Applying Earth observation to detect non-authorised … · Applying Earth observation to detect...
Transcript of Applying Earth observation to detect non-authorised … · Applying Earth observation to detect...
Applying Earth observation
to detect non-authorised
water abstractions
Annexes to the Guidance
document
Document information
CLIENT European Commission, DG Environment
CONTRACT NUMBER 070307/2013/SFRA/660810/ENV.C1 - under the Framework contract ENV.D.I/FRA/2012/0014 “Framework contract to provide services to support the development and implementation of EU freshwater policies”
PROJECT NAME Applying Earth observation to detect non-authorised water abstractions
PROJECT OFFICER Thomas Petitguyot
DATE 16 September 2014
AUTHORS BIO by Deloitte (BIO)
Sarah Lockwood, Marion Sarteel, and Shailendra Mugdal
University of Castilla La Mancha (UCLM)
Anna Osann, Alfonso Calera
KEY CONTACTS Sarah Lockwood
Or
Shailendra Mugdal
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 1
Contents
Annex 1 : Case studies - Applying Earth Observation to detect non-authorised water abstraction ........ 3
A. Cas des régions Languedoc-Roussillon et PACA, France ...................................................... 4
B. Case of the Crete River Basin, in Greece .............................................................................. 27
C. Case of Campania & Puglia Regions, in Italy ........................................................................ 40
D. Case of experienced river basins in Spain and Portugal ....................................................... 56
Annex 2: Status of non-authorised abstractions in the EU .................................................................... 81
Annex 3: Details of EO-based methods to monitor abstractions ........................................................... 85
Annex 4: Overview of EO tools and services ........................................................................................ 97
Annex 5: Background on water rights in the EU.................................................................................. 103
Tables
Table 1: Focus sur la région Languedoc Roussillon ............................................................................. 20
Table 2 : Focus sur la région PACA ...................................................................................................... 21
Table 3 : Procédures de déclaration ou demande d’autorisation de prélèvement - Classification ....... 22
Table 4 : Informations à fournir dans le cadre d’une déclaration ou d’une demande d’autorisation
de prélèvements .................................................................................................................................... 23
Table 5: Comparative Analysis of different procedures for the detection of irrigated areas and
abstractions: strengths and weaknesses .............................................................................................. 55
Table 6: Details of operative capacity for each element of EO Service provision line for Spain and
Portugal, example of SIRIUS................................................................................................................. 75
Table 7: Non-authorised water abstraction within Member States (selected following available
information) ............................................................................................................................................ 82
Table 8: EO sensors fulfilling water managers’ spatial resolution requirements ................................... 87
Table 9: Summary of existing Earth Observation initiatives currently used or with potential to detect
non-authorised water abstractions ........................................................................................................ 97
Table 10: Possible attributes of water rights ....................................................................................... 103
Table 11: Overview of information on water rights for irrigation for selected countries in the EU ...... 106
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 2
Figures
Figure 1 : Périmètre administratif du Bassin Rhône-Méditerranée. .........................................................5
Figure 2 : Prélèvements d’eau pour l’irrigation par régions en 2010........................................................7
Figure 3 : Gestion intégrée de la ressource en eau à l’échelle du Bassin Rhône Méditerranée .......... 10
Figure 4: Procédure de déclaration de prélèvement ............................................................................. 24
Figure 5: Procédure d’autorisation de prélèvement .............................................................................. 25
Figure 6: Crete River Basin District ....................................................................................................... 28
Figure 7: Responsibilities on water rights allocation and water abstraction management ................... 30
Figure 8: Approaches for the detection of non-authorised water abstractions and available tools
within the Crete River Basin District ...................................................................................................... 33
Figure 9: National Data Bank of Hydrological and Meteorological Information ..................................... 34
Figure 10: Irrigated areas in the Consortium Sannio Alifano (in brown) ............................................... 43
Figure 11: Map of the irrigated areas in the Capitanata Plain, focus of this case study ....................... 44
Figure 12: Water abstraction management in Campania and Puglia Regions ..................................... 46
Figure 13: Approaches for the detection of non-authorised water abstractions and available tools
within the area covered by a Consortium .............................................................................................. 48
Figure 14: Newspaper Il Mattino”, in occasion of the final conference of the EU-project “DEMETER” 51
Figure 15: Water abstraction management within the Guadiana River Basin ...................................... 58
Figure 16: Guadiana river basin ............................................................................................................ 61
Figure 17: Evolution of water table in Upper Guadiana aquifer. ........................................................... 62
Figure 18: Approaches for the detection of non-authorised water abstractions and available tools
within the basin ...................................................................................................................................... 67
Figure 20: Overview of steps in using EO for detecting non-authorised abstractions .......................... 85
Figure 21: Overview of processing steps from crop water requirements (CWR) to water abstraction . 86
Figure 22: Comparison between declared irrigated surfaces per plot by farmers and classified by
remote sensing ...................................................................................................................................... 88
Figure 23: Calculation of irrigation requirements and associated information required for calculation
control .................................................................................................................................................... 89
Figure 24: Comparison among amount of irrigation water applied by farmer and irrigation water
applied estimated by the methodology kc-NDVI- ETo .......................................................................... 92
Figure 25: Comparison of estimated abstractions at aquifer scale with observed piezometric level
variations ............................................................................................................................................... 93
Figure 26: Schematic illustration of water governance ....................................................................... 105
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 3
Annex 1 : Case studies - Applying
Earth Observation to detect non-
authorised water abstraction
A. Case of Languedoc-Roussillon and PACA regions, in France
B. Case of the Crete River Basin District, in Greece
C. Case of river basins in Italy
D. Case of river basins in Spain and Portugal
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 4
A.Cas des régions Languedoc-
Roussillon et PACA, France
1. Présentation de l’étude et des objectifs de l’atelier
1.1. Contexte et objectifs de l’étude
Le Plan d'action européen pour la sauvegarde des ressources en eau1 définit le futur agenda de
l'UE sur la politique de l'eau. La surexploitation des ressources y est identifiée comme une
pression importante qui doit être abordée par les Etats Membres pour permettre d’atteindre les
objectifs spécifiés dans la directive cadre sur l'eau (DCE). Parmi les actions proposées, ce plan
préconise l’utilisation de la télédétection pour assister les acteurs impliqués dans la gestion
quantitative de l’eau et améliorer la connaissance des prélèvements. La question se pose
aujourd’hui de l’opportunité de développer un service européen sur l’eau à travers une extension
des activités du programme européen Copernicus2 (anciennement programme européen de
surveillance de la Terre GMES)3, sur la base de tests opérationnels déjà réalisés dans certains
pays.
Dans le cadre de ce plan d’action, la DG Environnement de la Commission Européenne a
commandité une étude menée par BIO by Deloitte, en partenariat avec UCLM4. Cette étude visait
à explorer comment les technologies d’observation par satellite pourraient compléter les outils
existants pour une meilleure gestion et connaissance des prélèvements, et assister les services de
l’eau dans leurs opérations.
Dans ce contexte, une série d’ateliers ont été organisés dans des Etats Membres (en Espagne et
au Portugal, en Italie, en France et en Grèce).
1 Communication COM/2012/673
2 http://copernicus.eu/
3 GMES : Global Monitoring for Environment and Security
4 Université de Castilla La Mancha (Espagne)
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 5
1.2. Objectifs de l’atelier
Les ateliers visaient à :
mieux comprendre les besoins des gestionnaires de l’eau dans les Etats Membres
en termes de connaissance et gestion des terres irriguées et des prélèvements
d’eau pour l’irrigation (gestion structurelle et/ou gestion de crise),
informer et échanger sur les intérêts et les limites du recours à la télédétection pour
répondre à ces besoins,
explorer le potentiel de développement de la télédétection comme outil
complémentaire pour les gestionnaires et les services de la police de l’eau pour
différents modes de gouvernance, contextes agricoles, et types de prélèvements.
2. Connaissances et gestion quantitative de la ressource
2.1. Contexte de l’utilisation des ressources en eau sur en régions
Languedoc Roussillon et PACA
Les régions Languedoc-Roussillon et PACA s’étendent sur trois bassins hydrographiques :
principalement sur le bassin Rhône Méditerranée (Figure 1), et dans une moindre mesure sur le
bassin Adour-Garonne et le bassin Loire-Bretagne.
Figure 1 : Périmètre administratif du Bassin Rhône-Méditerranée5.
5 http://www.eaurmc.fr/le-bassin-rhone-mediterranee/les-caracteristiques-du-bassin-rhone-mediterranee.html
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 6
Le bassin RM est le bassin français où la demande agro-climatique est la plus marquée,
notamment dans la partie sud qui présente l’évapotranspiration potentielle annuelle la plus élevée.
Alors que le bassin bénéficie d’une ressource globalement abondante (le Rhône, la Durance, le
Verdon…), celle-ci reste inégalement répartie sur le territoire: certains secteurs comme l’Ardèche,
la Côte-d’Or, la Drôme, etc. connaissent des situations de pénurie d’eau récurrentes.6
Une véritable pression existe sur les ressources en eau de plusieurs bassins versants en régions
Languedoc-Roussillon et PACA, en particulier l’été lorsque la demande est la plus importante.
L’industrie du tourisme fortement développée dans les régions associée à une importante
demande hydrique des cultures peut conduire à des prélèvements d’eau supérieurs aux quantités
disponibles, créant des déficits conjoncturels ou même structurels. Les régions Languedoc-
Roussillon et PACA comptent parmi les régions françaises avec les volumes de prélèvements
d’eau pour l’irrigation les plus élevés (Figure 2). En 2010, la région PACA et la région Languedoc-
Roussillon comptent parmi les régions ayant prélevé le plus grand volume d’eau pour l’irrigation
(>650 millions de m3
chacune). Ces deux régions constituent de loin les régions utilisant le plus
d’eau par surface irriguées avec 6626 m3/ha et 5855 m
3/ha pour la région PACA et la région
Languedoc-Roussillon respectivement (données DREAL et Agence de l’eau).
Ces prélèvements agricoles sont essentiellement réalisés sur les eaux de surface, et dans une
moindre mesure à partir des eaux souterraines. Les volumes prélevés dépendent des besoins des
plantes donc des cultures pratiquées, mais aussi des techniques d'irrigation et du contexte
climatique. Dans le bassin Rhône-Méditerranée, la viticulture, l’arboriculture et l’horticulture
représentent une part importante de la production agricole. L’irrigation est essentiellement assurée
par système gravitaire. Celui-ci est moins efficient que de l’irrigation sous pression mais il présente
l’intérêt de rester silencieux (pas de bruit de moteur), d’éviter la consommation d'énergie fossile, et
dans quelques cas de présenter des effets indirects positifs (recharge de nappes d'eau souterraine
exploitées pour l'alimentation en eau potable).
L’impact des prélèvements d’irrigation est d’autant plus important qu’ils ont lieu pour l’essentiel
dans une période qui inclut généralement l’étiage des ressources en eau superficielles et
souterraines (entre avril et septembre). Cette pression sur les ressources en eau est susceptible
de conduire à des conflits d’usage et à la surexploitation des ressources7, ce qui nécessite la mise
en place d’une gestion de crise avec la mise en place de restrictions d’usage de l’eau.
6 http://www.eaurmc.fr/le-bassin-rhone-mediterranee/les-caracteristiques-du-bassin-rhone-mediterranee/les-grands-
enjeux-du-bassin-rhone-mediterranee.html
7 http://www.observatoire-eau-paca.org/environnement/les-differents-usages-de-l-eau-et-les-pressions-qu-ils-
engendrent-sur-la-ressource-en-paca_71.html
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 7
Figure 2 : Prélèvements d’eau pour l’irrigation par régions en 2010
Les Table 1 et Table 2 (dans la section d’Informations complémentaires en fin de document)
donnent un aperçu du contexte agricole et hydrologique dans ces régions, susceptible d’avoir des
implications sur les méthodes d’identification des prélèvements.
2.2. Gouvernance de l’eau et allocation des droits d’eau
Afin de limiter les pressions sur les ressources hydriques et le développement de conflits d’usage,
il est essentiel d’assurer la gestion quantitative de la ressource pour en assurer un usage durab le,
équitable et transparent. La gestion des prélèvements pour l’irrigation en fait partie. Celle-ci
implique un certain nombre d’acteurs, dont les Agences de l’Eau, les services de l’Etat, des
associations d’irrigants et des préleveurs individuels. Elle repose sur une gestion établie dans la
plupart des cas de manière concertée (dans la région Languedoc-Roussillon par exemple, seul le
Bassin versant de l'Agly est orphelin de démarche concertée) et qui sera révisée suivant les PGRE
(plans de gestion des ressources en eau souterraine) élaborés à partir des résultats des études
récentes sur les volumes prélevables.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 8
Gestion intégrée de l’eau8 9 10 11.12 13 14
Dans les régions Languedoc-Roussillon et PACA, la gestion quantitative de l’eau, et donc entre
autres des prélèvements, est coordonnée à l’échelle du bassin hydrographique Rhône-
Méditerranée par le préfet de Rhône-Alpes, région où siège le Comité de Bassin Rhône
Méditerranée (cf.. Figure 3). Le Comité de Bassin Rhône-Méditerranée est responsable de
l’élaboration et de la planification du Schéma Directeur d’Aménagement et de Gestion de l’Eau
(SDAGE) qui fixe, pour l’ensemble du Bassin, des objectifs de gestion quantitative de la ressource
en eau reposant notamment sur le respect de l’équilibre prélèvement / ressources disponibles.
Tous les secteurs sont associés aux économies d’eau, mais ce cas d’étude traite essentiellement
de la question des prélèvements réalisés pour l’irrigation. La gestion administrative des
prélèvements d’eau pour l’irrigation est assurée par les DDT (Police de l’eau). L’Office Nationale de
l’Eau et des Milieux Aquatiques (ONEMA) appuie les services de l’Etat (DDT) sur le contrôle des
prélèvements.
Afin de faciliter la gestion des prélèvements d'eau pour l'irrigation, la LEMA (2006) a introduit le
regroupement d’irrigants sur des périmètres cohérents au plan hydrogéologique, via la constitution
d’organismes uniques de gestion collective (OUGC). Les OUGC sont en charge de la gestion et de
la répartition des volumes d’eau prélevés à usage agricole sur un territoire déterminé. Les
autorisations de prélèvement accordées par l’administration sont délivrées à ces OUGC, pour
l’ensemble des irrigants. La création de tels OUGC n’est pas obligatoire mais fortement
recommandée par la LEMA dans les zones déficitaires, afin de mieux répartir une ressource déjà
limitée. En 2010, deux OUGC ont été désignés sur le bassin Rhône Méditerranée :
la chambre d’agriculture des Hautes-Alpes, sur le bassin de Buech ;
la chambre d’agriculture des Bouches-du-Rhône, sur la nappe de la Crau.
Il s’agit d’un outil relativement récent dont la mise en place se fait progressivement.
