See Hydropower Wp6 d.6.8. Apele 121219 Final Version-primer

1

D.6.8. ASSESSMENT OF THE ECOLOGICAL

STATUS USING DIFFERENT QUALITY ELEMENTS IN

THE PRUT RIVER BASIN

WORK PACKAGE 6 – Pilot Case Studies Final Version

Date 18.12.2012

A. Galie, V. Popescu , C. Moldovan

2

INDEX

1. PREFACE ..........................................................................................................................................4

2. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................4

2.1. GENERAL ASPECTS ON ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT ................................................................... 4 2.2. ROMANIAN APPROACH ON ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT .............................................................. 8

3. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES (RIVERS) – PHYTOPLANKTON ............................................12

4. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES (RIVERS) - BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES COMMUNITIES ...................................................................................................................................13

5. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES (RIVERS) –FISH FAUNA .........................................14

6. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES (RIVERS) – CHEMICAL AND PHYSICO – CHEMICAL ELEMENTS .....................................................................................................................16

7. DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES (RIVERS) – HYDROMORPHOLOGICAL ELEMENTS ..........19

7.1. HYDROLOGICAL PARAMETERS .......................................................................................................... 20 7.2. MORPHOLOGICAL PARAMETERS ........................................................................................................ 23

8. APPLICATION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES – HYDROMORPHOLOGICAL ELEMENTS ON A CASE STUDY - ROMANIAN PILOT BASIN (THE PRUT RIVER BASIN) ....................................................27

9. CONCLUSIONS ..............................................................................................................................28

10. REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................29

3

Figure index

FIGURE 1 – THE QUALITY ELEMENTS FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF ECOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL STATUS .................... 5 FIGURE 2 – ECOLOGICAL STATUS CLASSES (PETER POLLARD, SCOTTISH ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AGENCY) ...... 6 FIGURE 3 – THE RELATIVE ROLES OF THE BIOLOGICAL, HYDROMORPHOLOGICAL AND PHYSICO-CHEMICAL QUALITY

ELEMENTS IN ECOLOGICAL STATUS CLASSES (GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS NO. 10 RIVERS AND LAKES – TYPOLOGY, REFERENCE CONDITIONS AND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS) .............................................................................. 7

FIGURE 4 – BASIC PRINCIPLES FOR CLASSIFICATION OF ECOLOGICAL STATUS BASED ON ECOLOGICAL QUALITY RATIOS

.................................................................................................................................................................... 7 FIGURE 5 – AN EXAMPLE OF HOW PARAMETERS CAN BE COMBINED TO ESTIMATE THE CONDITION OF THE BIOLOGICAL

QUALITY ELEMENTS (WFD CIS GUIDANCE DOCUMENT NO. 13 OVERALL APPROACH TO THE CLASSIFICATION OF

ECOLOGICAL STATUS AND ECOLOGICAL POTENTIAL) ....................................................................................... 8 FIGURE 6 – ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT SCHEME FOR PHYTOPLANKTON - RIVERS ........................................ 12 FIGURE 7 – ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT SCHEME FOR MACROINVERTEBRATES – RIVERS .............................. 14 FIGURE 8 – GENERAL SCHEME FOR ESTABLISHING THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS FOR DISSOLVED OXYGEN ................... 17 FIGURE 9 – GENERAL SCHEME FOR ESTABLISHING OF ECOLOGICAL STATUS FOR NUTRIENTS (N-NH4, N-NO2, N-

NO3, P-PO4, TOTAL P) .............................................................................................................................. 18 FIGURE 10 – GENERAL SCHEME FOR ESTABLISHING THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS FOR PH ........................................... 19 FIGURE 11 – MAP - UNDERGROUND WATER SUPPLY CONDITIONS .......................................................................... 22 FIGURE 12 – LITHOLOGICAL MAP ......................................................................................................................... 23 FIGURE 13 – THE LOCATION OF THE WATER BODIES ANALYZED WITHIN THE PRUT RIVER BASIN ............................... 27

Table index

TABLE 1 – DEFINITION FOR HIGH, GOOD, MODERATE ECOLOGICAL STATUS (WFD) .................................................... 6 TABLE 2 – ELEMENTS, PARAMETERS AND FREQUENCY OF MONITORING IN THE SURVEILLANCE AND OPERATIONAL

MONITORING PROGRAM – RIVERS ................................................................................................................. 10 TABLE 3 – OUTPUT EXAMPLE (ONLY FEW COLUMNS FROM THE REPORT) ................................................................ 14 TABLE 4 – DATA USED FOR FISH FAUNA ................................................................................................................ 15 TABLE 5 – LIST OF THE MIGRATORY FISH SPECIES ON MEDIUM AND LONG DISTANCES FROM THE ROMANIAN RIVERS . 21 TABLE 6 – TOP OF FORM - SYNTHESIS OF HYDRO-MORPHOLOGICAL PARAMETERS ................................................. 24 TABLE 7 – HYDRO-MORPHOLOGICAL PARAMETERS FOR ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT – RIVERS .................................. 26

Annexes index

Annex 1 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 30 Annex 2 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 33

4

1. Preface

The present work is an outcome of the project “SEE HYDROPOWER, targeted to improve water resource management for a growing renewable energy production”, in the frame of the South-East-Europe Transnational Cooperation Programme, co-funded by the European Regional Development Fund (www.seehydropower.eu).

The project is based on the European Directive on the promotion of Electricity from Renewable Energy Sources respect to the Kyoto protocol targets, that aims to establish an overall binding target of 20% share of renewable energy sources in energy consumption to be achieved by each Member State, as well as binding national targets by 2020 in line with the overall EU target of 20%. Objectives of the SEE HYDROPOWER deal with the promotion of hydro energy production in SEE countries, by the optimization of water resource exploitation, in a compatible way with other water users following environmental friendly approaches. Therefore, it gives a strong contribution to the integration between the Water Frame and the RES-e Directives.

Main activities of the project concern the definition of policies, methodologies and tools for a better water & hydropower planning and management; the establishment of common criteria for preserving water bodies; to assess strategies to improve hydropower implementation, such as small hydropower; testing studies in pilot catchments of partner countries; promotion and dissemination of project outcomes among target groups all over the SEE Region countries.

In particular, the report “D.6.8. Assessment of the ecological status using different quality elements in the Prut River Basin”, which is part of the Work Package 6 – Pilot Case Studies, is presented here.

