Normative definitions of ecological status classifications – COASTAL WATERS

High status Good status

Moderate status COASTAL

Phytoplankton

Macroalgae and angiosperms

Biological quality elements

The composition and abundance of phytoplanktonic taxa are consistent with undisturbed conditions.

The average phytoplankton biomass is consistent with the type-specific physicochemical conditions and is not such as to significantly alter the type specific transparency conditions.

Planktonic blooms occur at a frequency and intensity which is consistent with the type specific physicochemical conditions.

The composition and abundance of phytoplanktonic taxa show slight signs of disturbance.

There are slight changes in biomass compared to type-specific conditions.

Such changes do not indicate any accelerated growth of algae resulting in undesirable disturbance to the balance of organisms present in the water body or to the quality of the water.

A slight increase in the frequency and intensity of the type specific planktonic blooms may occur.

The composition and abundance of planktonic taxa show signs of moderate disturbance.

Algal biomass is substantially outside the range associated with type specific conditions, and is such as to impact upon other biological quality elements.

A moderate increase in the frequency and intensity of planktonic blooms may occur.

Persistent blooms may occur during summer months.

All disturbance sensitive macroalgal and angiosperm taxa associated with undisturbed conditions are present.

The levels of macroalgal cover and angiosperm abundance are consistent with undisturbed conditions.

Benthic invertebrate fauna

The level of diversity and abundance of invertebrate taxa is within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions.

All the disturbance sensitive taxa associated with undisturbed conditions are present.

Most disturbance sensitive macroalgal and angiosperm taxa associated with undisturbed conditions are present.

The level of macroalgal cover and angiosperm abundance show slight signs of disturbance.

A moderate number of the disturbance sensitive macroalgal and angiosperm taxa associated with undisturbed conditions are absent.

Macroalgal cover and angiosperm abundance is moderately disturbed and may be such as to result in an undesirable disturbance to the balance of organisms present in the water body.

The level of diversity and abundance of invertebrate taxa is slightly outside the range associated with the type specific conditions

Most of the sensitive taxa of the type specific communities are present.

The level of diversity and abundance of invertebrate taxa is moderately outside the range associated with the type specific conditions.

Taxa indicative of pollution are present

Many of the sensitive taxa of the type specific communities are absent

90

COASTAL

Tidal regime

Morphological conditions

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

High status Good status

Moderate status

Hydro-morphological quality elements

The freshwater flow regime and the direction and speed of dominant currents correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

The depth variation, structure and substrate of the coastal bed, and both the structure and condition of the inter-tidal zones correspond totally or nearly totally to the undisturbed conditions.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Physico-chemical quality elements

General conditions

Specific synthetic pollutants

Specific non synthetic pollutants

The physicochemical elements correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

Nutrient concentrations remain within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions

Temperature, oxygen balance and transparency do not show signs of anthropogenic disturbance and remain within the ranges normally associated with undisturbed conditions.

Temperature, oxygenation conditions and transparency do not reach levels outside the ranges established so as to ensure the functioning of the ecosystem and the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Nutrient concentrations do not exceed the levels established so as to ensure the functioning of the ecosystem and the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Concentrations close to zero and at least below the limits of detection of the most advanced analytical techniques in general use.

Concentrations remain within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions

(background levels = bgl) standards set in accordance with procedure for the setting of chemical quality standards.

Concentrations not in excess of the standards set in accordance with procedure for the setting of chemical quality standards.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

Conditions consistent with the achievement of the values specified above for the biological quality elements.

91

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Annex 6 – Stepwise approach for the ecological classification

92

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

STEP 1

- High Ecological Status (HES) and Maximum Ecological Potential

(MEP)

WFD (Annex II 1.3) requires to establish type-specific biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical conditions representing the values defined in Tables 1.2.1 – 1.2.5 of Annex V for HES or MEP. A slightly different approach has to be used for natural and heavily modified or artificial water bodies according to

Figures 2-2 and 2-3 of given Report. Generally, the assessment of whether a HMWB or an AWB is at MEP should start with an assessment of whether the condition of the hydromorphological quality elements is consistent with the condition expected for them if all mitigation measures were taken to ensure the best approximation to ecological continuum.