Réglementation appliquée aux prélèvements d’eau15
Depuis 1992, les prélèvements sont soumis à autorisation ou déclaration auprès du préfet du ou
des département(s) concerné(s), en fonction du type de ressource, d’usage et de seuils explicités
dans le code de l’environnement (article R 214-1, article R 214-6 et suivants et R 214-32 et
suivants) (Table 3 dans la section d’Informations complémentaires en fin de document). Les
déclarations et les autorisations, pour les prélèvements en eau souterraine sont basées sur des
volumes prélevés. Dans le cas des eaux de surface, les prélèvements ne sont pas suivis en
8 www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/L-elaboration-des-schemas.html
9 www.eaurmc.fr/pedageau/la-gestion-de-leau-en-france/les-acteurs-de-leau-en-france.html
10 www.lesagencesdeleau.fr/les-agences-de-leau/les-leviers-daction-des-agences-de-leau/
11 www.languedoc-roussillon.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/les-contrats-de-milieu-r602.html
12 www.lesagencesdeleau.fr/les-agences-de-leau/la-democratie-de-leau/
13www.rhone.gouv.fr/Services-de-l-Etat/Prefecture-et-sous-prefecture/Le-prefet-coordonnateur-de-bassin/La-
fonction-de-Prefet-coordonnateur-de-bassin
14 www.eaurmc.fr/le-bassin-rhone-mediterranee/le-comite-de-bassin-rhone-mediterranee.html
15 www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/La-reglementation-appliquee-aux.html
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 9
termes de surfaces irriguées. Ils peuvent selon les cas être décrits en termes de volume ou de
débit, ou encore, de manière plus indirecte, à travers le débit réservé16
(permettant d’assurer un
débit minimal dans le cours d’eau). Cette information est particulièrement intéressante pour mieux
comprendre les atouts et limites de la télédétection par satellite pour le contrôle des prélèvements
dans le Sud de la France (cf. section 3).
Toute personne souhaitant effectuer un prélèvement d’eau doit adresser une déclaration17
ou une
demande d’autorisation18
au préfet du ou des département(s) où ils sont envisagés, selon les
modalités détaillées dans la Table 4 dans la section d’Informations complémentaires en fin de
document. Les prélèvements domestiques (ou assimilés) ne sont pas soumis à cette procédure ;
ils relèvent de la procédure appliquée aux forages domestiques et doivent être déclaré en Mairie.
Tout prélèvement inférieur ou égal à 1000 m3/an est assimilé à un prélèvement domestique. Une
fois en préfecture, sous réserve de la complétude des informations fournies, le dossier de
déclaration ou demande d’autorisation est instruit par la Police de l’eau qui contrôle la conformité
des prélèvements envisagés avec la législation en vigueur. La procédure est détaillée dans la
section d’Informations complémentaires en fin de document, Figure 4 et Figure 5. Les
prélèvements ne peuvent débuter avant l’obtention d’un avis favorable, notifié par arrêté
préfectoral. L’administration peut s’opposer à une déclaration ou refuser de délivrer une
autorisation si le prélèvement associé est estimé porter atteinte au bon état des cours d’eau ou au
niveau des nappes.
Tout ouvrage antérieur à 1992 doit en théorie faire l’objet d’une régularisation simplifiée, mais
l’expérience montre que la déclaration de l’existant reste très insuffisante en comparaison du
nombre attendu d’ouvrages, notamment à cause des coûts associés à cette régularisation. La
conditionnalité des aides introduite par la PAC et plus récemment la LEMA ont permis d’accélérer
ce processus, bien que la connaissance des points de prélèvements reste incomplète à ce jour.
Les déclarations et demandes d’autorisation des prélèvements peuvent se faire de manière
collective, à travers des associations d’irrigants (ASA) (75% des cas), ou individuelle. Dans le
premier cas, est considérée comme « préleveur » l’association. C’est elle qui devra rendre compte
des prélèvements effectués lors d’un contrôle par les services déconcentrés de l’Etat ou les
Agences de l’Eau (auxquelles ils déclarent des redevances), et non les utilisateurs individuels
membres de l’association. Les surfaces irrigables sont définies dans le statut de ces associations.
16 Il est cependant important de noter qu’un seuil de prélèvement en rivière peut respecter le débit réservé mais
dépasser les volumes autorisés, d'autant plus si il est à l'amont d'autres prélèvements tributaires de sa gestion et consommation.
17www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCode.do?idSectionTA=LEGISCTA000006188720&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006074220&
dateTexte=20090831
18www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCode.do?idSectionTA=LEGISCTA000006189059&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006074220&
dateTexte=20090831
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised water abstractions | 10
SDAGE(Schéma Directeur d’Aménagement et de
Gestion de l’Eau)
• Document fixant les objectifs de gestion
durable des ressources en eau,
• Associé à des Programmes De Mesures
(PDM) déterminant les actions concrètes
pour atteindre ces objectifs
Comité de Bassin
Rhône-Méditerranée
« Parlement de l’eau » ou instance délibérative
• 66 élus de collectivités (conseillers
régionaux, généraux et municipaux)
• 66 représentants des « usagers » de l’eau
• 33 représentants de l’Etat
• Définition des grandes orientations de la
politique de l’eau
Agence de l’Eau
Rhône-Méditerranée et Corse
• Etablissement public placé sous la tutelle du MEDDE et doté de
l’autonomie financière
• Mission d’incitation à une utilisation rationnelle de l’eau via le
levier d’action financier des redevances et subventions
• Mission de production et gestion des données sur l’eau pour la
connaissance, la gestion et l’évaluation
Préfet de Rhône-Alpes
coordonnateur de
bassin
• Autorité administrative
compétente pour le
bassin
Délégation interrégionale Méditerranée• Appui technique
• Encadrement réglementaire
Services départementaux de l’ONEMA
ONEMA(Office Nationale de l’Eau
et de Milieux Aquatiques)
• Etablissement public national
• Surveillance des milieux aquatiques
• Contrôle des usages de l’eau
• Connaissance et information
Elaboration
Planification
Financement
Coordination du suivi de
la mise en œuvre
Adaptation des objectifs
du SDAGE aux
contextes locaux SAGE(Schéma d’Aménagement et
de Gestion de l’Eau)
Commission Locale de l’Eau
Pilotage
Contrats de milieu(de rivière, de lac, de lagune ou
de nappe)
Comité de Rivière
Elaboration
Accord technique et
financier de mise en
œuvre du SDAGE
Avis sur le
programmeEn partenariat :
définition et mise en
œuvre de la stratégie
nationale pour l’eau et
les milieux aquatiques
Délégation et appui
• Commission relative au Milieu
Naturel Aquatique de bassin
• Conseil Scientifique
• Bureau
Instances de réflexion, de
travail et de concertation :
• 5 Commissions Géographiques
• 4 Commissions Territoriales
Agrément
Examen du périmètre
et des projets
• Comité d’agrément
Coordination du
suivi de la mise
en œuvre
DREAL(Direction Régionale de l’Environnement,
de l’Aménagement et du Logement)
• DREAL Rhône-Alpes
• DREAL Languedoc Roussillon
• DREAL PACA, …
DDT(Direction Départementale
des Territoires)
= Police de l’Eau
Contrôle des PrélèvementsGendarmerie
Police nationale
Maire
(Fonction judiciaire)
Constat des
infractionsContrôle, sur le terrain, du respect de la réglementation,
et constat des infractions
Gestion administrative de la base de données nationale
sur la déclaration et les autorisations de prélèvement
Contrôle du respect
de la réglementation
Usagers de l’eau
dont les agriculteurs irrigants
Cohérence des pratiques(en particulier des prélèvements pour
l’irrigation)
Avis favorable pour prélèvement(suite à déclaration ou demande de
prélèvement)
Figure 3 : Gestion intégrée de la ressource en eau à l’échelle du Bassin Rhône Méditerranée
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 11
En vertu des dispositions prévues par le code de l’Environnement (article L.211-3 II-1°), les préfets
peuvent prendre des mesures exceptionnelles pour faire face à une potentielle situation de
sécheresse. La nécessité de mettre en place de mesures de restriction des prélèvements d’eau en
situation de sécheresse est signalée par des « Comités sécheresse » qui se réunissent au niveau
de chaque département. La planification de ces mesures et la décision de mise en œuvre sont
assurées par le préfet du ou des département(s) concerné(s), à travers un arrêté préfectoral. Un
arrêté départemental formalise la limitation des usages de l’eau. Les situations de déficit hydrique
(peu de précipitations, moindre débit des cours d’eau) sont fréquentes dans les départements du
bassin Rhône Méditerranée en saison estivale. En 2012 par exemple, l’ensemble du département
Bouches-du-Rhône a été placé en situation de « vigilance » sur avis du comité départemental dès
le mois d’avril19
. Le Comité sécheresse du Vaucluse, en collaboration étroite avec l’association
des Irrigants du Vaucluse et la Chambre d’Agriculture, joue également un rôle important en
termes de gestion des pénuries d’eau sur le Bassin de la Durance20
.
2.3. Connaissance des volumes prélevables et des prélèvements
pour l’irrigation
Dans le cadre du SDAGE 2010-2015 du Bassin Rhone-Mediterrannée, une campagne d’études
d’évaluation des volumes prélevables globaux (EVPG), c’est-à-dire tous usages confondus, a été
lancée. Ces évaluations, qui seront terminées pour la plupart en 2014, vont permettre de préciser
les déséquilibres quantitatifs. A l'issue des études volumes prélevables, les acteurs élaboreront de
manière concertée un plan de gestion des ressources en eau qui propose une répartition des
volumes prélevables au sein du bassin hydrographique ou de la masse d'eau souterraine. C'est sur
la base de cette répartition que seront revues les autorisations de prélèvements pour le prochain
SDAGE. Les bassins hydrographiques et masses d’eau souterraine dont les EVPG confirment le
déficit quantitatif sont classés en Zone de Répartition des Eaux (ZRE)21
. Les ZRE identifient des
zones présentant une insuffisance structurelle, c’est-à-dire autre qu’exceptionnelle, des ressources
par rapport aux besoins et font l’objet d’une gestion plus fine des prélèvements ainsi que d’efforts
accentués d’économie d’eau. Actuellement, plusieurs bassins et masses d’eau souterraine de la
région Languedoc-Roussillon sont identifiés en ZRE (aquifère plioquaternaire du Roussillon, Tech
à l’aval d‘Amélie-les-Bains, Aude Médiane, Astien, amont Vidurle, amont Gardons, amont Cèze).
Trois ZRE ont été identifiés en 2010 en région PACA22
, sur le bassin versant du Largue et le
bassin du Lauzon (Alpes de Provences), et le bassin du Gapeau (dans le Var).
La ressource en eau est suivie par l’Etat via un réseau de mesures hydrométriques des eaux de
surfaces et un réseau de mesures piézométriques. Elle fait l’objet de bulletins périodiques de la
situation hydrologique et des eaux souterraines23
. Ces réseaux peuvent être complétés par des
19 www.paca.pref.gouv.fr/Actualites/Secheresse-2012-vigilance-de-rigueur-pour-l-ensemble-du-departement-des-
Bouches-du-Rhone
20 www.agriculture84.fr/la-chambre-d-agriculture/ses-missions/gestion-de-la-ressource-en-eau/gestion-concertee-de-
l-eau.html
21 www.rhone-mediterranee.eaufrance.fr/docs/ZRE/consultation2013/consultZRE_synthese-avis_20130626_BD.pdf
22 www.rhone-mediterranee.eaufrance.fr/usages-et-pressions/gestion-quanti/classement_zre.php
23 www.languedoc-roussillon.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/ressources-en-eaux-r574.html
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 12
réseaux de mesures locaux déployés par les Conseils généraux/syndicats de bassin versant ou de
nappe.
De plus, la mise en œuvre d’instruments de mesure des prélèvements chez les utilisateurs
(associations d’irrigants ou individuels) est obligatoire dans le cadre de la DCE. Elle reste
cependant insuffisamment développée à ce jour dans les deux régions. Cela peut être en partie
expliqué par la prédominance des systèmes d’irrigation gravitaire pour lesquels l’installation d’une
métrologie efficace est relativement complexe. Au niveau régional, l'ONEMA intervient
techniquement pour appuyer à la mise en place de dispositifs permettant à la fois de respecter le
débit réservé et le débit de prélèvement autorisé. La transition vers des systèmes sous pression
est délicate, à cause des coûts associés à cette modernisation ainsi qu’aux effets possibles sur le
fonctionnement hydrologique de certains bassins (nappes alimentées principalement par les
canaux d’irrigation, comme en région PACA).
Ces prélèvements peuvent être approchés indirectement via l’évolution du niveau piézométrique
de la nappe et les niveaux d’étiage, mais l’information reste imparfaite et la responsabilité
(individuelle et non-individuelle) des irrigants est difficile à engager. En dehors d’une déclaration «
exhaustive » des irrigants, la meilleure connaissance des prélèvements agricoles nécessiterait
aujourd’hui des enquêtes de terrain à grande échelle dont le coût peut être important.
A ce jour, la connaissance des prélèvements repose ainsi essentiellement sur du déclaratif (à
travers les déclarations/autorisations de prélèvements, les volumes ou surfaces irriguées déclarés
aux Agences de l’Eau pour les redevances24
, et les surfaces en cultures irriguées identifiées à
travers le recensement général agricole) et sur les résultats nécessairement partiels ou
ponctuels d’enquêtes de terrain et des campagnes d’inspections. Un projet national de
banque nationale de prélèvements est en cours de développement au sein du ministère de
l'écologie (prévu pour 2015) et devrait permettre de consolider ces différentes bases de données.
Malgré leur intérêt pour la collecte d’information, ces différentes approches ont toutefois leurs
limites, et la connaissance des préleveurs, des surfaces irriguées et des volumes prélevés reste
insuffisante.
24 Les pétitionnaires ont une obligation de comptage de leurs prélèvements qui sont à déclarer auprès des agences de
l'eau. En l’absence de compteurs, cas majoritaire dans ces régions où l’irrigation gravitaire reste dominante, les volumes peuvent être calculés sur la base des surfaces et types de cultures irriguées ou des forfaits sont appliqués. Ces données permettent de connaître les volumes prélevés par type d’usage (irrigation gravitaire par ruissellement, irrigation par aspersion et irrigation par goutte à goutte) et par type de ressource (eau superficielle ou eau souterraine) (Cf. Encart ci-dessous).
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 13
Redevance Prélèvement d’eau
Les prélèvements d’eau contribuent à la diminution du débit des cours d’eau et du niveau des
nappes. L’agence de l’eau dispose d’un instrument financier pour limiter les prélèvements d’eau et
ainsi les éventuelles pressions sur les ressources hydriques. Il s’agit des redevances pour
prélèvements sur la ressource en eau, dont le dispositif est fixé par la LEMA. Ces redevances
sont versées à l’agence de l’eau par toute personne prélevant sur la ressource. Le montant des
redevances est calculé à partir du volume prélevé au cours de l’année écoulée (Article L231-10-9
III du code de l’environnement)25
:
Redevance (€) = assiette (m3) x tarifs (€/m
3)
Le volume prélevé est renseigné par l’usager d’eau, i.e. par les agriculteurs dans le cas de
prélèvements d’eau d’irrigation, sur la base de mesures au compteur ou d’estimation en cas de
panne ou de changement de dispositif. Une vingtaine d’organismes habilités par l’agence de l’eau
Rhône-Méditerranée et Corse sont chargés de réaliser des contrôles du dispositif de mesure des
volumes prélevés26
. En cas d’impossibilité de mesure, l’irrigant doit fournir les informations
suivantes permettant d’estimer les prélèvements et ainsi le montant des redevances 27
:
Type d’irrigation : aspersion, gravitaire, autre procédé (micro irrigation, localisée)
Hectares de culture irriguée pendant l’année
Ces déclarations de prélèvements peuvent se faire en ligne sur le site internet de l’agence de
l’eau Rhône-Méditerranée. Un formulaire type se trouve dans la section d’Informations
complémentaires en fin de document.