2. Introduction

2.1. General aspects on ecological status assessment The implementation of the Water Framework Directive within the Member States of the European Union requires a 5-classes classification system for surface water status, for all water types (rivers, lakes, etc.). The surface water status has two components:

ecological water status chemical water status

The quality elements for the classification of ecological and chemical status are shown in figure 1:

5

Figure 1 – The Quality elements for the classification of ecological and chemical status

The quality elements for the classification of chemical status are priority substances. The quality elements for the classification of ecological status are detailed below (Annex V 1.1.1. - WFD):

Biological elements:

Composition and abundance of aquatic flora Composition and abundance of benthic invertebrate fauna Composition, abundance and age structure of fish fauna

Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements:

General Thermal conditions Oxygenation conditions Salinity Acidification status Nutrient conditions Specific pollutants

Hydro-morphological elements supporting the biological elements:

Hydrological regime Quantity and dynamics of water flow Connection to groundwater bodies River continuity Morphological conditions River depth and width variation Structure and substrate of the river bed Structure of the riparian zone

The ecological status of water according to European guidelines is determined by integrating the biological elements with the chemical and physico-chemical elements (general and specific pollutants) and those related to hydromorphological alterations, the last two groups of elements are stipulated as “supporting the biological elements” in Annex V of the Water Framework Directive. The supporting elements should ensure the optimal conditions for the aquatic organisms. Each quality element is expressed by several indicators/indices/parameters, which may differ from one country to another. The ecological status of water bodies should be classified in 5 classes, according to WFD (Annex V): high, good, moderate, poor and bad (figure 2).

6

Figure 2 – Ecological status classes (Peter Pollard, Scottish Environment Protection Agency)

General definition of ecological quality for rivers, lakes, transitional waters and coastal waters for high, good, moderate ecological status, according to Annex V, is shown in the table no. 1.

Element High status Good status Moderate status General There are no, or only very minor,

anthropogenic alterations to the values of the physico-chemical and hydromorphological quality elements for the surface water body type from those normally associated with that type under undisturbed conditions. The values of the biological quality elements for the surface water body reflect those normally associated with that type under undisturbed conditions, and show no, or only very minor, evidence of distortion. These are the type-specific conditions and communities.

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

The values of the biological quality elements for the type of surface water body deviate moderately from those normally associated with the type of surface water body under undisturbed conditions. The values show moderate signs of distortion resulting from human activity and are significantly more disturbed than under conditions of good status.

Table 1 – Definition for high, good, moderate ecological status (WFD)

The establishment of thresholds among the classes is a major challenge for European scientific community. The relative roles of the biological, hydromorphological, chemical and physico-chemical quality elements in the ecological status classification and the basic principles for classification of ecological status are

7

presented in the figures 3 and 4.

Figure 3 – The relative roles of the biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements in ecological status classes (Guidance Documents no. 10 Rivers and Lakes –

Typology, Reference Conditions and Classification Systems)

Figure 4 – Basic principles for classification of ecological status based on Ecological Quality Ratios

“Deciding if a particular ecological status or potential class can be assigned to a water body depends on whether the quality element worst affected by anthropogenic alterations matches its normative definition for that class.” ((WFD CIS Guidance Document no. 13 Overall Approach to the Classification of Ecological

8

Status and Ecological Potential). The one-out – all-out principle has to be used on the quality element level as indicated in the phytobenthos example (figure 5).

Figure 5 – An example of how parameters can be combined to estimate the condition of the biological quality elements (WFD CIS Guidance Document no. 13 Overall Approach to the

Classification of Ecological Status and Ecological Potential)

The one-out – all-out principle has to be used when evaluating the results obtained for the ecological/potential status and chemical status in order to assess the surface water status.

2.2. Romanian approach on ecological status assessment In order to assess the water bodies status, the monitoring programs for surface water, groundwater and protected areas were required by Article 8 (1) of the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Therefore, EU Member States have established the monitoring programs aiming to collect information for "water bodies status assessment" within each river basin. Monitoring programs for the surface water bodies, groundwater bodies and protected areas established in Romania, became operational on 22.12.2006. The monitoring program (according to WFD) is established by the National Management Plan, which was approved by the Governmental Decision/Order no. 80/26.01.2011 (for the approval of the National Management Plan related to the Romanian sector of the international Danube River District , published in the Official Gazette no. 265/14.04.2011). The monitoring of water, sediments and biota, quality elements and parameters is done through investigative activities. The minimum monitoring frequencies are in accordance with the requirements of the Water Framework Directive, taking into account the type of program (surveillance, operational and investigative monitoring). The monitoring of water body status in Romania based on the monitoring programs established in accordance with Article 8 of the Water Framework Directive is carried out by the National Administration

9

"Romanian Waters" through its 11 River Basin Authorities. For some water bodies from the Danube Delta, the monitoring is carried out by the National Institute for Research and Development "Danube Delta", from Tulcea town. The monitoring of coastal water bodies is carried out by Dobrogea Litoral Water Directorate in collaboration with the National Institute of Marine Research and Development "Grigore Antipa" (NIMRD) - Constanta. Table 2 presents the biological, chemical and physico-chemical elements and hydromorphological elements and the minimum monitoring frequencies, as defined in the surveillance and the operational monitoring program for rivers within the National Administration "Romanian Waters” (according to Annex V of WFD).

Quality components Parameters Frequency of monitoring Surveillance program

Operational program

Biological components

Phytoplankton Taxonomic component (list and no. of species) density (exp / l)

2/year 3/year

Microphytobenthos Taxonomic component (list and no. of species) density (exp / m2)

2/year 3/year

Macrophytes Taxonomic component (list and no. of species) density (exp / m2)

1/3 years 1/3 years

Zoobenthos Taxonomic component (list and no. of species) density (exp / m2)

2/ year 3/ year

Fish fauna Taxonomic component (list and no. of species) density (exp/100m2) age structure

1/3 years 1/3 years

Hydromorphological elements

Hydrological regime

Water level and discharge

H = 2 / day * Q = 20-60 /year*

H = 2 / day * Q = 20-60/year*

Connectivity to groundwater bodies

1/3 days 1/3 days

River continuity 1/6 years 1/6 years

Morphological parameters

River depth and width variation

1/ year 1/ year

Structure and substrate of the river bed

1/6 years 1/6 years

Structure of the riparian zone

1/6 years 1/6 years

Physico-chemical components

Transparency Suspended solids, turbidity, color

6/ year 6/12/ year **

Thermal conditions Temperature 6/ year 6/12/ year **

Oxygenation conditions

Dissolved oxygen CCO - Mn and/or CCO - Cr CBO5 and in some cases COT and COD

6/ year 6/12/ year **

Salinity Conductivity/ fixed residue

6/ year 6/12/ year **

Acidifications status pH Alkalinity 6/ year 6/12/ year **

Nutrient conditions Nitrites, Nitrates, Ammonium Ntotal, Orthophosphates, Ptotal, Chlorophyll "a"