The mitigation measures must be compatible with the use for which the water body is designated, making them and the resulting values for MEP hydromorphology potentially very specific to particular water bodies or groups of water bodies. Since the MEP hydromorphology dictates the MEP biological and physico-chemical conditions, it is appropriate in the case of those AWBs and HMWBs that may be at

MEP to check if their hydromorphology is at MEP before considering the condition of the other quality elements.

Only if the values for all the biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements reflect their type-specific conditions can the resulting class be high ecological status or MEP.

Biological Quality Elements

For natural water bodies, the values of the relevant biological quality elements at high status reflect those normally associated with that type under undisturbed conditions, and show no, or only very minor, evidence of distortion; i.e. the biological quality elements correspond totally, or nearly totally, to undisturbed conditions (HES).

5.1.6 For HMWBs & AWBs, the values of the relevant biological quality elements at

MEP, reflect, as far as possible given the MEP hydromorphological and associated physico-chemical conditions, those of the closest comparable surface water body type.

Physico-chemical Quality Elements

For natural water bodies, the values for the general physico-chemical quality elements at high ecological status correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

A further qualification specifies that the values for the physico-chemical quality elements must remain within the ranges normally associated with undisturbed conditions.

For HMWBs and AWBs, the MEP values for the general physico-chemical quality elements are derived from the ”undisturbed conditions” for the surface water body type most closely comparable to the artificial or heavily modified water body concerned, given the MEP hydromorphological conditions. The CIS guidance on

HMWBs and AWBs recognises that in the case of some MEP hydromorphological conditions, the values for some of the general physicochemical quality elements will

93

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

be very different to those of the closest comparable type. The guidance therefore suggests that, provided the differences are an inevitable and direct result of the

MEP hydromorphological conditions, they may be taken into account when establishing the MEP values for the general physico-chemical quality elements. The following example illustrates how to define MEP physico-chemical reference conditions: The hydromorphological characteristics of impoundment created for hydropower and water supply can dictate the oxygen and temperature conditions in the impounded water and the downstream river. These may be different from those in a natural water body. These differences can be taken into account when defining MEP.

The specific pollutant quality elements have been subdivided into specific synthetic pollutants and specific non-synthetic pollutants. For HES/MEP to be achieved the concentrations of the specific synthetic pollutants must be close to zero and at least below the limits of detection of the most advanced analytical techniques in general use. The concentrations of the specific nonsynthetic pollutants must be within the range normally associated with undisturbed conditions. CIS IMPRESS provides guidance on the identification of specific pollutants.

Hydromorphological Quality Elements

For HES, the values for the hydromorphological quality elements correspond totally or nearly totally to undisturbed conditions.

For MEP, the hydromorphological conditions are consistent with the only impacts on the surface water body being those resulting from the artificial or heavily modified characteristics of the water body once all mitigation measures have been taken to ensure the best approximation to ecological continuum, in particular with respect to migration of fauna and appropriate spawning and breeding grounds. The mitigation measures should not include those that would have a significant adverse effect on the specified uses of the water body or the wider environment.

STEP 2 -

Good Ecological Status (GES) and Good Ecological Potential

(GEP)

For natural and heavily modified or artificial water bodies the same approach has to be used according to Figures 2-2 and 2-3 of this Report.

Only if the values for the biological and physico-chemical quality elements reflect, as relevant, the values defined for GES or GEP should a water body be classified as

GES or GEP.

Biological Quality Elements

For natural water bodies, the values of the relevant biological quality elements for the surface water body show low levels of distortion resulting from human activity, but deviate only slightly from those normally associated with the surface water body type under undisturbed conditions (HES).

For an HMWB or AWB to be classified as being at GEP there must be no more than slight changes in the values of the relevant biological quality elements as compared to their values at MEP.