L’ensemble des données de prélèvements et la quantité d’eau souterraines sont disponibles
publiquement28
.
25 www.eaurmc.fr/teleservices/formulaires-administratifs/formulaires-de-declaration-redevance-prelevement-deau-
et-production-electrique.html?eID=dam_frontend_push&docID=3080
26 liste de ces organismes disponible à : www.eaurmc.fr/fileadmin/aides-et-
redevances/documents/Redevances/Prelevement/Zonage_2013_-_2018/liste-organismes-habilites-prelevement-eau.pdf
27 www.eaurmc.fr/teleservices/formulaires-administratifs/formulaires-de-declaration-redevance-prelevement-deau-
et-production-electrique.html?eID=dam_frontend_push&docID=1056
28 sierm.eaurmc.fr/telechargement/telechargement.php
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 14
2.4. Difficultés rencontrées et besoins des gestionnaires de l’eau
pour une meilleure connaissance des prélèvements
Suite aux discussions dans le cadre de l’atelier, les gestionnaires des régions PACA et Languedoc-
Roussillon estiment avoir une connaissance régionale relativement précise des prélèvements
grâce à la combinaison des différentes bases de données ainsi qu’aux études volumes
prélevables. L’enjeu est de continuer à améliorer cette connaissance afin d’affiner les volumes
prélevés et la connaissance des préleveurs, à la fois pour des raisons environnementales de
gestion de la ressource et de justice fiscale. La gestion quantitative de l’eau pourrait être améliorée
en levant les incertitudes restantes relatives aux points de prélèvements, aux surfaces irriguées et
aux volumes prélevés, qui limitent les possibilités d’action ciblée des gestionnaires en cas de
déficit conjoncturel et/ou structurel de la ressource en eau. Les difficultés et actions correctives
associées identifiées par les participants incluent :
absence de métrologie efficace sur les prélèvements, relative à la prédominance des
systèmes d’irrigation gravitaire. Celle-ci est cependant en phase d’amélioration avec
des préconisations précises issues de l’arrêté prélèvement du 19 décembre 2011 ;
incertitudes liés au déclaratif, diminuées dans une certaine mesure par des contrôles
aléatoires et tournants :
régularisation insuffisante des ouvrages existants de la part des
usagers (souvent attribuée aux coûts associés) ;
absence de déclaration de nouveaux forages ;
fiabilité relative des volumes déclarés pour les redevances, en
l’absence d’instrument de mesure performants (ex. forfaits à l’hectare) ;
exemption de déclaration pour les volumes prélevés en eau souterraine
de moins de 10 000 m3/an, ainsi qu’en eau superficielle si les volumes
prélevés sont inférieurs à 2% du QMNA5 naturel (débit mensuel
quinquennal sec, i.e. débit minimum se produisant en moyenne une fois
tous les cinq ans). En revanche, en Zone de répartition des Eaux, tous
les prélèvements non domestiques sont déclarés ou autorisés ;
pompages mobiles (relativement mineurs cependant comparés aux volumes estimés
des prélèvements collectifs) ;
usage généralisé de sources multiples pour l’irrigation (un ou plusieurs canaux
collectifs et forages individuels) d’une même parcelle (lot de parcelles), couplée à
des ressources souterraines et superficielles dont le fonctionnement hydrologique
peut être interdépendant ;
comptages effectués au lieu de distribution et non au lieu de prélèvement ne
permettent pas de connaitre les usages individuels
accès limité aux propriétés pour les opérations de contrôle ;
insuffisance des ressources disponibles (personnel, temps, coûts) pour ces
opérations de contrôles : seul un nombre limité de préleveurs peut être inspecté (en
pratique, 3 inspections maximum par jour) ;
difficulté supplémentaire en gestion de crise étant données les conditions requises
en termes de réactivité.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 15
Les besoins clés des gestionnaires et de la police de l’eau identifiés lors de l’atelier incluent :
l’identification des sources et points de prélèvements (à travers les ouvrages fixes
et/ou mobiles), en particulier chez les utilisateurs privés, afin d’optimiser les
campagnes de régularisation ;
une meilleure connaissance des surfaces irriguées et une meilleure connaissance
des prélèvements bruts et nets afin de mieux préparer les plans de gestions et
ensuite de vérifier leur mise en œuvre et efficacité pour consolider les diagnostics
issus des études volumes prélevables et vérifier la réalisation des actions
d'économies identifiées dans les PGRE (Plans de gestion des ressources en eau
souterraine) ;
des outils pour améliorer le ciblage des inspections et notamment garantir le respect
des mesures de restriction en période de crise.
3. L’observation de la Terre pour répondre aux besoins de la gestion de
l’eau pour l’irrigation en agriculture
3.1. Les outils apportés par la télédétection par satellite pour la
gestion quantitative de l’eau
La télédétection par satellite, associée à des données de terrain, peut fournir un panel de produits
et services permettant d’assister les gestionnaires dans la gestion quantitative des prélèvements
pour l’irrigation, ce à différentes échelles spatiales. La télédétection permet notamment:
d’identifier de manière fine les zones irriguées ;
d’estimer indirectement les volumes prélevés à travers la demande en irrigation.
Ces outils permettent de mieux connaitre la quantité d’eau apportée aux parcelles, provenant à la
fois de sources souterraines et de surface.
La capacité à cartographier les zones irriguées dépend de la fréquence des images à haute
résolution disponibles via la télédétection et de leur adéquation avec les données de terrain. La
capacité à cartographier la demande en eau d’irrigation dépend de l’estimation de l’équilibre
hydrique des sols sur la base des données satellites et requiert plusieurs exercices de
modélisation. De manière générale, la précision obtenue dans le premier cas est de plus de 90%.
Les incertitudes relatives au second cas s’élèvent à 10 à 20%. Plus la période de suivi est longue,
plus la précision sera élevée.
Les séries chronologiques d’images à haute résolution (5-30 m) permettent de visualiser des
parcelles agricoles de tailles supérieures à 0,1-1 ha (et de couvrir ainsi la grande majorité des
zones irriguées). La connaissance de l’occupation des sols est une entrée clé pour être à même de
cartographier les zones irriguées et la demande en irrigation. Celle-ci peut être dérivée de la
télédétection. La modélisation du développement des cultures, réalisée sur la base de séries
chronologiques de l’indice de végétation (NDVI) dérivées de l’imagerie multi-spectrale, est
reconnue comme une procédure d’identification fiable de l’occupation du sol.
Les besoins des cultures en eau d’irrigation sont alors estimés sur la base de données
d’évapotranspiration et de bilan hydrique des sols. Ce ne sont pas des mesures directes de l’eau
apportée mais elles y sont directement liées en fonction de l’efficacité du système d’irrigation. Ces
besoins en eau d’irrigation donnent des mesures valables de la quantité d’eau apportée à la
parcelle. Selon les cultures et le stress hydrique appliqué lors d’une diminution ou d’un arrêt de
l’irrigation (en période de restriction par exemple), le ralentissement ou la diminution de la courbe
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 16
des NDVI observés peut être plus ou moins importante et étalée dans le temps. Cette réponse
dépend également de l’importance du stockage de l’eau dans les sols. Concrètement, cela signifie
qu’il n’est pas toujours évident de détecter une réponse hydrique claire, dans un court laps de
temps, suite à la mise en œuvre de restrictions.
3.2. Applications
A elles seules, les mesures volumétriques sur le terrain peuvent constituer un outil puissant pour la
gestion quantitative de l’eau à condition qu’elles soient correctement réalisées. En réalité, la
plupart des expériences d’utilisation des méthodes volumétriques sans coopération avec les
utilisateurs seraient des échecs en Europe, généralement pour les même raisons que celles citées
dans la section 2.
L’expérience montre que, pour des parcelles supérieures à 1 ha (et même 0,1 ha en fonction du
degré de précision des images satellites disponibles), les approches de télédétection complètent
efficacement les mesures volumétriques réalisées sur le terrain.
Parmi les besoins identifiées par les acteurs lors de l’atelier, les applications suivantes ont été
proposées :
suivi ex-post des prélèvements sur les bassins en déficit permettant d’évaluer
l’efficacité du plan de gestion et des mesures éventuelles de restriction, à l’échelle
du mois, de l’année, ou sur un pas de temps pluri-annuel ;
ciblage des inspections en anticipé, en identifiant des anomalies en années N et en
orientant les contrôles sur ces parcelles en année N+1, afin de régulariser la
situation des points de prélèvements non identifiés et cibler les inspections sur les
prélèvements les plus importants. La télédétection permet de détecter de manière
efficace des anomalies relatives aux prélèvements. Elle permet de faciliter et
d’optimiser le processus d’inspection par des actions ciblées, alors que les
inspections sur le terrain ne peuvent pas être appliquées sur de grandes zones, et
reposent généralement à ce jour sur une sélection de parcelles à inspecter, définie
sur la base de critères et priorités stratégiques propres à chacune des DDT.
Les produits de télédétection offrent un degré similaire de précision et, après investissement initial,
sont moins coûteux sur de nombreux plans que des visites non ciblées. La combinaison des deux
systèmes, télédétection et données volumétriques, est perçue comme une alternative réaliste et
envisageable. Les acteurs présents lors de l’atelier ont cependant soulevé les limites de la
télédétection liées au décalage observé entre le besoin des plantes, les consommations à la
parcelle et le prélèvement effectif dans le milieu ainsi qu’à l’absence de données de référence et
adaptabilité limitée de l’outil aux cultures méditerranéenne telles que la vigne et l’olivier,
prédominants sur certains bassins.
La télédétection a montré son intérêt notamment pour la gestion structurelle des ressources en
eau. La possibilité d’utiliser cet outil pour la gestion de crise reste plus limitée, car elle dépend du
type de culture et de la sévérité des mesures de restriction29
. Elle est particulièrement pertinente
29 Il existe trois seuils de mesures de limitation des prélèvements d’eau à des fins agricoles :
1)Seuil d’alerte franchi dans le secteur
a.Tous les prélèvements dans les eaux superficielles et les eaux souterraines :
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 17
pour surveiller les mesures de restriction totales lorsque le seuil de crise est franchi, et, dans une
moindre mesure pour vérifier la réduction des volumes prélevés à l’échelle de la semaine ou de la
décade pour les seuils d’alerte 1 et 2. L’efficacité de la mise en œuvre de restrictions peut
cependant être analysée en fin de saison afin d’en tirer les conclusions pour la campagne à venir.
3.3. Conditions de mise en œuvre et de suivi opérationnel
Un système opérationnel basé sur la télédétection au service de l’irrigation nécessite un certain
nombre de données, issues de la télédétection et des bases de données et dispositifs de terrain :
fréquence importante de série d’images à haute résolution (SPOT5, RapidEye,
Landsat8, DeIMOS et idéalement, SENTINEL2) pour la saison de croissance de la
culture en place :
afin de détecter les zones irriguées, des images sans nuages (<10% de
nébulosité) doivent être obtenues toutes les 2-4 semaines à partir de 2
semaines avant le début de la saison de croissance jusqu'à la fin de la
saison ;
afin d’estimer les volumes prélevés, des images doivent être obtenues
toutes les 1 à 2 semaines jusqu’à la fin de la saison.
réseau de stations agro-météorologiques ;
limites cadastrales des parcelles soumises à des droits d’accès à l’eau ;
informations auxiliaires au sujet de la phénologie et du développement des cultures ;
cartes d’occupation des sols et de couvertures végétales.
Limitation des prélèvements 2 jours / semaine
Ou réduction de 15 à 30 % des volumes dont le prélèvement est autorisé par semaine ou par décade.
b.Cas particulier des prélèvements dans les cours d’eau, leurs nappes d’accompagnement ou dans les autres eaux souterraines avec une incidence rapide sur le débit des cours d’eau :
Même réduction des prélèvements avec en plus l’organisation de « tours d’eau »
2)Seuil d'alerte renforcée franchi dans le secteur
a.Tous les prélèvements dans les eaux superficielles 1 et les eaux souterraines :
Limitation des prélèvements 3,5 jours / semaine
Ou réduction de 50 % des volumes dont le prélèvement est autorisé par semaine ou par décade.
b.Cas particulier des prélèvements dans les cours d’eau, leurs nappes d’accompagnement ou dans les autres eaux souterraines avec une incidence rapide sur le débit des cours d’eau :
Même réduction des prélèvements avec en plus l’organisation de « tours d’eau »
Seuil de crise franchi dans le secteur
Tous les prélèvements dans les eaux superficielles et les eaux souterraines : Suspension totale des prélèvements
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 18
Plus spécifiquement, il est nécessaire d’obtenir toutes les semaines, idéalement chaque semaine,
des images satellites à haute résolution (5-30m), ainsi que les données listées ci-dessous :
les cartes vectorielles des exploitations agricoles et des unités de gestion de l’eau
(ex : cadastre rural, ortho-photo ou cartes publiques) pour vérifier le respect des
droits d’accès à l’eau et des attributions ;
les données quotidiennes des stations agro-météorologiques et de pluviométrie pour
les calculs de consommation d’eau par les cultures ;
les données de débitmétrie à certains endroits pour calibrer les données de
consommation d’eau par les cultures de manière continue.
Idéalement, ces données doivent être intégrées à un système d’information géographique dans le
but de fournir un outil à l’attention des parties prenantes, pour leur collaboration et la transparence
de la gestion.
3.4. Synthèse des avantages et inconvénients de l’utilisation de la
télédétection
Des études pilotes ont déjà été menées dans différentes zones en France sur l’utilisation de la
télédétection comme aide à la décision pour les usagers ou les services de l’Etat, certaines dans le
domaine de l’eau. La base de ces études est disponible au sein de plusieurs universités et
institutions de recherche (ex : CESBIO, Maison de la Télédétection, etc.). L’INRA d’Avignon a
aussi été la source d’un ensemble de méthodologies basées sur des modèles pour estimer
l’évapotranspiration à partir de la télédétection en alimentant les données spatiales disponibles
avec des modèles de croissance des végétaux. Plusieurs expériences européennes ont par
ailleurs démontré les atouts opérationnels et la capacité de fonctionnement à long terme de la
télédétection30
.
La question reste de savoir comment faire coïncider les besoins identifiés des gestionnaires pour
une meilleure connaissance et gestion des prélèvements avec les possibilités offertes par la
télédétection.
Comme dans d’autres régions, les avantages clés du suivi des prélèvements d’eau par la
télédétection attendus incluent :
grande couverture spatiale et résolution spatiale et temporelle adaptée ;
bonne précision ;
augmentation nette de l’efficacité de la surveillance et d l’inspection ;
outil d’évaluation objectif et reconnu comme tel auprès des utilisateurs de la
ressource ;
développement de jeux de données d’occupation des sols supplémentaires et mis à
jour;
nette réduction des coûts de suivi et des besoins en main d’œuvre après
investissement initial.