6/ year 6/12/ year **

Nutrients Ntotal, Ptotal 6/ year 6/ year

10

(suspended matter)

Priority substances - water

1) 12/ year 12/ year

Priority substances (Suspended matter)

Heavy metals: Cd, Ni, Pb, Hg

6/ year 6/ year

Priority substances (sediments)

Heavy metals and organic micro pollutants relevant for sediments

1/ year 1/ year

Priority substances (biota)

Heavy metals and organic micro pollutants relevant for biota

1/ year

Specific non-priority pollutants

2) 6/ year 6/ year

Specific non-priority pollutants (suspended matter)

Other heavy metals (list II)

6/ year 6/ year

Specific non-priority pollutants (sediments)

Substances in list I and II relevant to sediments

1/ year 1/ year

Specific non-priority pollutants (biota)

Substances in list I and II relevant to biota

1/ year

Other pollutants 3) 6/ year 6/ year

Microbiological components

Bacteriologic parameters***

total coliforms, fecal coliforms, fecal streptococcus, Salmonella

4-12/ year 4-12/ year

Table 2 – Elements, parameters and frequency of monitoring in the surveillance and operational monitoring program – rivers

* in case of floods, the monitoring frequency will increase according to the hydrological regime of the river ** when is at risk due to the nutrients and the organic substances is monitored 12 times / year ** when is at risk due to the morphological alterations and the priority substances is monitoring 6 times / year *** only for the sections of surface water abstraction for drinking water 1) priority substances (Annex X of WFD - 2455/2001/EC Decision): in case of pollution sources which release such substances; 2) specific non-priority pollutants (substances from the Annex 8 and 9 of the Water Framework Directive): in case of pollution sources which release such substances; 3) other pollutants: substances not found in Annexes 8, 9 and 10 of the Water Framework Directive: the case of pollution sources which release such substances. Note: The Annex V of WFD, specifies the minimum monitoring frequencies for hydromorphological elements to every six years. For the operational monitoring program, the monitoring frequency can be established by each Member State in order to have sufficient data for a proper assessment of the status of the analyzed element. Therefore, this frequency can be changed according to modification occurred in the hydrological regime. The characterization of the ecological status in accordance with the requirements of Water Framework Directive (transposed into the Romanian legislation by Law 310/2004, which amends the Water Law 107/1996) is relying on a classification system with five classes, namely: high, good, moderate, poor and bad. The elaboration of the classification system for water status was lead by the National Research and Development Environmental Protection - ICIM Bucharest, in collaboration with National Institute of Marine Research and Development "Grigore Antipa" (NIMRD) - Constanta (for transitional and coastal waters). The classification and evaluation of water status will be revised as appropriate, at each planning cycle of the management activity, at basin level and approved by order of the head of the main/national public water authority.

11

The ecological status (relying on biological and hydromorphological and chemical and physico-chemical supporting elements) is determined by applying the one-out all-out principle. Within each group of elements (biological, chemical and physico-chemical - general and specific pollutants and hydromorphological elements) the most unfavorable situation is to be the one which dictates the class for the water body. In Romania, according to the methodologies implemented in the National Management Plan based on the classification system (elaborated by ICIM and collaborators), the hydromorphological elements were taken into account within the ecological status assessment, only if the water bodies achieve high ecological status by the biological and physico-chemical elements (as European guidelines recommends). In this case should be checked, if the hydromorphological status is very good. If all these conditions are met, the water body can be classified as achieving high ecological status. In addition, the chemical status must be assessed. The final status is given by the worst situation between ecological and chemical status. In the first National Management Plan for the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers), information about microphytobenthos, aquatic macrophytes was not included. Methodologies for some physico-chemical elements were developed. For the other quality elements not yet assessed, the methodologies for the ecological status assessment are under development. In the process of updating the Article 5 of WFD and other specific reporting requirements, the water bodies status assessment will be reviewed relying on the elements missing in the first National Management Plan.

X X X

In order to achieve the objectives of this deliverable as well as the objectives of the SEE HYDROPOWER project the National Administration “Apele Romane” prepared a lot of information (detailed information) about the Prut river basin. Some information was provided to BOKU partner as follows:

a document (an excel file) containing five worksheets as follows: general data, physico-chemical data, stressors, and EFI+ input data and EFI+ output data. The names of the columns for each worksheet are itemed in Annex 1. Detailed data (minimum, maximum and average values, standard deviation and annual number of recorded values), for a total of 40 monitoring sections in the Prut River Basin, for the period 2004-2010, referring to the following physico-chemical parameters: Oxygen (concentration and saturation), Total Phosphorus-P, ortho-phosphate-P, nitrate-N, ammonium-N, Total nitrogen-N, Biological Oxygen Demand (5 days), Water temperature, Alkalinity, pH, Chloride was provided.

a document, prepared in GIS format, containing 7 shape-files regarding the human pressures in the Prut river basin according to WFD and including also the dikes forecasted to be built. Two of the shape files, LWBody and RWBody, are done according to the templates required by ICPDR. The names of the columns within the attribute tables are itemed in The names of the columns for each worksheet are itemed in Annex 2.

The current report presents the following issues (Romanian approach):

- a short description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) - phytoplankton communities;

- a short description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) - benthic invertebrates communities;

- a short description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) –fish fauna;

- a short description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) - chemical and physico-chemical elements;

- a description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) – hydromorphological elements;

- application of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies – hydromorphological elements on a case study - Romanian pilot basin (the Prut river basin).

12

3. Short description of the methodology regarding ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) – phytoplankton

The assessment method complies with the Water Framework Directive and takes into account the impact of the main pressures on communities of phytoplankton algae in streams. Phytoplankton is sensitive to the following pressures: input of nutrients, organic pollution and general degradation. For every selected indicator, limit values have been proposed for each status (high, good, moderate, poor and bad) and for each typology. Also, the reference guide values for each typology and for each of the selected indicators have been set. Assessment was done, at the water body level. Each monitoring station has a list of monitored species. For each species the following indices are calculated:

- Saprobic index - Chlorophyll index - Simpson diversity index - Number of taxa index - Diatom abundance index - Bacillariophyceae.

For each of the indices, Ecological Quality Ratios (EQR) are calculated, based on the obtained value and the reference guide value for the corresponding ecologic status (in accordance with European guidelines – see figure 4). The ratios shall be sub unitary, between 0 and 1. Using the above-mentioned indices, the multimetric index (MI) is calculated. Also, for multimetric index, values for determining the ecological status were established. For the ecological status assessment of the river water bodies, for the selected indices, it was proposed a weighting, according to their importance for the communities of algae, as follows:

- Saprobic index (SI): 20% - Chlorophyll index (CLI): 25% - Simpson diversity index (DI): 30% - Number of taxa index (NTI): 15% - Diatom abundance index – Bacillariophyceae (DAI): 10%.