94

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Physico-chemical Quality Elements

For a water body to be classified as being at good ecological status/potential, the values for the general physico-chemical quality elements must comply with the ranges or levels established so as to ensure:

The functioning of the type specific ecosystem; and

The achievement of the values specified for the relevant biological quality elements.

Where the levels or ranges proposed for a general physico-chemical quality element in a type are being exceeded, a checking procedure should be used to assess whether the established levels or ranges for the elements are more stringent than is necessary to ensure the functioning of the ecosystem and the achievement of the values specified for the biological quality elements at good status/potential. An outline checking procedure is presented in Figure 5 of EU guidance document - Overall

Approach to the Classification of Ecological Status and Ecological Potential

(ECOSTAT, Working Group 2 A).

Similarly, where the levels or ranges proposed for a general physico-chemical quality element in a type are not exceeded but, because of anthropogenic alterations to the general physico-chemical conditions:

The good status/potential values for the biological quality elements are not being met; or

There is evidence of impairment to ecosystem functioning a second checking procedure could be used as a means of assessing whether the established levels or ranges meet the Directive’s requirements or are insufficiently stringent to ensure the functioning of the ecosystem and the achievement of the good status/potential values for the biological quality elements. An outline checking procedure is presented in Figure 6 of EU guidance document - Overall Approach to the Classification of Ecological Status and Ecological Potential (ECOSTAT, Working

Group 2 A). Good ecological status/potential also requires that the concentrations of the specific pollutant quality elements are not in excess of the environmental quality standards (EQS) set at Member State level in accordance with the procedure laid down in Annex V, Section 1.2.6 of WFD.

Hydromorphological Quality Elements

The conditions of the hydromorphological quality elements at GES and GEP must be consistent with the achievement of the values specified for the relevant biological quality elements at GES/GEP level.

STEP 3 -

Moderate Ecological Status and Moderate Ecological Potential

For natural, heavily modified and artificial water bodies the same approach has to be used according to Figures 2-2 and 2-3 presented in this Report. A water body should be classified as moderate status/potential where:

95

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

The values for the biological quality elements differ moderately10 from the type specific communities;

The values for the biological quality elements differ moderately and the physico-chemical quality element values are less than good or;

The values for the biological quality elements are better than moderate but the physicochemical quality element values are less than good.

If the biological quality elements are at moderate status or potential, the condition of the physico-chemical and hydromorphological quality elements must, by definition, be consistent with the achievement of those biological values.

If the biological quality elements reflect good status/potential, but the values of the general physico-chemical quality elements do not ensure the functioning of the type specific ecosystem or the concentrations of one or more of the specific pollutant quality elements are not in compliance with relevant EQSs, the resulting ecological status/potential is “moderate”

STEP 4 -

Poor Ecological Status and Poor Ecological Potential

For natural, heavily modified and artificial water bodies the same approach has to be used according to Figures 2-2 and 2-3 presented in this Report.

In accordance with Annex V, Section 1.2 of WFD, if the values for the relevant biological quality elements show evidence of major alteration from their type specific values [i.e. the relevant biological communities deviate substantially from those normally associated with the surface water body type under undisturbed conditions], the water body must be classified as ”poor”. The decision on whether a water body is at poor status/potential or not is dictated by the condition of the biological quality elements. The condition of the physico-chemical and hydromorphological quality elements only affects that decision indirectly through their influence on the condition of the biological elements.

STEP 5 -

Bad Ecological Status and Bad Ecological Potential

For natural, heavily modified and artificial water bodies the same approach has to be used according to Figures 2-2 and 2-3 presented in this Report. .

In accordance with Annex V, Section 1.2 of WFD, if the values for the relevant biological quality elements show evidence of severe alteration from their type specific values [i.e. large portions of the relevant biological communities normally associated with the type are absent], the water body must be classified as bad”. The decision on whether a water body is at bad status/potential or not is dictated by the condition of the biological quality elements. The condition of the physico-chemical and hydromorphological quality elements only affects that decision indirectly through their influence on the condition of the biological elements.