30 Ex. Projet FP7 Sirius
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 19
Certaines spécificités du Sud de la France sont cependant susceptibles de limiter l’application de la
télédétection :
d’un point de vue administratif, la gestion des prélèvements en eau de surface
souvent effectuée à travers des débits maximums et non une quantité à l’hectare ne
permet pas toujours de comparer directement les volumes prélevés estimés par la
télédétection avec l’eau effectivement apportée à la parcelle ;
l’irrigation étant essentiellement apportée sous forme gravitaire, les prélèvements
bruts sont bien plus élevés que les prélèvements dits « nets » et que les besoins des
cultures estimés à travers la télédétection ;
dans la région, il y a une présence importante de vignes, oliviers et autres cultures
pérennes, pour lesquelles le contraste observé entre cultures irriguées (en
maintenant des conditions de stress) et non irriguées est relativement faible via la
télédétection. Cela réduit la fiabilité des estimations relatives aux prélèvements
associés, bien qu’un traitement pluri-annuel des résultats permette d’augmenter la
précision des estimations. Cela est également vrai pour de l’irrigation d’appoint.
Cependant, les volumes prélevés dans ce cadre restent relativement faibles au
regard des cultures irriguées de manière continue en été ;
la couverture nuageuse dans la région est un frein majeur à l’acquisition de données
satellites suffisamment fréquentes, mais de nouvelles possibilités seront offertes par
le lancement de Sentinel2 dans un future proche, qui augmentera la fréquence de
l’ensemble des images obtenues ;
en cas de gestion de crise, il peut être difficile d’assurer le respect des mesures de
restrictions. Dans l’ensemble, les acteurs ne sont pas convaincus de la réactivité
offerte par la télédétection pour témoigner d’infractions, notamment à cause de la
variabilité de la réponse des NDVI.
3.5. Opportunités de déploiement
L’utilisation de la télédétection pour une meilleure gestion quantitative de l’eau n’est pas encore
développée dans le sud de la France. En revanche, un certain nombre d’infrastructures sont en
cours de développement, qui assureront un environnement favorable pour le déploiement de la
télédétection. C’est le cas notamment du développement attendu de la base de données nationale
sur les prélèvements, qui compilera l’ensemble des informations sur les droits d’eau et les
déclarations réalisées pour le paiement des redevances. La structure de la base de données, le
type de contenu et le type d’affichage restent encore à préciser, mais cette base est une
opportunité remarquable pour le croisement des informations administratives et légales avec les
données obtenues par télédétection.
De la même manière, le projet GeoSud31
vise à mutualiser l’utilisation des satellites, avec une
ambition nationale, afin de garantir l’accès à des données multi-usages. Il est soutenu par des
structures locales apportant des plateformes d’échanges et de valorisation thématique des
données, comme SIG-LR32
(par exemple dans le cas de la gestion des forêts).
31 www.teledetection.fr/projet-geosud.html
32 www.siglr.org/
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 20
Un environnement favorable au déploiement de la télédétection pour une meilleure gestion
quantitative de l’eau est ainsi en cours de création, avec un niveau de flexibilité permettant à ce
jour de construire les infrastructures pertinentes pour répondre aux besoins identifiés des
gestionnaires et de la police de l’eau.
4. Informations complémentaires
Table 1: Focus sur la région Languedoc Roussillon
Paramètre Donnée Source
Surface de la région 27 376 km² Eau France (2005)
Climat Influences méditerranéennes, océaniques et
continentales
Eau France (2005)
Poids de l’agriculture
dans l’économie
6% de la population active de la région
travaillent dans le secteur agricole
L’agriculture est un élément important de
l’économie régionale avec 56 000 emplois
environ en 2004, notamment dans la viticulture
(44% du total), la production de fruits et
légumes (2ème rang national 26% du total) et
les activités ostréicoles et conchylicoles.
Ifremer (2004)
Plan Climat Région LR
(2009)
Terres agricoles
(SAU)
1 080 000 ha soit 39% de la région en 2000
Territoire relativement boisé (34% de la
superficie de la région)
Eau France (2005)
Terres agricoles
irriguées (ha et % de
la SAU totale)
61 656 ha en 2010
Soit 25% de la surface agricole utile
Agence de l’eau (2010)
Types d’irrigation Gravitaire
Aspersion
Micro-irrigation
Cultures Production végétale majoritaire (en % de la
SAU de la région, en 2000)
-28% vigne
-14% céréales et oléagineux
-2,4% fruits
Ovins-caprins
Eau France (2005)
Prélèvements d’eau
pour l’irrigation
En 2010, 316,1 millions de m3 ont été prélevés
pour l’irrigation.
AGRESTE (2008)
Agence de l’eau (2010)
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 21
Table 2 : Focus sur la région PACA
Paramètre Donnée Source
Surface de la
région
31 400 km²
6% du territoire français
Eau France (2005)
Climat Méditerranéen OFME (2006)
Poids de
l’agriculture
dans
l’économie
2% de la population active de la région travaillent dans le
secteur agricole
Ifremer (2004)
Terres
agricoles
(SAU)
SAU de 700 000 ha (soit environ 20% du territoire régional.
Territoire fortement boisé (environ 40% de la superficie de la
région)
DREAL PACA et
Agence Eau RM-C
(2010)
Eau France (2005) et
OFME (2006)
Terres
agricoles
irriguées (ha
et % de la
SAU totale)
En 2000, parmi les 24% de SAU irrigable en PACA, 79%
étaient effectivement irrigués.
En 2010, 100 387 ha de SAU irriguées, soit 33% de la
surface irriguée totale du bassin
DREAL PACA et
Agence Eau RM-C
(2010)
Agence de l’eau
(2010)
Type
d’irrigation
52 % en gravitaire
37% en aspersion
10% en micro-irrigation
DREAL PACA et
Agence Eau RM-C
(2010)
Cultures Production végétale majoritaire (en % de la SAU de la
région)
-Plus de 50% fourrages
-15% céréales
-15% vignes
-5% fruits
-Fleurs, plantes aromatique, maraichages
Ovins
DREAL PACA et
Agence Eau RM-C
(2010)
Eau France (2005)
Prélèvements
d’eau pour
l’irrigation
3,4 milliards de m3 prélevés dont près de 70% pour
l’irrigation.
La ressource Durance – Verdon représente 2/3 du volume
utilisé pour l’irrigation en PACA. 60% de cette ressource
Durance-Verdon affectée à l’irrigation est exportée hors du
bassin de la Durance.
DIREN PACA (2009)
DREAL PACA et
Agence Eau RM-C
(2010)
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 22
Paramètre Donnée Source
Principales cultures irriguées (chacune représentant environ
25% de la surface irriguée totale de PACA) :
-Prairies
-Céréales (dont riz)
-Vergers
Besoin estimé pour l’irrigation : 423 millions de m3/an, dont
35% (150 millions de m3) sont mobilisés en juillet
DREAL PACA et
Agence Eau RM-C
(2010)
Table 3 : Procédures de déclaration ou demande d’autorisation de prélèvement -
Classification
Déclaration Autorisation
Ouvrages exécutés en vue de prélèvements,
recherche ou surveillance d’une nappe
phréatique
Prélèvements issus des aquifères
≥ 10 000 et ≤ 200 000 m3/an ≥ 200 000 m
3/an
Prélèvements et installations des cours d’eau (y compris nappe d’accompagnement, plan d’eau
ou canal alimenté par ce cours d’eau ou cette nappe)
Capacité totale maximale comprise entre 400 et
1 000 m3 / heure ou entre 2 et 5 % du débit du
cours d’eau ou, à défaut, du débit global
d’alimentation du canal ou du plan d’eau
Capacité totale maximale supérieure ou égale à
1 000 m3 / heure ou à 5 % du débit du cours
d’eau ou, à défaut, du débit global
d’alimentation du canal ou du plan d’eau
Prélèvements et installations des cours d’eau (y
compris nappe d’accompagnement, plan d’eau
ou canal alimenté par ce cours d’eau ou cette
nappe) lorsque le débit du cours d’eau en
période d’étiage résulte, pour plus de moitié,
d’une réalimentation artificielle
Ouvrages et installations en Zones de Répartition des Eaux (Z.R.E.)33
Capacité de prélèvement < 8m3/h Capacité de prélèvement ≥ 8m
3/h
33 Une « zone de répartition des eaux » est caractérisée par une insuffisance quantitative chronique des ressources en
eau par rapport aux besoins.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 23
Table 4 : Informations à fournir dans le cadre d’une déclaration ou d’une demande
d’autorisation de prélèvements
Déclaration Demande d’autorisation
Nombre
d’exemplaires
3 7
Informations
générales
Nom et adresse du demandeur
Emplacement sur lequel l'installation, l'ouvrage, les travaux ou
l'activité doivent être réalisés
Nature, consistance, volume et objet de l'ouvrage, de l'installation,
des travaux ou de l'activité envisagés, ainsi que rubriques de la
nomenclature dans lesquelles ils doivent être rangés
Document Indiquant les incidences du projet sur la ressource en eau, le milieu
aquatique, l'écoulement, le niveau et la qualité des eaux, y compris
de ruissellement, en fonction des procédés mis en œuvre, des
modalités d'exécution des travaux ou de l'activité, du fonctionnement
des ouvrages ou installations, de la nature, de l'origine et du volume
des eaux utilisées ou affectées et compte tenu des variations
saisonnières et climatiques ;
Comportant, lorsque le projet est de nature à affecter de façon
notable un site Natura 2000 au sens de l'article L. 414-4, l'évaluation
de ses incidences au regard des objectifs de conservation du site ;
Justifiant, le cas échéant, de la compatibilité du projet avec le schéma
directeur ou le schéma d'aménagement et de gestion des eaux et de
sa contribution à la réalisation des objectifs visés à l'article L. 211-1
ainsi que des objectifs de qualité des eaux prévus par l'article D. 211-
10 ;
Précisant s'il y a lieu les mesures correctives ou compensatoires
envisagées.
Informations
supplémentaires
Moyens de surveillance ou d'évaluation des prélèvements et des
déversements prévus ;
Eléments graphiques, plans ou cartes utiles à la compréhension des
pièces du dossier
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 24
Figure 4: Procédure de déclaration de prélèvement
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 25
Figure 5: Procédure d’autorisation de prélèvement
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 26
Encart 1: Déclaration des forages
Les déclarations de forages concernent tous les forages de plus de 10 mètres de
profondeur et permettent de tenir à jour un inventaire des points de recherches et de
prélèvements effectués dans
le sous-sol.
Le demandeur doit remplir un formulaire adressé à la DREAL, précisant :
Les noms et adresses du propriétaire du forage ou du maître d’ouvrage
Le nom et adresse de l’entreprise de forage
La nature du forage (puits- forage),
L’objet du forage (recherche d’eau, reconnaissance de sol , autre,)
Si recherche d’eau :
o indication de l’usage domestique ou pas
o indication de la consommation annuelle envisagée ( + ou - 1 .000 m3)
Le nombre et la profondeur prévue (exprimée en ml)
La localisation des travaux, département, commune, rue, lieu-dit
La durée probable des travaux
La date de début des travaux
La DREAL accuse réception au déclarant (entreprise de forage ou maître d’ouvrage) et en
fait copie au Bureau des Recherches Géologiques et Minières. Ce courrier précise
également qu’en application du Code de l’Environnement et de la loi sur l’Eau, d’autres
démarches sont à faire, à la Préfecture de département - Bureau de l’Environnement, soit :
une déclaration pour le forage, (rubrique 110 de la nomenclature de la Loi sur l’eau)
Puis par la suite si le forage est équipé d’une pompe :
une déclaration pour le forage équipé d’une pompe dont le débit est compris entre 8 et 80
m3/heure,
une demande d’autorisation préfectorale pour le forage dont le débit est supérieur à 80
m3/ heure.
Source : www.paca.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/Les-forages-r509.html
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 27
B.Case of the Crete River Basin, in
Greece
1. Presentation of the study and objectives of the workshop
1.1. Context and objectives of the study
The Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Water Resources34
sets out the future EU agenda on water
policy. It identifies over-abstraction, also due to lack of sufficient controls on abstraction, as a
significant pressure that needs to be tackled by MS to allow the achievement of Water Framework
Directive (WFD) good status objectives. It outlines, amongst others, a specific action to “Apply
Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES), now Copernicus, services to detect non-
authorised abstractions”. Copernicus35
is the European Programme for the establishment of a
European capacity for Earth Observation (EO).
As part of the action lines mandated in the Blueprint, DG-ENV has commissioned a study which is
currently carried out by BIO and UCLM to test how to make best use of EO systems, together with
information at local scale, in order to identify and manage non-authorised abstractions, in particular
from agriculture.
1.2. Objectives of the workshop
In the context of this action line, a series of exploratory workshops will be held in MS with the
following objectives
To better understand the perceived need of water managers in the MS to monitor
and manage irrigated areas and their water consumption, in particular also to detect
non-authorised abstraction,
To inform and discuss how EO can answer to this need and what are the benefits
and limits (and how can we address the latter).
To explore opportunities for supporting irrigation water management by providing
EO-assisted tools and information to water managers, users and other stakeholders
and to verify whether the solutions proposed for a selected case example can be
used in other parts of the country.
34 Communication COM/2012/673
35 http://copernicus.eu/
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 28
The present document is the main outcome of the workshop that was conducted in Heraklion on 30
June 2014.
2. Current situation of water use and abstractions
2.1. Overall context of water resources and water use
The Crete River Basin District covers a surface area of 8,344.54 km2. It consists of three river
basins (Figure 6):
the river basin of North part of Chania-Rethimno-Irakleio (GR39) with an area of
3,676.06 km2;
the river basin of South part of Cania-Rethimno-Irakleio (GR40), with an area of
2,798.02 km2;
the river basin of East Crete (GR41), with an area of 1,870.28 km2.
Figure 6: Crete River Basin District
The climate of Crete is a transitional intermediary type between continental and continental desert,
characterised by mild winter and relatively cool summer. The mean annual precipitation in Crete
reaches 927 mm, which correspond to 7.69 billion cubic meters of precipitation per year;
nevertheless more than 60% of that amount is lost through evapotranspiration36
.
Agriculture has a great economic weight in the region. The total agricultural land, in Crete RBD, is
2,554 km2, while the irrigated land estimated in 1,079.09 km
2, or 42.2% of the total agricultural
land. The total need of water to meet the irrigation demands reaches 439x106 m
3/year, or 85.3% of
the total water needs of the Crete RBD.
Characteristics of the Crete River Basin District:
Total theoretical water availability estimated to 2860 hm3
About 85% of the available water is used for irrigation
1,079.09 km2 of irrigated land
36 Data from Draft of Crete’s River Basin District Management Plan (2014)
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 29
320x106 m
3 of water abstracted every year, of which 27x10
6 m
3 (or 8.4%) come from
surface water and 290x106 m
3 (or 91.6%) come from groundwater (data from
Preliminary River Basin Management Plan for Crete River Basin District)
As the above data reveal, water supply in the area, increasingly relies on groundwater abstractions.