The multimetric index value is given by the following equation: MI = 0.2 * EQRSI + 0.25 * EQRCLI + 0.3 * EQRDI + 0.15 * EQRNTI + 0.1 * EQRDAI The multimetric index value gives the ecological status. The same procedure is applied for heavily modified water bodies. The multimetric index value gives the ecological potential.

Figure 6 – Ecological status assessment scheme for phytoplankton - rivers

13

4. Short description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) - benthic invertebrates communities

The assessment method is in compliance with the Water Framework Directive and takes into account the effects of the main pressures on macro-invertebrates communities in streams: organic pollution and general degradation. For every selected index, limit values have been proposed for each status (high, good, moderate, poor and bad) and for each typology. Also, reference guide values have been set for each typology and for each selected index. Assessment is done for each water body. Each monitoring station has a list of monitored species. For each species, the following indices are calculated:

Saprobic index EPT index Shannon-Wiener diversity index Number of family index OCH/O index Functional groups index Preference flow index

For each of the indices, Ecological Quality Ratios (EQR) is calculated based on the obtained value and the reference guide value for corresponding ecologic status. The ratios shall be sub unitary (between 0 and 1). Using the above-mentioned indices, the multimetric index (MI) is calculated. Also, for the multimetric index, values for determining the ecological status were established. For the selected indicators, it was proposed a weighting, according to their importance for the invertebrate communities, as follows:

Saprobic index (SI): 30% EPT index (EPT): 10% Shannon-Wiener diversity index (DI): 20% Number of family index (NF): 10% OCH/O index (OCH): 10% Functional groups index (FG): 10% Preference flow index (REO/LIM): 10%.

The multimetric index value is given by the following equation: MI = 0.3 * EQRSI+0.1*EQREPT +0.2*EQRDI +0.1*EQRNF +0.1*EQROCH +0.1 *EQRFG +0.1*EQRREO/LIM The multimetric index value will give the ecological status. The same procedure applies for heavily modified water bodies, only the weighting of the indices used to calculate the multimetric index is different.

Saprobe index (SI): 10% EPT index (EPT): 20% Shannon-Wiener diversity index (DI): 20% Number of family index (NF): 10% OCH/O index (OCH): 10% Functional groups index (FG): 10% Preference flow index (REO/LIM): 20%.

For heavily modified water bodies, the multimetric index value is given by the following equation:

14

MI=0.1*EQRSI+0.2*EQREPT+0.2*EQRDI+0.1*EQRNF+0.1*EQROCH+0.1*EQRFG+0.2*EQRREO/LIM In this case, the multimetric index value will give the ecological potential.

Figure 7 – Ecological status assessment scheme for macroinvertebrates – rivers

5. Short description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) –fish fauna

The evaluation and classification of water bodies on fish fauna was done using the method EFI +. The EFI + selected metrics are:

salmonid water bodies:

- relative density of intolerant individuals with size below 150 mm; - relative density of intolerant species to the reduction of dissolved oxygen.

cyprinid water bodies:

- relative abundance of species-generative (requiring lothyic habitat type for reproduction); - relative density of lithophyle species.

Data are recorded in excel sheets provided by <http://efi-plus.boku.ac.at/software/insert_data.php> EFI on the website and sent in this form, or can be entered manually, as indicated on the same page.

Site.name River.name Sample.code Day Month Year … FishIndex FishIndex.ClassVama cu tabla Bahlui Bahlui_132550 5 9 2004 0.953 1

Table 3 – Output example (only few columns from the report)

15

For the same monitoring sections and the same period, the following data for fish fauna was transmitted:

Input EFI+ Output EFI+ River Basin Site.name SampleCode River.name Longitude SampleCode

Latitude Day Day Month Month Year Year Comments.date Country Longitude River Name Latitude Site Name Obs.dens.HINTOL.inf.150 Altitude Obs.dens.O2INTOL Ecoregion Obs.ric.RH.PAR Mediterranean Type Obs.dens.LITH River Region Exp.dens.HINTOL.inf150 Method Exp.dens.O2INTOL Fished Area Exp.ric.RH.PAR River Width Exp.dens.LITH Flow Regime Ids.dens.HINTOL.inf.150 Natural Lake Upstream Ids.dens.O2INTOL Geomorphology Ids.ric.RH.PAR Former Flood Plain Ids.dens.LITH Water Source Method Upstream Drainage Area Comments.method Distance from Source Sampling.location River Slope Comments.sampling.location Air temperature Mean Annual Richness Air temperature January Comments.richness Air temperature July Captures Former Sediment Size Comments.sampling.effort Sampling Location Ecoregion Species Name ST-Species Total number run1 River.zone Number Length Below 150 Comments.river.zone Number Length Over 150 Aggregated.score.Salmonid.zone

Table 4 – Data used for fish fauna

16

6. Short description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) – chemical and physico – chemical elements

The physico-chemical elements, supporting elements for the ecological status assessment according to WFD, are itemed below: General physico-chemical elements:

thermal conditions oxygenation conditions salinity nutrient conditions acidification status

Pollutants specific - other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities in water bodies. In Romania, for rivers, limits were set for high/good and good/moderate status for the following quality elements:

General physico-chemical elements:

thermal condition (temperature) oxygen condition (dissolved oxygen in terms of concentration) (Figure 8) nutrients status (N-NH4, N-NO2, N-NO3, P-PO4, total P) (Figure 9) acidification status (pH) (Figure 10)

Specific pollutants: Cu, Zn, As, Cr, acenaphthen, PCB (sum of 7), phenol, xilen, toluene.

For chemical and physico-chemical elements, for which limits have been set, the ecological status is established as follows:

high status (H) good status (G) moderate status (M)

General schemes for the evaluation of general physico-chemical elements are shown in Figure 8, 9 and 10. For specific pollutants, the evaluation of the ecological status considers average annual data, for both specific non-synthetic pollutants (Cu, Zn, As, Cr), as for synthetic pollutants (acenaphthen, PCB (sum of 7), phenol, xilen, toluene). If the recorded values are below the limit of quantification, the statistical size used for the evaluation is the average one. Also, for non-synthetic specific pollutants, natural background is considered.