96

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Annex 7 – Monitoring data used for the development of lake typology

97

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Data holder

1 LEA

Number of lakes (rivers) year

Investigated parameters

Sampling frequency

(per year)

2 LEA

3 LEA

4 LEA

45 lakes

56 lakes

57 lakes

8 lakes, 3 reservoirs, 21 rivers

1998/1999 T/Oxygen profile pH

Conductivity

P-total (surface)

Colour

Secchi depth chlorophyll-a phytoplankton

(species, biomass) zooplankton (species, number) macrophytes (species, covering)

2001 T/Oxygen profile pH

Conductivity

Secchi depth

Colour

P-total (surface)

N-total (surface) chlorophyll-a phytoplankton

(species, biomass) zooplankton (species, number) macrophytes (species, covering)

2002 T/Oxygen profile pH

Conductivity

Secchi depth

Colour

P-total (surface)

P-total (integrated)

N-total (surface)

N-total (integrated) chlorophyll-a phytoplankton

(species, biomass) zooplankton (species, number) macrophytes (species, covering)

1990-2002

T/Oxygen (horizont

0.5 m) pH

Conductivity

Colour

2 (summer, winter)

2 (summer, winter)

2 (summer, winter)

2 (summer, winter)

2 (summer, winter)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

Data format

Excel

Excel

10

10

10

10

LEA database,

Excel

Excel

98

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Data holder

Number of lakes (rivers) year

Investigated parameters

Sampling frequency

(per year)

5 LEA

69 lakes

139 waterbodies with controllable water level

6 State

>1000 lakes

Geological

Secchi depth (lakes)

BOD

7

Flow rate (rivers) suspended matter

Hardness-total

Mineralization

CO

2

COD

P-total

N-total

N/NH

4

N/NO

2

N/NO

3

P/PO

4

Si

Ca++

Mg++

Na+

K+

HCO

3

-

SO

4

2

-

Cl-

Fe, Cu, Zn, Cd, Pb chlorophyll-a phytoplankton

(species, biomass) bentic invertebrates

2001 mean depth (1970) annual water exchange covering by emerged macrophytes littoral zone

~1990

2001 minimum water level average water level maximum water level littoral zone efficiency volume description of hydroconstruction sediment scheme river basin

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

10

3

3

2

1 Excel

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Data format

1

1 paper

1

99

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Data holder

Survey

(SGS)

7 NBR

Number of lakes (rivers)

53 lakes, 16 man-made waterbodies

year

Investigated parameters

geomorphological region kind of dip average depth maximum depth filling up coefficient of dip hydrological regime covering by macrophytes trophic state water mineralization sapropel deposit description results of sapropel analyses

Sampling frequency

(per year)

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

Data format

1

1 paper, database

Ezeri.lv

1

1990 bathymetrical and topographical map water levels description of lakeshore list of fish species catchment area (area, composition) flow rate (spring, summer) annual water exchange

Secchi depth

Colour

Conductivity pH

Oxygen, saturation

(surface)

BOD

5

COD

N/NH

4

N/NO

2

N/NO

3

P/PO

4

Fe-total covering by macrophytes (total, emerged) list of dominant macrophyte species polluters of lake mud chemical analyses

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (spring)

1 (spring)

1 (spring)

1 (spring)

1 (spring)

1 (spring)

1 (spring)

1 (spring)

1 (spring)

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

100

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Data holder

Sampling frequency

(per year)

8 ESI

9 M.Leinerte

10 LEA

11 Institute of

Biology

Number of lakes (rivers) year

Investigated parameters

~800 lakes

67 lakes

1971-1975

~1985 description of lake bottom bathymetrical maps

1:10 000

T/Oxygen profile pH

6 lakes (Kemeri

Secchi depth

National Park) 1995-2002 T/Oxygen profile pH

Conductivity

Colour

Secchi depth

BOD

5

COD

P-total

N-total

N/NH

4

N/NO

2

N/NO

3

P/PO

4

TOC

Hardness

Alcalinity

F+

Cl-

SO

4

2

- chlorophyll-a phytoplankton

(species, biomass) zooplankton (species, number) bentic invertebrates macrophytes (species, covering)