Although the current number of private wells within the region is not accurately known, it has
steadily increased since the 1970s and so has the quantity of water abstracted from groundwater
sources.
2.2. Water governance and water rights allocation
Conflicting water uses in the Crete region may result from high water demands in a context of low
resource availability. Management of water abstractions, in particular through water allocation,
aims to ensure the sustainable use of water resources.
Water administration authorities in Greece, are currently undergoing profound transformation in
order for water governance to comply with the requirements of the European Water Framework
Directive. The present description of the institutional framework for the management of water
abstraction is a picture of the current situation.
Responsibilities on water rights allocation and water abstraction management are distributed at
national, regional and local level as illustrated in Figure 7.
Law 3199/2003 provides for the issuance of water use permits. Permits are granted to any legal or
natural person for the satisfaction of their estimated needs based on the river basin management
plan for the Crete region. Permits are established for a specific use and a specific amount of water.
While the River Basin Districts have been determined, the Decentralised Regions are the
managing authorities for these Districts and as such, they are responsible, among other, for (Law
3199/2003):
the promotion of the sustainable use of water, based on the long term protection of
the available water resources;
the ensuring of the balance between water abstraction from groundwater and its
enrichment;
the prevention of the deterioration of the surface waters and groundwater;
the upgrade and restoration of water systems;
the gradual reduction of the pollution from priority substances and the pause or the
gradual elimination of all emissions, discharges and leakages of dangerous priority
substances;
the mitigation of flood and draughts effects; and
the application of all the targets and standards for the protected areas.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 30
Figure 7: Responsibilities on water rights allocation and water abstraction management
The Common Ministerial Decision 43504/2005 governs every new water abstraction action in
Greece, while the Common Ministerial Decision 150559/2011 governs the permitting process for
existing water rights. Both these Decisions, in line with the Law 3199/2003, determine that the
General Secretary of the Decentralised Region (in which the River Basin District is located) is the
competent authority responsible for the allocation of water rights. In case that a River Basin District
is extended in the administrative boundaries of more than one Regions, then the responsibilities
could be allocated between the Regions, or one Region could be determined as solely responsible.
The National Water Committee (with its Decision on 16/07/2010) determined the River Basin
Districts and the responsible Region for their management.
Common Ministerial Decisions 43504/2005 and 150559/2011 define the water rights. There are 19
water right categories grouped in 5 main groups (see in the end of the case study).
The Greek Legislation separates the water rights in a) existing water rights (which predate the 20-
12-2005, publishing date of the Common Ministerial Decision 43504/2005) and don’t have permits
or must renew their permits and b) new water rights.
Regional Direction of Water, River Basin District of Crete
Responsible for the establishment and application of the River Basin Management
Plan (every 6 years) and for the establishment of measures aiming at promoting
sustainable water use, control over hydraulic works developed for the exploitation
of water
Ministry of the Environment Urban Planning and Public Work
Responsible for elaborating National Water Plans, monitoring of quantity of waters
For each River Basin District, composition of the characteristics and the impact of
human activity and economic analysis of water use
Water user
Application for concession rights, incl. data about:
Ownership
Water right category
Details of the exploitation activity (e.g. crop type, irrigated area and system of irrigation
Origin of the abstracted water
Annual quantity
Approval of environmental permits for the activity
Chemical and/or microbiological water analysis by a certified laboratory
Allocation
of water
rights
according
to RBMP
and control
Information on the region water needs
National Water Plan
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 31
For new permits or renewal of permits for existing water rights and for new water rights, the
following are required:
An application form that must include:
details of the area (Region, city, or village, the ownership status of the area);
details of the water use (water right category, kind and size of the exploitation activity
[e.g. crop type, irrigated area and system of irrigation]);
details of the water (origin, quantity [in m3 per year], quality);
brief technical description of the existing infrastructure.
Approval of environmental permits for the activity;
A 1:5000 map of the area, which must include the existing water abstraction
activities in a radius of 200m;
Chemical and/or microbiological water analysis by a certified laboratory;
Copy of a legal document, which certifies the ownership of the area;
In areas with collective water management networks, a certificate of inability of
service by that network.
The Water Directorates of the Decentralised Regions are responsible for the monitoring and the
application control of these water rights. The above procedure is the same for both groundwater
and surface water abstractions.
Currently there is no national database for water rights, but a National Register of Water
Abstraction Points established at 10/01/2014, with the Common Ministerial Decision 145026/2014
and until 15/05/2014, all water right holders must register in it. This National Register will include
new and old water abstraction points, active and inactive and their respective rights. The database
will also include data for each point like spatial data, use data (starting year, water right category,
and annual water withdrawal), technical characteristics of the point (depth, diameter, existence of
metering device, power of the pump, piping network). All the points will be presented in a Digital
Map, with their coordinates per River Basin District.
Moreover, the Ministry of Environment, Energy & Climate Change, with the Common Ministerial
Decision 140384/2011 created the National Monitoring Network for the quantitative and qualitative
monitoring of water resources. After its full implementation, all the relevant quantity and quality data
will be available to the public. That National Monitoring Network will be a very useful tool for water
abstraction management.
According to Law 3199/2003 the first river basin management plan should have been drafted and
approved by the end of 2009. However, the river basin management plan for the Crete region is
still under pending approval at the present day.
Since the management plan for the region has not been issued yet, the Ministry of Environment,
Energy and Climate Change indicates in a circular issued in 2011 that: “when an application for a
permit is filed but the relevant river basin management plan has not yet been issued, the permit
shall be granted on the condition that the work or activity to be undertaken is deemed to be
compatible with the policy of rational water management and environmental protection applicable
to the specific region” (Greek Law Digest website, 2012).
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 32
2.3. Non-authorised abstractions: what do we know?
Water resources in the Crete River Basin are under pressure. Non-authorised water abstractions
represent a real challenge for water managers within the region, as the sustainable use and
access to water for all users requires complying with the water allocation plan provided by the river
basin authority.
Ensuring that water abstractions are authorised requires verifying:
the existence of a water right to abstract water (case A in Figure 8); and
the compliance of water abstractions with this water right, i.e. verifying that volumes
of water abstracted do not exceed authorised amounts or that they comply with e.g.
seasonal use restrictions (case B in Figure 8).
In the first case, all irrigated areas need to be identified and cross-checked with any available
information or database on irrigable areas (i.e. areas with a right to irrigate). In the second case,
water consumption needs to be monitored and cross-checked with the authorised abstraction
amount.
Figure 8 recapitulates all the steps that are necessary for the detection of non-authorised water
abstractions as well as the available tools/data that are used or could be used within the
Consortium area to detect illegal abstractions. For each type of non-authorised abstractions, if any
of the three first steps is not met, the competent authority in charge of water abstraction monitoring
will not be able to conclude whether there is a case of illegal abstraction.
Groundwater abstractions are predominant in the Crete River Basin Area. A study in the area
registered 2.600 wells in 2000, while the Water Directorate in Crete estimated the number of wells
at 5.000. There are also a great number of wells without permits (Preliminary River Basin
Management Plan).
Currently there is no organised monitoring program for the compliance of water abstractions with
water rights in the area. In situ monitoring inspections (regarding valid water rights) are conducted
every year to a random 1% of the farmers who are entitled for direct payments by the Payment and
Control Agency for Guidance and Guarantee Community Aid (OPEKEPE). The Strategic
Environmental Impact Assessment for the River Basin Management Plan of the Crete’s River Basin
District suggested a series of measures for the control of water abstractions from surface water and
groundwater. These measures included:
installation of monitoring devices on all water abstraction points;
register of all the consumers with the biggest abstractions;
in-situ monitoring inspections (at least twice per year) for the inspection of the
abstraction points and the installed monitoring devices.
Moreover, there is no organised plan of emergency in case of extreme events (e.g. draughts
leading to water restriction periods). According to EPI-Water European Project (http://www.feem-
project.net/epiwater/) “Drought Management Plans or other policy instruments are lacking, and
drought management is currently based on “crisis management” rather than on a pro-active and
preparedness approach.
In general, there is a lack of communication between the responsible authorities and of a
centralised way of reporting, monitoring and communicating the available information. Recent
actions, however, like the creation of the National Register of Water Abstraction Points and the
National Monitoring Network, are steps towards a solution to that situation.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 33
Approaches for the detection of non-authorised
water abstractions
Available tools within the river basin
Defining the type of non-authorised abstraction to be identified 1
A.Absence of water rights B.Exceedance of authorised
amount
s
Identification of irrigated areas through field inspections,
land-use maps, cadastral maps or Earth Observation-derived
information (NDVI) supported with ground truth
Identification of existing wells or surface water derivation
through field inspections, patrols or using orthophotos, record of
registered wells
The Army Geographical Agency
maps, topography, land use, GIS
Identifying the areas of interest: irrigated areas or abstraction points 2
GIS subsystem developed by the
National Data Bank of Hydrological
and Meteorological Information with
incomplete information about farmers
and irrigation water (see Figure 9)
Verifying the existence of a water right for the specific location of the identified irrigated area, well or surface water deviation point that has been identified
Estimating water
consumption through field
inspection and in-situ
metering or according to
operational hours and
delivery flow or using Earth
Observation-derived
information (maps of
evapotranspiration)
Verifying that volumes of
water abstracted at the
specific abstraction point
comply with the authorised
amount
Referring to a registry of
water rights that indicates
the specific spatial location
of the intended irrigated land
Referring to a registry of
water rights that indicates
the specific spatial location
of the abstraction point and
the authorised amount of
water to be abstracted
Up to now, there are no complete
records of water rights
Referring to registry of water rights 3
Verifying compliance of water use with water rights 4
Figure 8: Approaches for the detection of non-authorised water abstractions and available
tools within the Crete River Basin District
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 34
The National Data Bank of Hydrological and Meteorological Information has not been updated for
the last years (Figure 9). Instead, the Ministry of Environment, Energy & Climate Change, with the
Common Ministerial Decision 140384/2011 created the National Monitoring Network for the
quantitative and qualitative monitoring of water resources. After its full implementation, all the
relevant quantity and quality data will be available to the public. That National Monitoring Network
will be a very useful tool for water abstraction management.
2.4. Identified challenges and water managers’ needs for the
detection of non-authorised abstractions
Despite all the tools available and the efforts made by the national and regional authorities,
technical, economic and governance issues make it difficult to have a clear vision of non-
authorised water abstraction. Several challenges for water managers have been identified. They
can be grouped into four main categories.
Managing competing water uses
Agriculture is the main water user in the river basin. The high water demand in summer for
domestic uses (population growth and increase water demand due to tourism) and agriculture
(increase water demand due to a hot and dry summer) makes the provision of water services more
complex. The main difficulty for water managers within the region is to deal with a lack of water
resources and to reconcile water needs for two activities that have a huge impact on the region
economy: agriculture and tourism.
Several initiatives and Action Plans are promoting a more efficient water resources management
within the river basin. They invite farmers to a shift towards less water demanding crops, more
sustainable irrigation methods through educational programs (PLEIADeS, 2008). Strategic
Environmental Impact Assessment for the River Basin Management Plan mentions several times
that incentives must be applied, but there is no description of the kind of incentives or the way of
application.
Data on water use, land use and geographical data
National Data Bank of Hydrological and Meteorological Information National data bank that gathers all information collected by the four national Ministries above. Up to 2005 only the institutions that had contributed to the creation of this data bank had access to the data. It was planned that data would be available to other institutions and research organisations.
Ministry of the
Environment
Urban Planning
and Public Work
Ministry of
Agriculture
Ministry of Interior Ministry of
Development
Data on water use and agricultural census
Data on municipal water consumption
Data on land use, pop. and groundwater
Figure 9: National Data Bank of Hydrological and Meteorological Information
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 35
Compiling and updating information on water rights
Up to now, there are no complete records of existing water rights within the region which makes the
verification of compliance of water use with water rights (step 3 and 4 in Figure 8) more difficult or
impossible in some cases.
The National Monitoring Network for the quantitative and qualitative monitoring of water resources
and the National Register of Water Abstraction Points, which recently established, could be a very
useful tool for the identification of areas of interest (i.e. area where illegal water abstraction could
be expected) (step 2 in Figure 8) lacks information on farmers and irrigation water (Tsarakis et al.,
2005).
Controlling volumes of water abstracted at every abstraction site and point of use
Not all the existing regulatory instruments are properly implemented. Measures used to monitor
their correct application are not effective (WWF, 2003) (refer to step 4 in Figure 8).
The Draft River Basin Management Plan of the Crete River Basin District (2014) suggested a
series of measures for the control of water abstractions from surface water and groundwater.
These measures included the installation of monitoring devices on all water abstraction points and
in situ monitoring inspections (at least twice per year) for the inspection of the abstraction points
and the installed monitoring devices, among others. The implementation of these measures will be
a great step forward, towards a more sustainable management of water resources.
Having adequate financial resources
The region lacks adequate economic, financial and administrative resources to deal with non-
authorised water abstraction. The different competent authorities are deprived of the adequate
infrastructure, human resources and material in order to apply an efficient water policy.
Centralised power and fragmentation of competences
Dealing with a centralised power
Many government Ministries are involved in water management issues. The regional authority of
Crete is responsible for ground and surface water matters but, in practice, all decision-making
processes are maintained at a central level (WWF, 2003).
The transfer of authority in water issues from the Ministries to the Regional Directions of Water is
slowly occurring mainly because of an inadequate operational infrastructure in the regions which
were until now unconnected with the management of water resources (Mahleras et al., 2007).
Fragmentation of competences
Many authorities, at different administration level are in charge of water abstraction management
for the same area. All the competent authorities are compartmentalised and not well coordinated
and have more difficulties in making decisions37
. Overlapping functions occur and may decrease
the water management efficiency (Mahleras et al., 2007).
37 http://environ.chemeng.ntua.gr/wsm/
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 36
Nevertheless, the recent legislation and predominately Law 3199/2003 (in accordance with the
Water Framework Directive) tries to rationalise the water resources management. According to the
Law, the Water Directorate of the Decentralised Region (in which the River Basin District is
located) is the competent authority responsible for the management of water resources. In case
that a River Basin District is extended in the administrative boundaries of more than one Regions,
then the responsibilities could be allocated between the Regions, or one Region could be
determined as solely responsible. The National Water Committee (with its Decision on 16/07/2010)
determined the River Basin Districts and the responsible Region for their management.
Undergoing a transitional period
The Greek water administrations are undergoing structural changes. All river basin management
plans have not been accepted yet by the European Commission. Some of them such as the river
basin management plan for the Crete region are under pending approval. The region is
experiencing a transitional period and the water authorities have to deal with it and grant water
rights approval without having necessary a clear legal framework.
3. How Earth Observation could meet your needs to address illegal water
abstraction
The three main challenges for water managers in addressing non-authorised water abstractions
described above are equally found in other Greek river basin districts. Earth observation may offer
promising opportunities to overcome these challenges:
only a small number of flow meters are installed, which could be complemented with
EO-derived maps of water consumption, thus forming a hybrid monitoring system,
which in other member states has been recommended by water authorities;
an EO-based monitoring system has been demonstrated to be more cost-effective
and cheaper than full-area coverage volumetric metering. This could help overcome
the lack of financing;
the estimated large number of wells would again point in the direction of an EO-
based, ideally hybrid, system, as it requires covering large areas at fine spatial
resolution.