17

Figure 8 – General scheme for establishing the ecological status for Dissolved Oxygen

Regarding the General scheme for establishing of ecological status for nutrients (N-NH4, N-NO2, N-NO3, P-PO4, total P) shown in Fig. 9, compliance scheme is applied to each indicator of nutrient group (for which limits were set), and the final status is established on the principle of "status is given by the worst placed indicator".

18

Figure 9 – General scheme for establishing of ecological status for nutrients (N-NH4, N-NO2, N-NO3, P-PO4, total P)

19

Figure 10 – General scheme for establishing the ecological status for pH

7. Description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) – hydromorphological elements

Any change in the flow regime causes an imbalance in the structure and function of aquatic ecosystems which depends on it. Knowing the parameters of the flow regime provide information on the availability of habitat, biodiversity, resilience (ability to restore the ecosystem), capacity of responsiveness for the biota and synchronizing the evolutional stages of the aquatic organisms with these parameters. In order to analyze the modifications of the hydrological regime and riverbed morphology, one must analyze parameters corresponding to the natural hydrological regime and to the modified hydrological regime and parameters corresponding to the natural and modified riverbed morphology. With these parameters, indicators reflecting the modification of the hydrological regime and the degree of alteration of the riverbed morphology can be calculated. The final purpose is to integrate these indicators into a single overall indicator of hydromorphological alterations to assess the ecological water body status (and enroll the water bodies in one of the five quality classes as required by the Water Framework Directive). The hydromorphological quality elements for rivers listed in Annex V of WFD, are considered only when assessing the high ecological status, being specific to each water body category (rivers).

20

These elements are: the hydrological regime (water level and flow), the connectivity with groundwater bodies, the river continuity, the morphological parameters (the river depth and width variation, the bed structure substrate of the river bed, the structure of the riparian zone); In order to evaluate the water bodies status based on hydro-morphological elements, a situation corresponding to a natural state of reference for the water body needs to be taken into consideration, i.e. the situation before the impact created by the hydro-technical works (built in the years 1950 - 1960) and the current situation - monitoring data until 2007. The data available before building the hydraulic works (including tables and maps from the years 1950 - 1960) will be used as reference data for very good status. In the same way, the monitoring data available after the construction of hydraulic works to 2007, will be used in order to assess the current ecological status of the water body.

7.1. Hydrological parameters

The average flow modification (IH1) shall be calculated by the ratio Qm nat/Qm mod, where:

Qm nat – the average flow in natural conditions (m3/s) – the multiannual average flow measured from the first year of operation of the gauging station up to the execution of the water works on the water course;

Qm mod – the average flow in modified conditions due to the antropic pressures (m3/s) – the multiannual average flow measured at the gauging station after the execution on the water works on the water course up to the current year (2007).

Modification of maximum amplitude of water level variations (IH2) (∆Hnat/ ∆Hmod)

Modification of maximum amplitude of water level variations in natural conditions (m) expressed by the level variation corresponding to the reference status:

∆Hnat= (H max in year I + Hmin in year I)/2, where:

H max in year I = the maximum level averaged for the first years of operation of the gauging station before the execution of water works on the water body (m)

Hmin in year I = the minimum level averaged for the first years of operation of the gauging station before the execution of water works on the water body(m)

Modification of maximum amplitude of water level variations due to the anthropogenic pressures (m) expressed by the level variation corresponding to the current status:

∆Hmod= (H max mod in current year + Hmin mod in current year)/2 where:

Hmax mod in current year = the maximum level registered after carrying on the water works, up to the current year (2007) – (m)

Hmin mod in current year = the minimum level registered after carrying on the water works, up to the current year (2007) – (m)

River continuity (IH3) It is considered that in the reference year there were no transversal (cross-sections) barriers on the river. Data from the current year (2007) shall be checked. It shall be mentioned if there are transversal barriers on the river (thresholds, dams) and if there are any functional structures for migratory fishes (table 5). In this case, it is considered that, the water body is in good ecological status.

21

Ordinal Species Englishname Migratory

Species Eudontomyzon danfordi Carpathian lamprey X

Acipenseriformes

Acipenser gueldenstaedti Danube sturgeon X Acipenser nudiventris ship sturgeon /

fringebarbel sturgeon X

Acipenser ruthenus starlet X Acipenser stellatus stellate sturgeon / starry

sturgeon X

Huso huso beluga / European sturgeon

X

Clupeiformes Alosa immaculata / Caspialosa pontica

Pontic shad / Caspian shad

X

Clupeonella cultriventris Black Sea sprat X

Salmoniformes Hucho hucho Danube salmon / huchen X Salmo trutta lacustris lake trout X Salmo trutta labrax Black Sea trout X

Anguiliformes Anguilla anguilla European eel X

Cypriniformes

Chondrostoma nasus Nase X Leuciscus idus Ide X Abramis brama Bream X Aspius aspius Asp X Barbus barbus barbell X Vimba vimba vimba bream X Cyprinus carpio Common carp X Chalcalburnus chalcoides big bleak X Romanogobio uranoscopus (Tisa superior) / Gobio Uranoscopus / Rheogobio frici

Danubian longbarbel gudgeon / gudgeon

X

Pelecus cultratus Sichel X Lota lota Burbot X

Table 5 – List of the migratory fish species on medium and long distances from the Romanian rivers

Connectivity with groundwater bodies (IH4) is expressed by:

1. level variations recorded in the drillings for the reference status: the piezometric level in the observation wells near the water course shall be checked and compared with the piezometric level corresponding to the current status; 2. percentage out of the surface runoff. For reference status, connectivity with groundwater body shall be checked, using the map no. 1, in order to estimate the contribution of underground supply, as a percentage of multiannual average flow corresponding to the related analyzed surface water body. For current status, underground supply is estimated, as percentage of the multiannual average flow related to the analyzed water body, for the years after execution of water works (map no. 2 - keeping the same percentage of surface runoff as on Map no.1). Appropriate annual average flow shall be considered. In absence of water balance data, one can estimate very good or good connectivity, if the ratio of groundwater levels, corresponding to the natural regime, compared current levels varies in the range of + / - 15%. Following this analysis, estimates shall be made, if there is any change in the connectivity with groundwater, or not. If no observation wells near the watercourse, connectivity with groundwater bodies can be estimated only in percentage of surface runoff.

22

Figure 11 – Map - Underground water supply conditions

23

Figure 12 – Lithological map

7.2. Morphological parameters Modification of the cross section - depth Hm nat/Hm mod (IM1)

H m nat = the average depth of the river bed in natural regime – shall be calculated as the average depth for multiannual average flow, from the cross section profiles of the first years of operation of the gauging station, recorded before the execution of water works (m);

Hm mod = the average depth under a modified regime (m) - shall be calculated as the average depth for the multiannual average flow, from the cross section profiles, recorded after the execution of water works, up to 2007 (considered as current situation).