1 lake (Engures,

6 sampling sites) 1995-2002 Ca++

Mg++

K+

Na+

HCO3-

SO42-

Cl-

T/Oxygen pH

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

3-4

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1

3

3

1

1

Data format

1 jpg

Excel

Word

1

1

1

3

3

Excel

101

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Data holder

Number of lakes (rivers) year

Investigated parameters

Sampling frequency

(per year)

Data format

12 Institute of

Biology

Conductivity

Colour

Hardness

BOD5

COD

N/NH4

N/NO2

N/NO3

P/PO4

Fe

Si chlorophyll-a phytoplankton

(species, biomass) zooplankton (species, number) bacterioplankton bentic invertebrates

1 lake

Pb, Zn, Ni, Cu, Cd, Fe,

Mn (in sediment)

(Kanieris, 7 sampling sites) 2001/2002 Ca++

Mg++

K+

Na+

HCO3-

SO42-

Cl-

T/Oxygen profile pH

Conductivity

Colour

Hardness

BOD5

COD

N/NH4

N/NO2

N/NO3

P/PO4

Fe

Si humic substances

Pb, Zn, Ni, Cu, Cd, Fe,

Mn (in sediment) chlorophyll-a bacterioplankton

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (spring)

2 (spring, summer)

3

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4 Word

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

4

102

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Data holder

Number of lakes (rivers) year

Sampling frequency

(per year)

Investigated parameters

phytoplankton

(species, biomass) zooplankton (species, number) bentic invertebrates

(species, biomass)

3

3

3

13 Institute of

Biology

4 rivers (Salaca

- 3-6 sampling sites, Briede,

Seda, R ja)

1 lake

(Burtnieku)

1997-2002 Ca++

Mg++

K+

Na+

HCO3-

SO42-

Cl-

T/Oxygen pH

Conductivity

Colour

Hardness

BOD5

COD

N/NH4

N/NO2

N/NO3

P/PO4

Fe

Si bacterioplankton phytoplankton

(species, biomass) zooplankton (species, number) bentic invertebrates

(species, biomass) chlorophyll-a

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

1-3

Data format

Word

14 Institute of

Biology

1-3 lakes

(Ziemelvidzeme peat bogs) 1997-2002 Ca++

Mg++

K+

Na+

HCO3-

SO42-

Cl-

T/Oxygen profile pH

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

Word

103

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Data holder

Number of lakes (rivers) year

Investigated parameters

Sampling frequency

(per year)

Conductivity

Colour

Hardness

BOD5

COD

N/NH4

N/NO2

N/NO3

P/PO4

Fe

Si

Secchi depth chlorophyll-a bacterioplankton phytoplankton

(species, biomass) zooplankton (species, number) bentic invertebrates

(species, biomass)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

15 Institute of

Biology

6 lakes

(Krustkalni and

Teici nature reserve) 1988-2002 Ca++

Mg++

K+

Na+

HCO3-

SO42-

Cl-

T/Oxygen profile pH

Conductivity

Colour

Hardness

BOD5

COD

N/NH4

N/NO2

N/NO3

P/PO4 humic substances

Fe

Si

Secchi depth chlorophyll-a bacterioplankton

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1-2 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

Data format

104

Legal entity Carl Bro a/s represented by

Carl Bro a/s (Denmark) & Carl Bro SIA (Latvia):

Transposition and Implementation of the EU Water Framework Directive In Latvia

Technical Report No. 3: Action Plan – How to define ecological status of surface water body types

Data holder

Number of lakes (rivers) year

Sampling frequency

(per year)

Investigated parameters

phytoplankton

(species, biomass) zooplankton (species, number) bentic invertebrates

(species, biomass)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

1 (summer)

Data format

105

Was this manual useful for you? yes no
Thank you for your participation!

* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project