3.1. Requirements for operational implementation and maintenance
An operational EO-based system for the detection of non-authorised water abstractions requires
the following data:
dense time series of high resolution imagery; Landsat8, DEIMOS and, ideally,
SENTINEL2 covering crop growing season;
agrometeorological station network;
cadastral limits of plot with water rights;
ancillary information about main crops phenology and development;
existing land use/land cover maps.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 37
More specifically, it requires bi-weekly to monthly EO images from a high-resolution (HR) Virtual
Constellation (multi-sensor time series at 10-30m resolution), plus the following non-EO data:
vector maps of farms and water management units (e.g., from rural cadastre;
orthophoto; public maps) for the purpose of verifying compliance with existing water
rights and allocations;
daily agrometeorological station and rain gauge data for the calculation of crop water
consumption;
flow meter data in selected locations for calibration and continuous ground truthing
of crop water consumption.
Ideally, these data need to be integrated in a webGIS in order to provide a tool for stakeholder
participation, collaboration and transparent governance.
The cost of implementing and running such a service has been estimated at the order of 60-
100,000 EUR per year for an irrigated area of 50-100,000 ha, spatially distributed on the field of
view of a typical Landsat scene (180x180 km) (depending on image overpass location).
3.2. Synthesis of assets and shortcomings of the use of EO,
including MS-wide applicability
Pilot studies have been conducted in several areas in Greece on the use of EO for water
management purposes, e.g. in Thessaly during PLEIADeS (2008). Stakeholders at local level
(prefectures, municipalities) have generally expressed their interest in being involved and in
benefiting from the technology. The Cretan Nagref Institute has been offering an online irrigation
advisory based on agrometeorological station data, which could provide an ideal basis for “plug-in”
of EO data. The basis of operational capacity (relevant EO expertise and experience, existing GIS-
based services) is also available at several universities and research institutions (e.g. University of
Thessaly, Agricultural University of Athens, NAGREF). However, so far these studies have
remained limited at pilot stage.
On the other hand, the water managers’ needs, as described above, could be fulfilled by an EO-
based monitoring system. So the open question is how to best match the existing requirements
with the current capacity, in the current and evolving policy and governance context. Water
governance in Greece is at a crossroads, with major innovations and reorganisation taking place
that could provide an excellent opportunity for introducing EO-based monitoring.
As in other regions, key benefits of EO-based monitoring of abstractions include:
large geographical coverage at adequate spatial and temporal resolution;
good accuracy;
vastly increased efficiency of surveillance and inspection;
objective assessment tool and trusted by water users as such;
additional development of land-use datasets through LPIS;
vastly reduced monitoring cost and needs for human resources;
acceptance by users and demonstrated high interest of representatives of water
authorities.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 38
Technical barriers exist but could mostly be overcome, as follows:
the reliance on cloud conditions can be alleviated by using a multi-sensor
constellation of satellites combined with a multi-annual agronomic knowledge base
(available in most important irrigated areas in both countries).
area with small cultivated parcels can be covered with higher resolution images
(Sentinel-2 will allow for resolving 0.3 ha, several commercial satellites provide even
much higher resolution).
extended and long-standing EO capabilities and expertise is available and several
pilots have been successfully accomplished.
An essential barrier, that so far has not been addressed, is the recognition of EO as legal evidence
and its anchoring in national policy.
4. Background information – Categories of water rights
Common Ministerial Decisions 43504/2005 and 150559/2011 define the water rights. There are 19
water right categories grouped in 5 main groups:
1.Drinking water supply
a.Drinking water, nutrition, cleaning, irrigation of green areas
b.Water supply of public spaces and public stores
c.Air-conditioning, thermoregulation
d.Construction
2.Agricultural use
a.Irrigation
b.Stock raising
c.Aquaculture
d.Fish and shellfish welfare
e.Agribusiness
3.Industrial use
a.Direct industrial use
b.Indirect industrial use
c.Bottling
d.Cooling, thermoregulation
e.Fire safety
4.Energy production
a.Hydroelectric facilities
b.Thermoelectric facilities
5.Recreation
a.Hotels, motels, camps
b.Special touristic facilities (spas, etc.)
c.Sports – recreational activities (sailing, rowing, water ski, swimming, thematic parks, etc.)
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions | 39
5. References
Chartzoulakis K., Paranychianakis N. and Angelakis A., 2001. Water resources management in the
island of Crete, Greece with emphasis on the agricultural use. Water Policy 3: 193-205.
Χαρτζουλάκης, ΚΣ: ΒΙΩΣΙΜΗ ΔΙΑΧΕΙΡΙΣΗ ΤΩΝ ΥΔΑΤΙΚΩΝ ΠΟΡΩΝ ΣΤΗ ΓΕΩΡΓΙΑ ΣΕ
ΞΗΡΟΘΕΡΜΙΚΕΣ ΣΥΝΘΗΚΕΣ. Manuscript distrubuted at Crete Workshop, July 2014.
EASAC (2010): Groundwater in the Southern Member States of the European Union: an assessment
of current knowledge and future prospects. Country report for Greece. Available at:
http://www.easac.eu/fileadmin/PDF_s/reports_statements/Greece_Groundwater_country_report.pdf
Kontogianni V., Pytharouli S. and Stiros S. (2007) Ground subsidence, Quaternary faults and
vulnerability of utilities and transportation networks in Thessaly, Greece. Environmental Geology, June
2007, Volume 52, Issue 6, pp. 1085-1095. [Online] Available at:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00254-006-0548-y?no-access=true
Mahleras A, Kontogianni A, Skourtos M. (2007) Pinios River Basin – Greece, Status Report of the EU
funded project “AquaMoney, Development and Testing of Practical Guidelines for the Assessment of
Environmental and Resource Costs and Benefits in the WFD”. Contract no SSPI-022723, 15/4/2007
PLEIADeS (2008). Available at: www.pleiades.es
Tsarakis et al. (2005)
WWF (2003) “Water and Wetland Index - Critical issues in water policy across Europe”. Results
overview for the Pinios river basin (Greece)
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 40
C.Case of Campania & Puglia
Regions, in Italy
1. Presentation of the study and objectives of the workshop
1.1. Context and objectives of the study
The Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Water Resources38
sets out the future EU agenda on water
policy. It identifies over-abstraction, also due to lack of sufficient controls on abstraction, as a
significant pressure that needs to be tackled by Member States to allow the achievement of Water
Framework Directive (WFD) good status objectives. It outlines, amongst others, a specific action to
“Apply Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES), now Copernicus, services to
detect non-authorised abstractions”. Copernicus39
is the European Programme for the
establishment of a European capacity for Earth Observation (EO).
As part of the action lines mandated in the Blueprint, DG-ENV has commissioned a study which is
currently carried out by BIO and UCLM to test how to make best use of EO systems, together with
information at local scale, in order to identify and manage non-authorised abstractions, in particular
from agriculture.
1.2. Objectives of the workshop
In the context of this action line, a series of exploratory workshops are being held in MS with the
following objectives:
to better understand the perceived need of water managers in the MS to monitor and
manage irrigated areas and their water consumption, in particular also to detect
non-authorised abstraction;
to inform and discuss how EO can answer to this need and what are the benefits
and limits (and how can we address the latter);
to explore opportunities for supporting irrigation water management by providing EO-
assisted tools and information to water managers, users and other stakeholders and
to verify whether the solutions proposed for a selected case example can be used in
other parts of the country.
38 Communication COM/2012/673
39 http://copernicus.eu/
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 41
The present document is the main outcome of the workshop that was conducted in Piedimonte on
25 March 2014.
2. Current situation: experience from Campania and Puglia regions
2.1. Overall context of water resources and water use
In Southern Italy, the traditional rural economy has been transformed into a highly specialised,
profit-making agriculture in many areas. Irrigation systems have been modernised by transforming
old open-channel schemes into pressurised pipeline networks, now covering more than 70% of the
total irrigated area. In most cases, the “on-demand” method for water distribution has been adopted
in substitution of the old rotational schedule. This modernisation has greatly enhanced the overall
efficiency of the irrigation systems, with tangible benefits for crop production and water
conservation.
However, more recently, many modernised irrigation areas have experienced an increase in the
demand of water for civil and industrial use and a contemporary reduction of water availability for
agriculture. Therefore, irrigation agencies and farmers’ associations have been asked to further
improve the efficiency of their irrigation networks and delivery systems by means of a more rational
use of limited water resources.
Actual management of water resources for irrigation results from compromises between the
strategies of irrigation agencies and regional policy, in order to address environmental concerns
and conflicting water uses while meeting actual farmer water needs, related to crop production.
These two management levels are strictly connected. For this reason, in Italy Irrigation and Land
Reclamation Consortia have always played an important role in land and water resource
management. Traditionally, Consortia were created mainly to manage drainage canals after land
reclamation works (as stated by the general law on 1933); successively, with the introduction of
irrigation, they were entitled to manage it. The way in which they are organised and, above all, their
ability to bring together public and private interests have allowed the Consortia to respond to the
changing needs of a society which has changed radically, in particular with regards to how natural
resources such as water and land are used.
We are presenting here three examples of consortia, two in the Campania region where EO has
already been introduced and one in the Puglia region, which was the first to introduce volume-
based water fees.
Consortia di Bonifica in Destra Sele and di Sanio Alifano in the Campania region
The Irrigation and Land reclamation Consortium “Sannio Alifano” is located in the Northern
part of Campania Region, and it covers 82 municipalities in the Provinces of Caserta, Benevento
and Avellino. The predominant activity of Consortium Sannio Alifano is irrigation, although it is still
responsible for the operation and maintenance of drainage canal network. In 2003, the Regional
Law n.4 has established the new Consortium administrative domain, which has an extension of
194,837 ha, with 18,970 ha of irrigated land divided in two districts:
Sannio Alifano (14,070 ha), with predominant herbaceous crops and forages;
Telesina Valley (4,900ha), with predominant tree-crops (vineyards, fruits and olive
trees).
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 42
The Consortium Bonifica Sannio-Alifano is administrated by 25 delegates elected among the 30
000 farmers and landowners who pay for the irrigation and land reclamation services and members
by right (9 representatives from the 3 Provinces and 1 from the Regional Government).
The Consortium operates the irrigation distribution network from 1st May to 30
th September, with an
average seasonal delivery of 4500 m3/ha. Water, diverted from the Volturno river, is conveyed by
means of open channels (serving a total extension of 4 740 ha) and pressurised pipelines (14 230
ha), the latter representing about 3/4 of total irrigated area. Complementary groundwater resources
from private wells may also be used to meet annual crop water requirements.
The Consorzio di Bonifica in Destra Sele (Salerno) covers the right portion of the hydrographic
basin of Sele river with extension of 34 000 ha (of which approx. 18 000 ha are cultivated). It is
delimited on the west side by the Tyrrhenian sea and on the southern part by the Sele river. Main
crops are industrial vegetable crops in greenhouses and forages during the winter-spring period,
maize and fruit-trees in summer. Irrigation is applied intensively from April to October.
Greenhouses apply irrigation permanently with extraction from deep aquifer (with excellent water
quality). During the 1930's the building of a small dam along the Sele river allowed the supply of
water for the civil, industrial and agricultural uses and for the production of electricity. When the first
irrigation project started (1950), the Consortium obtained the allowance for diverting a maximum of
6 m3/s from the reservoir. The rapid development of economic activities in the area, following the
re-use of reclaimed lands, and the contemporary decrease of water resource availability have
determined the progressive reduction of water uptake for irrigation. Although dramatic drought
conditions have not been faced yet, the actual equilibrium in the irrigation system may collapse if
fast changes in cropping practices or increasing water resource scarceness occur.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 43
Figure 10: Irrigated areas in the Consortium Sannio Alifano (in brown)
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 44
Consortium of Bonifica della Capitanata in the Puglia region
The Puglia region covers 19 361 km2 in the South Eastern part of the Italian Boot (Figure 11).
There, climate is of Mediterranean semi-arid type, characterised by a hot and dry summer and a
moderately cold and rainy winter season. Agriculture has a great economic weight in the region
and agricultural land represents more than 70% of the total area. Agricultural land is fragmented,
composed of small parcels with an average surface of 7.5 ha (Massorutto, personal
communication, 2014). Most of the agricultural production is based on irrigation, which relies upon
water inflow from surrounding regions (Basilicata) and abstraction from groundwater aquifers
(Lamaddalena, 2004). The Capitanata Plain (441 579 ha), in red Figure 11, is under the authority of
the Consortium of Bonifica della Capitanata. It is a local authority administrated by farmers who
own the land within the Consortium area (almost 80 000 farmers) and members by right (18
representatives from the region, municipality, province and mountain community) (Lamaddalena,
2004).
Characteristics of the Capitanata Plain:
Cultivation: vegetables, vineyards, fruit-
crops and olive trees
Crop water requirements > 330 million3
About 121 266 ha irrigated, i.e. 27.5% of
the total area, of which 45% are irrigated
through the Consortium “Bonifica della
Capitanata” water distribution network
Annual water withdrawal by the Consortium
estimated to about 150.5 million m3, with
an efficiency of 86.7%. Most of it comes
from the Fortore watershed and Occhito
dam in the Northern part and Ofanto in the
Southern part
Legend:
Grey: Puglia region
Red: Administrative boundaries of the irrigation Consortium Bonifica della Capitanata
Blue: Irrigated land
Green: Non-irrigated land
Source: Adapted from Consorzio per la Bonifica della Capitanata website, 2014; Lamaddalena, 2004
Figure 11: Map of the irrigated areas in the Capitanata Plain, focus of this case study
Out of the 150 million m3 distributed by the consortium, about 130 million m
3 are effectively
distributed to irrigation fields, because of water losses during storage and conveyance but also
possibly because of suspected non-authorised water withdrawals along the distribution network
(Lamaddalena, 2004). Furthermore, the Consortium is not able to provide water to all water users.
Only 45% of the irrigated land is irrigated through the Consortium distribution network. The
fulfilment of the total irrigation demand in the district is limited by the amount of water available and
constrained by the hydraulic capacity of the conveyance and distribution network. Complementary
groundwater resources from private wells may be used to meet annual crop water requirements.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 45
2.2. Water governance and water rights allocation
Conflicting water uses within the three consortia result from higher water demands in a context of
lower resource availability. Management of water abstractions, in particular through water
allocation, aims to ensure the sustainable use of water resources.
With the institutional law n. 215 on 15 February 1933 (“Nuove norme per la bonifica integrale”), the
Irrigation and Land Reclamation Consortia have been recognised as local authorities delegated by
the State to deal with irrigation and land reclamation and given substantial powers for water
management in the agricultural sector. At the beginnings of the 70’s, the State passed the
responsibility of irrigation to the Regions, which later on (1990-2000) have reorganised the physical
boundaries of the existing Consortia and increased their responsibilities by introducing rural
environmental protection among the goals.
Concession rights are assigned to a Consortium by the Basin Authority and the Regional
authorities. They are granted for a specific use and give right to a certain amount of water. The
river water withdrawal is authorised by fixing a certain amount of maximum flow rate and seasonal
volume. Flow rate is established in such a way that a minimum flow is assured for environmental
purposes.