Modification of the cross section - width Bm nat/Bm mod (IM2)

B m nat = the average low-flow channel width of the river bed in natural regime - shall be calculated as the average channel width of the cross section profiles of the first year of operation of the gauging station (m);

B m mod = the average low-flow channel width under a modified regime (m) - shall be calculated as the average channel width of the cross section profiles of the current year (2007).

Dredging coefficient (IM3) (the channel maintenance and cleaning work) - Kd for rivers where navigation is performed.

24

Kd=Ld/Lr - dredging ratio (dredged length / river sector length)

Modification of flood channel (major river bed) reduction coefficient (IM4)

Ki=Lmaj nat / Lmaj dammed Ki = the flood channel reduction coefficient (the average width of the natural flood channel / the

average cross section distance between dikes on the water body); Lmaj nat = the average width of flood channel shall be calculated from the cross section profiles from

the first year of operation of the gauging station; Lmaj dammed = the average cross section distance between dikes on the water body.

Damming coefficient (dammed river length / water body length) in current situation (IM5) Kdammed=Ldammed/Lwb; Ldammed = dammed river length; Lwb = water body length;

Banks consolidation coefficient (IM6) Kbanks=L cons bank/L nat current bank (length of consolidated bank by stabilization works / length of non-consolidated bank, in current situation)

Stabilization of the river bed (IM7) (not applicable to the Danube river, only for inland rivers). The ratio of H/h threshold shall be calculated, where, H is the (actual) water level and h threshold = height of the threshold above the bottom level (m)

Riparian zone structure (IM8)- refers to how the land coverage is solved and its ratio.

X

X X After analyzing all the hydro-morphological parameters, the final ecological status of water body on hydromorphological quality elements is represented by the most unfavorable situation (e.g. If we have the situation where the parameter “modification of average flow leads to good ecological status”; the parameter “modification of major river bed reduction factor leads to moderate ecological status” and the parameter “modification of the maximum amplitude of level variations leads to high ecological status” , etc, then, the water body is framed in moderate ecological status). Qm nat Average flow in natural conditions (m3/s)

Qm mod Average flow in modified conditions due to entropic pressures (m3/s)

∆Hnat Modification of the maximum amplitude of level variations in natural conditions (m)

∆Hmod Modification of the maximum amplitude of level variations due to entropic pressures (m)

Hm nat Average depth in natural conditions (m)

Hm mod Average depth in modified conditions (m)

Bm nat Average width in natural conditions (m)

Bm mod Average width in modified conditions (m)

Kd*=Ld/Lr Dredging coefficient (dredging length /river sector length)

Ki=Lmaj nat/Lmaj dammed Major river bed reduction factor (major natural river bed average width / average cross distance between dikes)

Kdammed=Ldammed/Lwb Damming coefficient (dammed river length / water body length)

Kbanks=Lcons. banks/Lnat current banks Banks consolidation coefficient

H Water depth (m)

Hthreshold Threshold height above the bottom level of the river bed (m)

Table 6 – Top of Form - Synthesis of hydro-morphological parameters

After computing each parameter detailed above, one should check to which class the value derived is belonging. The boundaries among classes are shown in the table no.7.

25

Hydro-morphological parameters for ecological assessment - rivers High ecological

status Good ecological status

Moderate ecological status

Poor ecological status Bad ecological

status description evaluation

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Modification of average flow (IH1)

Qm nat/Qm mod 0.96 – 1.04 increase 0.85 – 0.96 decrease 1.04– 1.15

increase 0.70 – 0.85 decrease 1.15 – 1.30

increase 0.40 – 0.70 decrease 1.30- 1.60

increase <0.40 decrease >1.60

Modification of maximum amplitude of level variation (m) (IH2)

∆Hnat/∆Hmod 0.90 – 1.10 increase 0.80 – 0.90 decrease 1.10 – 1.20


increase 0.60 -0.70 decrease 1.30 -1.50


River continuity (IH3) permanent ensure fish stock movement from downstream to upstream and vice versa

periodical disrupted disrupted

Groundwater connectivity (IH4)

yes yes Reduced compared to the natural condition

no no

Modification of cross section – depth (IM1)

Hm nat/Hm mod 0.95 – 1.05 increase 0.80 – 0.95 decrease 1.05 – 1.20




Modification of cross section – width (IM2)

Bm nat/Bm mod 0.95 – 1.05 increase 0.80 – 0.95 decrease 1.05 – 1.20




Dredging coefficient (IM3)*

Kd* 0.00 0.00 – 0.20 0.20 – 0.40 0.40 – 0.75 075 – 1.00

Modification of major river bed reduction coefficient (IM4)

Ki 1.00 natural connectivity

1.20 natural connectivity

1.50 reduced connectivity

2.00 very reduced connectivity

>2.00 disrupted connectivity

Modification of damming coefficient (IM5)

Kdammed 0.00 0.00 – 0.20 0.20 – 0.40 0.40 – 0.70 0.70 – 1.00

Banks consolidation coefficient (IM6)

Kbanks 0.00 0.00 – 0.15 0.15 – 0.40 0.40 – 0.75 0.75 – 1.00

26

River bed stabilization (IM7)

hthreshold 0.00 – 0.10 m and H/hthreshold > 2.00

0.10 – 0.20 m and H/hthreshold > 2.00



>0.50 m

Riparian zone structure (IM8)

fallow land, natural coverage

land used for agriculture <40%

land used for agriculture >40%

water uses with significant anthropogenic impact

water uses with major anthropogenic impact (localities, industries)

* Kd shall be calculated only for rivers where navigation is performed (Study on the development of classification and comprehensive assessment of the status of surface waters (rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal waters) as required by the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC on the basis of biological, chemical and hydromorphological elements, ICIM Bucharest and collaborators and NIMRD, 2009)

Table 7 – Hydro-morphological parameters for ecological assessment – rivers

27

8. Application of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies – hydromorphological elements on a case study - Romanian pilot basin (the Prut river basin)

A detailed description of the Prut River Basin (physical-geographical characterization, hydrographic network, surface water resources and groundwater) was done in the “D.6.3. Report outlining the findings of the Ialomita and Prut Basin pilot studies”. The methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies using hydro-morphological elements was applied for two water bodies, in Prut river highlighted within the figure 13.