In the present situation, the Regional Authority entitles water management to the Consortia, which
in turn are responsible for irrigation scheduling, attribution of consumption rates to each user,
control of water use. Figure 12 highlights key stakeholders and responsibilities for the water
governance in the area covered by the Consortia.
The Consortia activate and promote public investments for developing irrigation and land
reclamation infrastructures; operation and maintenance of such infrastructures is a duty of
Consortium which collects fees from its members and associates. The Consortium holds water
rights and redistributes them to its members. On-demand schedule is the most flexible system for
delivering irrigation water, because in principle there is no restriction on water use by farmers. The
on-demand schedule does not limit the frequency, rate and duration of irrigation water applications.
This degree of flexibility would require large capabilities of the irrigation system in terms of water
storage and pipeline diameter to meet theoretical peak demand. By limiting the maximum flow rate
diverted to each outlet and by requesting farmers to ask for water availability in advance (“booking
system”), the excessive depletion of water resources can be avoided. The resulting distribution
system is called “limited rate on-demand” schedule.
In most Italy, fees do not encourage water savings by farmers as they are still collected in
proportion to the surface served. In the areas served by pressurised pipelines the unit-area fee is
higher, in order to compensate additional costs for pumping. The Consortia are planning, however,
to implement a binomial fee, composed of a fixed amount (proportional to surface) and a variable
amount, proportional to the volume abstracted, as introduced recently in the Capitanata region. To
allow this process, the pressurised pipeline system is going to be equipped with electronic metering
devices at each outlet. The issue remains, however, that vandalism acts are common on existing
metered delivery outlets.
Diversely, in order to be granted groundwater use rights for irrigation purposes, individual water
users must submit an application to the competent Province. Irrigation water rights are granted to
farmers after a registration, with specification of the cadastral units to be irrigated.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 46
Figure 12: Water abstraction management in Campania and Puglia Regions
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 47
2.3. Non-authorised abstractions: what do we know?
Non-authorised water abstractions represent a real challenge for water managers within the
Campania and Puglia region, as the sustainable use and access to water for all users requires
complying with the water allocation plan provided by the river basin authority. They relate either to
abstractions from non-registered wells, unauthorised water diversion from the Consortium’s water
distribution network or from abstractions exceeding authorised amounts.
Today, there is practically no reliable information available on the extent and amount of non-
authorised abstractions, in particular those from wells.
Ensuring that water abstractions are authorised requires verifying:
the existence of a water right to abstract water (similar to case A in Figure 13); and
the compliance of water abstractions with this water right, i.e. verifying that volumes
of water abstracted do not exceed authorised amounts or that they comply with e.g.
seasonal use restrictions (case B in Figure 13).
In the first case, all irrigated areas need to be identified and cross-checked with any available
information or database on irrigable areas (i.e. areas with a right to irrigate). In the second case,
water consumption needs to be monitored and cross-checked with the authorised abstraction
amount.
Figure 13 recapitulates all the steps that are necessary for monitoring water abstractions as well as
the available tools/data that are used or could be used within a Consortium (applying equally to any
consortium) area to detect illegal abstractions.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 48
Approaches for the detection of non-authorised water
abstractions
Available tools within the area
Defining the type of non-authorised abstraction to be identified1
A. Absence of water rights B. Exceedance of authorised
amount
(A) or (B)
Identification of irrigated areas through field inspections, land-use
maps, cadastral maps or Earth Observation-derived information
(NDVI) supported with ground truth
(A) or (B)
Identification of existing wells or surface water derivation through
field inspections, patrols or using orthophotos, record of registered
wells
GIS based on land use allows to have an overview
of the different crops and see where irrigated
areas can be expected
Identifying the areas of interest: irrigated areas or abstraction points2
Cadastral and land use maps
(A)
Verifying the existence of a
water right for the specific
location of the identified
irrigated area, well or surface
water deviation point that has
been identified
(B)
Verifying that volumes of water
abstracted at the specific
abstraction point comply with
the authorised amount
Concession rights are granted for a given
abstraction point and corresponding irrigated land
both of which must be indicated on an official
cadastral map
The water user must indicate also the amount of
water intended to be used.
Field inspections organised by regional authorities
and the Consortium
(A) Identifying irrigated areas
through field inspection and in-
situ metering or according to
operational hours and delivery
flow or using Earth
Observation-derived
information (maps of
evapotranspiration)
(B) Estimating water
consumption through field
inspection and in-situ metering
or according to operational
hours and delivery flow or using
Earth Observation-derived
information (maps of
evapotranspiration)
Estimating volumes of abstracted water3
Verifying compliance of water use with water rights4
New generation of flow-meters and AQUACARD
system introduced by the Consortium. Farmers
taking water from the same hydrant use personal
cards which measure and register water
consumption of each user
Figure 13: Approaches for the detection of non-authorised water abstractions and available
tools within the area covered by a Consortium
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 49
2.4. Identified challenges and water managers’ needs
Despite all the tools available and efforts made by the regional authorities and the three Consortia,
technical, economic and governance issues still make it difficult to have a clear vision of actual
withdrawals and non-authorised water abstractions. Several challenges for water managers have
been identified. They can be grouped into three main categories: compiling and updating information
on water rights, controlling volumes of water abstracted and having adequate water pricing system.
Compiling and updating information on water rights
As shown in Figure 13, having an updated record of water rights and land use cover map is essential
for monitoring water abstractions and for detecting non-authorised abstraction types.
Land-use based GIS can be used to guide field inspections, by identifying expected irrigated areas.
However, it requires frequent updating (at least annually) for field inspection to be efficient (step 2 of
case A and B in Figure 13).
In the application form for the use of irrigation water, the farmers and/or landowners indicate the
cadastral unit (which surface area is known) to be irrigated; the location is then identified on cadastral
maps and linked to the corresponding distribution network node. Note that water rights are not
specified in the ownership act.
The Consortium Sannio Alifano has started on 2013 a GIS inventory of irrigated plots which will be
regularly updated every year. The other consortia are in the same process.
Compiling an inventory of wells and controlling volumes of water abstracted from
groundwater
In most of the consortia areas farmers are using wells to complement the water volumes allocated
from the channel networks. Some of these wells are registered, whilst many are not and almost none
are equipped with flow meters.
Controlling volumes of water abstracted at every abstraction site and point of use
In a large portion of the area served by the pressurised pipeline network, delivery outlets are equipped
with an electronic activation and metering system, called AQUACARD, which controls the valve
opening at the outlet and logs duration, date and volumes. The Aquacard system can be programmed
to limit abstraction to a fixed amount (related to the payment of fees). However, controlling every
abstraction site and point of use within the area covered by the consortia in order to assess water
consumption (step4, case B in Figure 13) can be a difficult task:
field visits are regularly required for every abstraction sites (ideally two or three visits
within an irrigation period) which can be hard to achieve considering the number of
water meters in the region;
the implementation of AQUACARD system is expensive and requires additional human
resources. Connection via mobile phone modem is being experienced but additional
investments would be needed. The card has been experimentally introduced in some
parts of some consortia (e.g. Destra Sele) and is being used in Capitanata.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 50
Having an adequate water pricing system
In the near future, the irrigation fee within a Consortium will contain a fixed part (proportional to the
served area) and a variable part (depending on metered water consumption). Thus, the more a farmer
consumes water, the more they pay. It has been reported that when they consume little water the
price is relatively affordable but as soon as they become a bigger consumer, the difference in prices
becomes higher very rapidly. This policy on channel network water prices may encourage farmers
using illegal water abstraction to irrigate their crops (case A in Figure 13). However, this is a still on-
going process. In 2013, irrigation fees have been collected only considering the fixed part (except for
Capitanata, where a binomial fee is already in use).
In this context, the use of spatial information derived from EO data may significantly enhance the
management of irrigation systems, but it will require a rapid adaptation of the management of
Consortia to new technologies.
3. Use of Earth Observation data
3.1. Opportunities for water managers
In most Consortia of Southern Italy, the irrigation water allocation (and the application of
corresponding fees) is done on the basis of the extension of irrigated area and not of water volumes
even in presence of metered distribution networks. As a consequence, farmers are not motivated to
adopt efficient water saving strategies, which results in generalised over-irrigation and misuses of
water resources. The availability of reliable, objective and timely information about crop water
requirements allows the implementation of efficient water distribution criteria based on the actual
irrigation needs of crops.
Since 2007, however, an Irrigation Advisory Service based on near-real time distribution of EO
products is operative in the three largest Consortia in the Campania region to provide farmers and
water user associations with real-time information on crop water requirements. In 2013, the
operational irrigation advisory service in the Sannio Alifano has reached more than 250 farmers. The
service is currently implemented in the framework of the Rural Development Plan of the Campania
Region, Measure 124 Health Check (www.irrisat.it), as a further step for the implementation of E.U.
Directive n.60/2000 in the agricultural sector.
This development has its origin in the EU project DEMETER (2002-2005), where Destra Sele was one
of the pilot areas for demonstrating EO-based irrigation advisory (Calera et al. 2005, Osann et al
2006). D’Urso et al. (2006) find a 15-20% water savings potential in the use of EO, see also evaluation
statement of consortium president Vito Busillo in Figure 14 below.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 51
Figure 14: Newspaper Il Mattino”, in occasion of the final conference of the EU-project
“DEMETER”
Based on this experience, in the irrigation area of Sannio Alifano, a trial has been conducted in 2012
and 2013 to detect non-authorised irrigated areas and water abstractions based on the analysis of
temporal series of NDVI high and medium resolution images. Accuracy assessment has been carried
out by means of field surveys. Cost-benefit effectiveness has been assessed for different
combinations of number of acquisitions and sensors (DEIMOS-1, RapidEye, Landsat 8) for EO-based
irrigation advisory in Sannio Alifano. The box below summarises the results of this analysis. Due to
lack of metering data, a direct cost-benefit analysis of EO-based abstractions monitoring in Italy is not
possible, but costs are similar.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 52
Cost-benefits analysis for EO-based irrigation advisory in Sannio Alifano
The cost dimensioning covers a 5-year time period. The initial capital investment (CAPEX) includes the
development of the GIS and farmer’s database. CAPEX costs are amortized over the 5-years period. Operative
cost items (OPEX) cover personnel, satellite data, and other costs (field travel, software licenses), plus a flat rate
of 20% for indirect cost. Personnel-effort account for the entire satellite processing chain, including, atmospheric
correction and maps generation, quality control and Cal/Val activities, agro-meteorological data elaboration,
maintenance of spatial data infrastructures.
Satellite data cost depends on the type of data: minimum order size and required spatial resolution, which
dependents on field size (i.e., for higher field fragmentation, higher spatial resolution is needed to solve smaller
parcels).
The growing season is assumed to be 6 months, requiring a total of 12 images. Using commercial satellite data,
the service cost ranges between 55K and 67K € per growing season. On average, the cost of the satellite data
would reach around the 25% of the total cost of the service over the 5-year time. With the availability of free
satellite data from the future Sentinel-2 (S2) mission (at 10/20 m spatial resolution), we foresee an average
service cost of about 41K-52K € per growing season. If Very High spatial Resolution data were needed, the cost
of the satellite data would reach around 45-50% of the total cost, with no free S2-like option able to offer the
required spatial resolution.
Service cost per unit area (€/ha per growing season)
Service module Cost items (see table 1) Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
IFAS on 10000 ha
Commercial data (1+2+3+4+5+6+7) 5.5€ 5.8€ 6.0€ 6.3€ 6.7€
Free data (1+2+4+5+6+7) 4.1€ 4.3€ 4.5€ 4.8€ 5.2€
IWMS on 20000 ha
Commercial data (1+3+4+5+6) 2.3€ 2.4€ 2.4€ 2.4€ 2.4€
Free data (1+4+5+6) 1.6€ 1.6€ 1.6€ 1.7€ 1.7€
The calculation of benefits is from the farmer’s perspective, i.e. the reduction of the cost for irrigation that the
farmer can achieve with a correct amount of irrigation water. We assume that the percentage of water waste
due to over irrigation can be 20%-30% when irrigation is based only on practical experience. These values have
been observed in the pilot sites of the project and confirmed by regional estimates. Water and energy reductions
can be achieved without a reduction in yields. This has been largely recognized in literature and demonstrated in
the pilot area during various seasons directly with farmers. The analysis is based on the cost of the water service
that the farmers pay directly to the WUA with a flat rate (per ha) water tariff. Consequently, our analysis is based
only on the irrigation scheme or the on-farm costs that the farmers generally pay for water (a fee charged per
hectare or volume) as well as for any other production costs, such as seed, machinery, labour and maintenance.
The optimum irrigation volumes are based on the Standard Crop Water Requirements (CWR) for the specific crop
and climatic condition. The reduction of the cost (CR) for irrigation is calculated as the difference CR = cost of
applied irrigation – cost of max irrigation volumes.
To calculate the economic impact of water use, we consider an average over irrigation rate of 15% with three
irrigation profiles (High, Medium and Low) and a minimum/maximum cost of water of 0,03-0,1 €/m3. The
irrigation profiles express the different irrigation volumes that are required depending on the minimum and
maximum water needs of crops for given soil, climate and management conditions.
The economic impact of water use is normalized to the overall service use (active hectares per year) considering
10 000 ha of regularly irrigated areas. Note that the irrigation scheme has collective irrigation infrastructures and a
potential for irrigation of about 18 970 ha. The relationship between the cost of the service and the benefit is
shown in the figure below.
Comparison of the cost of the service vs. the expected reduction of costs for irrigation for three water use profiles.
We consider a cost of water of 0,03 €/m3 (Left) and 0,1 €/m
3 (Right). Costs are normalized to an irrigation
scheme extent of 10000 ha.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 53
The following summary of the cost-benefit analysis considers an average cost of water of 0,07 €/m3. In this case,
the cost reduction for each profile (low, medium and high) and the cost of the service are presented in the table
below. Costs-benefits are normalized to an irrigation scheme extent of 10 000 ha. Potentially, the area covered in
the minimum order size of the satellite data (10 000 km2) can be used to provide the service in the same
collective irrigation scheme up to about 20,000 ha and in adjacent collective irrigation systems for a total area of
approximately 80 000 ha. Therefore, the cost of the service for an area of 40 000 and 80 000 ha are also
provided.
Cost of the service vs. the expected benefit (5-year average) for three irrigation profiles and a given cost of water
of 0,07 €/m3. Costs-benefits are normalized to an irrigation scheme extent of 10 000 ha, 40000 ha and 80000 ha.
Irrigation
scheme extent
(ha)
Irrigation profile Benefit of the service Cost of the service
10,000
High 31 €/ha
4.6 – 6.1 €/ha Medium 25 €/ha
Low 20 €/ha
40,000
As above As above
~ 3 €/ha
80,000 ~ 2 €/ha
However, the uptake of the new technology still needs further some adaptation to the consortium’s
routine operations.
The Capitanata consortium has expressed interest in the technology and has offered to be a pilot site
in a funding proposal currently under evaluation.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 54
3.2. Requirements for operational implementation and maintenance
The experience mentioned above has confirmed that internalisation of EO-based procedures (but -
more in general- the use of spatial data) is a slow process in the context of irrigation Consortia.