Figure 13 – The location of the water bodies analyzed within the Prut River basin

28

Each hydromorphological parameter has been computed/derived using the methodology presented in chapter 7 and the results are itemed below: WB1 – the river Prut – sector between the confluence with Solonet and the confluence with Jijia

IH1 Modification of average flow: Since Qm nat = 85 m3/s and Qm mod = 92.3 m3/s, then Qm nat/Qm mod = 0.92, resulting in good ecological status taking into account only IH1;

IH2 Modification of maximum amplitude of level variation (m): Since ∆Hnat = 465 m and ∆Hmod = 310 m, then ∆Hnat/∆Hmod = 1.50, resulting in poor ecological status considering only IH2;

IH3 River continuity: permanent, resulting in high ecological status; IH4 Groundwater connectivity – not assessed; IM1 Modification of cross section – depth: Since Hm nat = 2.5 m and Hm mod = 2.75 m, then Hm

nat/Hm mod = 0.91, resulting in good ecological status; IM2 Modification of cross section – width: Since Bm nat = 60 m and Bm mod = 60.5 m, then Bm

nat/Bm mod = 0.99, resulting in good ecological status; IM3 Dredging coefficient – not assessed because there is no navigation on the Prut River IM4 Modification of major river bed reduction coefficient: Since Bm nat = 714 km and Bm mod = 129

km, then Bm nat/Bm mod = 5.53, resulting in bad ecological status; IM5 Modification of damming coefficient (Kdammed): Since Ldammed = 105.7 km and LWB = 118.7 km,

then Ldammed/Lwb = 0.89, resulting in bad ecological status; IM6 Banks consolidation coefficient – not assessed; IM7 River bad stabilisation – not assessed; IM8 Structure of riparian area – not assessed.

WB2 - the river Prut – sector between the confluence with the Jijia River and the confluence with the Danube River

IH1 Modification of average flow: Since Qm nat = 94 m3/s and Qm mod = 109 m3/s, then Qm nat/Qm mod = 0.86, resulting in good ecological status;

IH2 Modification of maximum amplitude of level variation (m): Since ∆Hnat = 436 m and ∆Hmod = 420 m, then ∆Hnat/∆Hmod = 1.04, resulting in very good ecological status;

IH3 River continuity: permanent, resulting in high ecological status IH4 Groundwater connectivity – not assessed; IM1 Modification of cross section – depth: Since Hm nat = 2.5 m and Hm mod = 2.75 m, then Hm

nat/Hm mod = 0.91, resulting in good ecological status; IM2 Modification of cross section – width: Since Bm nat = 61 m and Bm mod = 61.5 m, then Bm

nat/Bm mod = 0.99, resulting in high ecological status; IM 3 Dredging coefficient - – not assessed because there is no navigation on the Prut River IM 4 Modification of major river bed reduction coefficient: Since Bm nat = 4170 km and Bm mod =

470 km, then Bm nat/Bm mod = 8.87, resulting in bad ecological status; IM 5 Modification of damming coefficient (Kdammed): Since Ldammed = 234.83 km and LWB = 387 km,

then Ldammed/Lwb = 0.61, resulting in poor ecological status; IM 6 Banks consolidation coefficient - not assessed; IM7 River bad stabilisation– not assessed; IM 8 Structure of riparian area – not assessed

Some parameters have not been assessed because there was not enough information. It was not possible to draw a conclusion on the hydro-morphological status of the WB1 and WB2 using the methodology. In addition, the parameters computed have a high degree of uncertainty because of the lack of information before construction of water works.

9. Conclusions The National Administration “Apele Romane” made efforts in order to achieve the objectives of this deliverable as well as the objectives of the SEE HYDROPOWER project, preparing a lot of information (detailed information) related to the Prut river basin (including information provided to BOKU partner).

29

This report presents short descriptions of the Romanian methodologies regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) using different quality elements (phytoplankton communities; benthic invertebrates communities; fish fauna; chemical and physico-chemical elements) and the description of the Romanian methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) – hydromorphological elements. In addition, the parameters, which express the hydro-morphological elements, are applied on a case study - the Prut river. The methodology is in line with WFD requirements. Unfortunately, it is difficult to be applied mainly due to detailed information required before the construction of water works (e.g. the average depth of the river bed in natural regime – should be calculated as the average depth (corresponding to the multiannual average flow) from the cross section profiles of the first years of operation of the gauging station, recorded before the execution of water works). The results were contradictory for example, for WB1: IH1 showed good ecological status and IM5 showed bad ecological status (possible due to the lack of information before the construction of water works). Therefore, no conclusion regarding the overall assessment from the point of view of hydro-morphological elements could be drawn. The methodology regarding parameters, which should express hydro-morphological elements, for the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers), should be improved and a relationship with biological elements should be derived.

10. References *** Water Framework Directive 60/2000 EC

*** Water Law 107/1996 with subsequent amendments

Study on the development of classification and comprehensive assessment of the status of surface waters (rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal waters) as required by the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC on the basis of biological, chemical and hydromorphological elements – ICIM Bucharest and collaborators and the National Institute of Marine Research and Development "Grigore Antipa" (NIMRD) - Constanta, 2009.

30

Annexes

Annex 1

Agricultural sources existing_dike_Prut Industrial_Sources L_Body_Prut proposed_dike_Prut RB_Prut RW_Body_Prut Locality County LAT_ LONG_ Activity No. of animals ZV GWB Y_DD X_DD Y_D_D X_D_D km Latitude Longitude Nr

NUME ID_CADASTR BH CURS_APA L_MAL_DR D_DIG_M_DR L_MAL_ST D_DIG_M_ST Length MAX_L_km maluri Shape_Leng

UNIT_INDUS BH WB EUCD_WB LOCALITATE JUDET LAT_ LONG_ SECT_IND DIRECTIVE Nr

OBJECTID DANUBEID META_ID COUNTRY NAME EUCD_LWB EUCD_TLWB EUCD_LWTYP ECOREG_CD SYSTEM INS_WHEN INS_BY EUCD_RB STATUS_YR MODIFIED MOD_TEST MOD_APP MOD_BETTEO MOD_GEPACH EXEMPT_4 EXEMPT_5 ARTIFICIAL ALT_CAT GEOL_CAT SIZE_CAT DEPTH_CAT LONGITUDE LATITUDE SWSTAT_DAT CHEM_STAT CONF_CHEM

NUME ID_CADASTR BH CURS_APA L_MAL_DR D_DIG_M_DR L_MAL_ST D_DIG_M_ST Length MAX_L_km maluri

OBJECTID AREA_METERPERIMETER_ BAZINES7_ BAZINES7_I BAZIN OR1 OR2 OR3 OR4 OR5 OR6 COD DENUMIRE ordin Shape_Leng Shape_Area

OBJECTID DANUBEID META_ID COUNTRY NAME EUCD_RWB MSCD_RWB EUCD_RWTYP EUCD_TRWB ECOREG_CD SYSTEM INS_WHEN INS_BY EUCD_RB STATUS_YR MODIFIED MOD_TEST MOD_APP MOD_BETTEO MOD_GEPACH EXEMPT_4 EXEMPT_5 ARTIFICIAL ALT_CAT GEOL_CAT SIZE_CAT LONGITUDE LATITUDE SWSTAT_DAT CHEM_STAT CONF_CHEM

31

ECO_STAT CONF_ECOST ECO_POT CONF_ECOPO RISK_DATE RISK_TOTAL RISK_CHEM RISK_ECO RISK_O_POL RISK_HAZ_S RISK_N_POL RISK_HYDMO GWB_ASSOC PA_ASSOC RSN_P_POL RSN_D_POL RSN_ABSTR RSN_FLOWR RSN_MORPH PHYTO MAC_PHYTO BEN_INV FISH HYDRO_REG MORPH_COND GEN_COND NON_COMP O_PART_B EUCD_SUNIT EUCD_RBD SPEC_POLL SYNT_SPEC NSYNT_SPEC PRIO_SUBS SYNT_PRIO NSYNT_PRIO

ECO_STAT CONF_ECOST ECO_POT CONF_ECOPO RISK_DATE RISK_TOTAL RISK_CHEM RISK_ECO RISK_O_POL RISK_HAZ_S RISK_N_POL RISK_HYDMO GWB_ASSOC PA_ASSOC RSN_P_POL RSN_D_POL RSN_ABSTR RSN_FLOWR RSN_MORPH PHYTO MAC_PHYTO BEN_INV FISH HYMO HYDRO_REG RIV_CONT MORPH_COND GEN_COND SPEC_POLL SYNT_SPEC NSYNT_SPEC PRIO_SUBS SYNT_PRIO NSYNT_PRIO NON_COMP O_PART_B

32

HYMO MSCD_LWB Nume_lac EXEMPT_7 Nr_am_av Suprafata Area_LAEA Area_Balti EU_CD_LW X_DD Y_DD Shape_Leng Shape_Area

EUCD_SUNIT EUCD_RBD cod_aranja EXEMPT_7 extemp_7 Pesti_migr Nr_am_av Length X_ETRS89 Y_ETRS89 Shape_Leng

33

Annex 2 General Data Phisico-chemical Data Stressor Input EFI+ Output EFI+ Country, River, Site.name, National_wb_code Ecoregion Typology Fish-region Catchment (km2) Length (km) Distance (km) Sub-strate Side-arms Impoundment Water-way Assessment Method/Data Aliens (yes/no) HMWB (yes/no)

National_wb_code Site.name Longitude Latitude Discharge (m3/s) Oxygen concentration O2_mg/l (average, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year) Oxygen saturation O2_% (average, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year) Total Phosphorus-P TP_P_mg/l_ (average, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year) ortho-phosphate-P PO4_P_mg/l_ (average, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year) nitrate-N NO3_N_mg/L_ (average, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year) ammonium-N NH4_N_mg/l_ (average, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year) Total nitrogen-N TN_N_mg/L (average, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year) Biological Oxygen Demand (5 days) BOD5_mg/l (average,

National_wb_code Site.name % near natural area (i.e. "natural" forests, wetlands, moors, meadows, pasture) % intensive agriculture in catchment, e.g. fields, vinyards % extensive agriculture in catchment, e.g. pastures, orchards % urbanised and artificial land cover in catchment assessment of embankments, cross section alterations and flow velocity increase 4 classes (no, slight, significant, strong) influence of damming on the water body (yes/no) effects of impoundments: water velocity decrease: 4 classes (no, slight, significant, strong) effects of hydropeaking: alteration of hydrograph: 4 classes (no, slight, significant, strong) assessment of water abstraction 4 classes (no, slight, significant, strong) influence of dam located

River Basin SampleCode Longitude Latitude Day Month Year Country River Name Site Name Altitude Ecoregion Mediterranean Type River Region Method Fished Area River Width Flow Regime Natural Lake Upstream Geomorphology Former Flood Plain Water Source Upstream Drainage Area Distance from Source River Slope Air temperature Mean Annual Air temperature January Air temperature July Former Sediment Size Sampling Location Species Name Total number run1

Site.name River.name SampleCode Day Month Year Comments.date Longitude Latitude Obs.dens.HINTOL.inf.150 Obs.dens.O2INTOL Obs.ric.RH.PAR Obs.dens.LITH Exp.dens.HINTOL.inf150 Exp.dens.O2INTOL Exp.ric.RH.PAR Exp.dens.LITH Ids.dens.HINTOL.inf.150 Ids.dens.O2INTOL Ids.ric.RH.PAR Ids.dens.LITH Method Comments.method Sampling.location Comments.sampling.location Richness Comments.richness Captures Comments.sampling.effort Ecoregion ST-Species River.zone Comments.river.zone

34

minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year) Water temperature Temp_ °C (average, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year) Alkalinity [mvall] (optional: relevant for crystalline geology) alkalinity_mval/l_ meq/l (average, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year) pH value pH_mg/l (average, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year) Chloride Cl_mg/l_ (average, minimum, maximum, standard deviation, No of values, year)

upstream on the site itself (flow regulation, temperature, sedimentation, reservoir flushing) classes (no, slight, strong) Water temperature increase (yes/no) direct alteration of the riparian vegetation (i.e. adjacent natural vegetation appropriate to the type and geographical location of the river) 4 classes (no, slight, strong, complete) Toxic Risk. Priority substances list (yes/no/unknown) present acidification (yes/no) navigation intensity (commercial transport, large ship) (yes/no/high) significant fisheries (yes/no) dominant pressure acting at the water body (main_pressure) classes (organic, bank morphology, impoundments, other morphology, hydrology, navigation, toxic, acidity, specify)

Number Length Below 150 Number Length Over 150

Aggregated.score.Salmonid.zone Aggregated.score.Cyprinid.zone FishIndex FishIndex.class

www.seehydropower.eu Project Contact Ing. Maximo Peviani [email protected] Telephone: +39 035 55771 (switchboard) Fax: +39 035 5577999

Authors Contact

Andreea-Cristina Galie e-mail [email protected]

Telephone: +4021.31.81.115 / 109 Fax: +4021.31.81.116

Constanta Moldovan e-mail [email protected]

Telephone:+ 40 21 311 03 96 Fax: +40 21 312 21 74

See Hydropower Wp6 d.6.8. Apele 121219 Final Version-primer

Documents

Transcript of See Hydropower Wp6 d.6.8. Apele 121219 Final Version-primer