Technological innovation is probably faster at farm level, especially where irrigation water has an
energy cost related to volume abstraction, as when pumping lift is required. Web-based GIS
technology has eliminated the need for on-site specialised software installation and has introduced
user-friendly procedures. However, the existing IT level in the Consortia is rather low to allow a quick
uptake of new technologies. Local databases used for collecting irrigation fees and cadastral
information often are not linked; in many cases, data are manually typed in digital template, with
duplications and errors. Operational implementation and maintenance requires dedicated personnel
with some informatics background and capability in merging the standard operational procedures with
new technology including EO data.
3.3. Synthesis of assets and shortcomings of the use of EO, including
MS-wide applicability
EO-based information in the context of irrigation consortia needs to be highly accurate. In the case of
IRRISAT, where EO is used for monitoring irrigation requirements, the validation is difficult due to the
scarce availability of irrigation data at farm level. Where automatic registrations of water withdrawals
from the distribution network are available, it is possible to evaluate the correspondence between the
volumes indicated by IRRISAT and those applied by the farmers both at the farm and district scale.
Most farmers have evaluated positively the usefulness of the information provided by EO, which is
seen as objective and impartial. The detection of water excessive use or illegal abstractions can easily
cover the cost of implementing the technology through the collection of potentially lost fees, provided
that trained personnel and innovative management procedures are adopted in the everyday practice.
Table 5 below shows the comparison from the point of view of consortium technical operations and the
text underneath summarises their conclusions (M. Natalizio, General Director, Sannio Alifano,
personal communication 2014).
The methodology supported by EO data appears more effective in terms of:
processing times (shorter than the process supported by aerial photos);
employment of human resources (smaller than the procedure based on field
inspection);
cost of acquisition of the data (lower than the procedures supported by aerial photos
and field checks).
It also has a positive, direct impact in terms of cost/benefit analysis.
In conclusion, despite having to go through a phase of technological innovation, the use of EO
systems, together with information at local scale seems to represent the best solution to be adopted
by Consortia to identify and manage non-authorised water abstractions in agriculture.
Furthermore, the same methodology, without appreciable increased costs, can be applied to give
farmers an additional service, i.e. the “irrigation advice” (timely information about crop water
requirements), amplifying the advantages of EO systems compared to each other.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-
authorised water abstractions | 55
Table 5: Comparative Analysis of different procedures for the detection of irrigated areas and
abstractions: strengths and weaknesses
PROCEDURE STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES
Field inspection Direct feedback. On site direct controls, without any
previous information, requires
considerable human resources;
Choice of the right time to control;
High cost;
Very long time;
Difficult to carry out all the checks during
the irrigation season.
Aerial photos
(by airplane)
High-resolution images;
Easy to understand for non-
technical people but with limited
quantitative information.
No information about the current status
and trend of crops growth unless we set
up a multispectral camera;
High cost of images acquisition;
Long times to schedule a sufficient
number of flights;
Difficulty quick processing;
Large number of images to cover the
entire study area;
Inability of automatic processing.
Satellite Images Qualitative/quantitative information
data on the real performance and
the status of crops growth;
Easy to program many acquisitions
during the entire irrigation season;
Cover of large areas with a single
image;
Fast processing (images are
usually supplied already pre-
processed);
Support to controls on the ground,
i.e. it’s possible to carry out
targeted controls based on previous
information, reducing the
employment of human resources;
Possibility of automating
procedures;
Affordable cost.
High cost for high-resolution images;
Need to organise a campaign of data
verification on the ground.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 56
D. Case of experienced river basins
in Spain and Portugal
1. Presentation of the study and objectives of the workshop
1.1. Context and objectives of the study
The Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Water Resources40
sets out the future EU agenda on water
policy. It identifies over-abstraction, also due to lack of sufficient controls on abstraction, as a
significant pressure that needs to be tackled by Member States (MS) to allow the achievement of
Water Framework Directive (WFD) good status objectives. It outlines, amongst others, a specific
action to “Apply Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES), now Copernicus, services to
detect non-authorised abstractions”. Copernicus41
is the European Programme for the establishment
of a European capacity for Earth Observation (EO).
As part of the action lines mandated in the Blueprint, DG-ENV has commissioned a study which is
currently carried out by BIO and UCLM to test how to make best use of EO systems, together with
information at local scale, in order to identify and manage non-authorised abstractions, in particular
from agriculture.
1.2. Objectives of the workshop
In the context of this action line, a series of exploratory workshops was held in MS with the following
objectives:
to better understand the perceived need of water managers in the MS to monitor and
manage irrigated areas and their water consumption, in particular also to detect non-
authorised abstraction;
to inform and discuss how EO can answer to this need and what are the benefits and
limits (and how can we address the latter);
to explore opportunities for supporting irrigation water management and compliance by
providing EO-assisted tools and information to water managers, users and other
40 Communication COM/2012/673
41 http://copernicus.eu/
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 57
stakeholders and to verify whether the solutions proposed for a selected case example
can be used in other parts of the country.
The workshop for Spain and Portugal was primarily focused on the transboundary Guadiana river
basin, but also covered most other examples of EO use for water management and abstractions
monitoring in both countries. It was held on 17 February 2014 in Madrid, hosted by the Deputy
Directorate-General for Planning and Sustainable Use of Water of the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture,
Food and Environment. The participants were numerous water professionals from the public and
private sector, the European Commission Directorate General of Environment, and environmental
NGOs. This document summarises the background study conducted by BIO and UCLM, updated with
all contributions from the workshop and its conclusions.
The present document is the main outcome of the workshop that was conducted in Madrid on 17
February 2014.
2. Current situation of water use and abstractions
2.1. Water governance and water rights allocation in Spain and
Portugal
Overview
There is an extended communication and cooperation between the two countries on transboundary
water governance issues (Antunes et al., 2008). Portugal and Spain signed the 1998 Albufeira
Convention42
that aims at harmonising the use of resources for both countries.
The new flow protocol, signed in 200843
defines flow regimes for the five transboundary river basins,
with quantified objectives. Several monitoring stations are placed in strategic locations and flows data
are checked regularly. However, the basin faces challenges related with the allocation of its limited
water resources, both surface and groundwater, which is typical of the situation in southern European
river basins. Management of water abstractions, in particular through water allocation, aims to ensure
the sustainable use of water resources. The structure and organisation of water abstraction
management are similar in the two countries. Figure 15 highlights key stakeholders and
responsibilities for the water governance in the area covered by the Water User Associations.
Concession rights are granted for irrigation purposes; they are assigned to a specific use and give
right to a certain amount of water over a certain period of time (a maximum of 75 years in Spain and
Portugal). They can be granted for groundwaters or surface waters. The water user must submit an
application to the regional authority and provide further details as indicated in Figure 15. In Spain,
according to the Ancient 1879 Water Law (in force until 1985), land owners were able to extract
groundwater without limit (groundwater was considered a private property). This situation changed
with the passing of the Water Act of 1985, which is currently in force. The Water Act of 1985 defines
groundwater as public domain, although it allows existing groundwater abstraction to continue in
operation (well owners were just required to register their wells).
42 https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2000-2882
43 https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2010-652
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 58
Allocation of water
rights and control
Application for water
rights, incl. data about:
- Land ownership - Source of water and
abstraction site: abstraction point + location on an official cadastral plan
- Irrigated areas (number of ha) and + location on an official cadastral map; type irrigation system and system provided for the abstraction monitoring
- Authorised water abstraction volumes: annual volumes of water that are required
Application for water rights, incl. data about:
-Land ownership -Source of water and
abstraction site: abstraction point + location on an official cadastral plan
-Irrigated areas (number of ha) and + location on an official cadastral map; type irrigation system and system provided for the abstraction monitoring
-Authorised water -abstraction volumes:
annual volumes of water that are required
Allocation of water
rights according to
Annual
Exploitation Plan
and control
Attribution of a certain
amount of water
according to RBMP
Information on local
water needs
Attribution of a certain
amount of water
according to NWP
Information on the
region water needs
Commission for the Application and Development of Albufeira Convention (CADC)
Transboundary working body composed by Portuguese and Spanish delegations, responsible for carrying out studies, collecting,
processing, exchanging and managing information, implementing the technical and administrative procedures for cooperation
APA
Portuguese Environment Agency
National Authority responsible for the
elaboration of River Basin Management Plans
Consejo Nacional del Agua; National Water
Council; National authority responsible for the
elaboration of National Water Plans (NWP)
River Basin Authority
Regional authorities responsible for the
registration of concession rights and
abstraction surveillance at a regional level
Communidades de Regantes; Association of
water users; Responsible for the elaboration
of Annual Exploitation Plan and water
management at a local level
Farmers living in the Spanish part Farmers living in the Portuguese part
Associação de Benificiários
Association of water users
Responsible for water management at a
local level
Information on local
water needs
Attribution of a certain
amount of water
according to RBMP
Figure 15: Water abstraction management within the Guadiana River Basin
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 59
As a result of this change in the consideration of groundwater use, tens of thousands of Registration
applications were issued by farmers, since the previous legal framework (ancient XIXth century law)
and modern pumping system (1970’s) allowed intensive growth of irrigated areas in La Mancha
Aquifers. Resuming: this abstraction was considered legal because of the provisions of the ancient
law.
Today, and according to the water legislation, implemented since 1985, the right to use any water can
only be obtained via an official assignation called “water concession” (concesión de aguas), which is
either issued by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment to the natural or legal person who
have previously applied for it to the River Basin Authority (Confederación Hidrográfica), or by the
Regional Water Government. There are some exceptions that recognise historical rights in certain
areas in Valencia y Murcia, and also the rights to use mineral waters, which are issued according to
the mining legislation. The following two paragraphs focus on the case of the River Basin Authorities
depending on the Ministry.
All concessions must be properly written down in the Water Register. With the aim to improve the
control over extractions and, in particular, the control on concessions, the necessary legal
modifications to provide further transparency to the Water Register have been made. In this way, an
electronic Water Register is being developed and implemented in each River Basin Authority, which
will be available for all citizens, so that any person will be able to know the details of the water
concessions and the uses to which the property is entitled. The e-register will help to enhance the
identification of illegal abstractions.
The River Basin Authorities are in charge of planning and management of all water resources in their
basin area, including groundwaters. They are also in charge of the control of water abstractions, for
which a unit in charge of “water police and vigilance” (Guardería Fluvial y Agentes Medioambientales)
exist in each basin. Apart from this field-, physically-based control, other techniques such as aerial
photography and remote sensing are also being employed for abstraction control. But in any case,
these EO tools should always be verified and backed by field data. They are particularly useful for
detecting specific problems.
One of the issues that has evidenced to be amongst the best ways to control non-authorised water
abstractions is the cooperation between users, who have the responsibility for the compliance with
their concession terms. For that reason, the establishment of groundwater user communities, and, in
agriculture, irrigation communities, also play the role of vigilance and police in their community, and is
currently being promoted. Additionally, the implementation of volumetric meters in water intakes with
the aim of controlling the volume abstracted is advancing further.
The special situation in Spain: Transition Period
In Spain, since the new Water Act came into force in 1985, all water has been considered public.
However, in previous legal regulation (Water Act of 1879) groundwater was private water. Due to
these legislative changes, the adaptation of the administrative status of these wells is necessary.
These uses of private groundwaters will go from private to public when one of the characteristics
(even the ownership) changes.
The ALBERCA project has been created by the government in order to update the administrative
status of the water uses, especially facilitating the processing of expedients of groundwater use and
the transformation of the private water uses into public water uses, and checking the annotations in
The Catalogue of Historical Private Abstractions. Due to the great number of water uses (over a
million water uses and more than two million of water inlets. 50% of files are groundwater use) this is a
huge undertaking. The achievement so far is the review and update of around 700.000 titles of water
uses.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 60
Consequently, in Spain there are currently three different types of legal title to obtain the water use:
the legal license: a maximum period of 75 years.
the legal disposition: direct recognition of the water use by the Water Act (e.g.,
abstractions less than 7,000 m3/
yr).
the property title: in accordance to the repealed Act (generally valid until 2035).
The Water Register is a modern tool to register, modify, identify and locate all water uses. It is
already developed, but now it is being tested.
In Portugal, water resources use permits are required, under national legislation: Law No. 58/2005 of
29 December (Water Law, which partially transposes WFD) and Decree-Law No. 226-A/2007 of 31
May that regulate the use of water. In this scope, water abstraction (whatever its purpose - for
irrigation, human consumption, industry or other) is subjected to an authorization (or a previous
communication), a license or a concession depending on the use rights of the water resource (public
or private).
Authorisation is required for water abstraction of private water (except when extraction equipment has
a power lower than 5 horsepower (hp) and has no significant impact on water resources; in this case,
water abstraction needs a previous communication).
License is required for water abstraction of public water. In the case of water abstraction of public
water for irrigation of areas higher than 50 ha, for public supply or for energy production, concession is
required.
Currently, there is an online licensing system, called SILIAMB - https://siliamb.apambiente.pt/, used
not only for the permitting process, but also for the control. In particular, it comprises the self-control
reporting.
Regarding water resources management by water authority (APA, I.P. – Portuguese Environment
Agency, through regional departments), it is important to control the water abstraction and to know the
amount of water used, namely for irrigation purposes.
In both countries, water user associations are key stakeholders in the water abstraction monitoring.
They are responsible for water distribution, supplying necessary flows for irrigation and providing
technical support on water use issues to local farmers. They also have the possibility to intervene in
the control of water abstractions.
The main mission of water managers, like authorities in charge and Irrigation Water Users
Associations (and their water managers) is water resources planning and management in their
administrative territory (irrigation scheme, aquifer, province).
The key for irrigation water management is the planning in annual cycles. The Annual Exploitation
Plan (AEP, in some areas called by a different term, or simply hydrological plan) is the main tool for
water management in an irrigation scheme, but also used on larger spatial scales (aquifer, river
basin). It defines the upper limit of the amount of water to be consumed for irrigation in a given
irrigation season for the area covered by this plan. The AEP establishes for each farm or for each
Water Management Unit (WMU, farms or groups of farms drawing from the same source of water) the
maximum amount of water (from groundwater or from channels) to be abstracted or diverted for
irrigation purposes in a given year. The amount of water established in the AEP is related directly with
the crops and the area they occupy, because the amount of irrigation water consumed per unit area
for each crop in a given environment is well known.
The AEP is developed before the beginning of each irrigation season by the corresponding water
management authority (e.g. Irrigation Water Users Association in the case of irrigation schemes or
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 61
aquifers), normally based on the allocation of water amounts authorised by the River-Basin
Organisation for the given year. It is agreed by and legally binding for all members of the Water Users
Associations (through voting in the general assembly). On the basis of the AEP, each farmer or
producer decides which crops to plant on which plot in the given growing season.
The identification of irrigated areas by means of EO has systematically been carried out by the
Guadiana basin authority since 1990´s up to day, with high involvement and participation of
stakeholders and users, through different organisms, such as the Government Assembly; the Users
Assembly; Reservoir Withdrawal Commission, the Exploitation Boards; the River District Water
Council and the Competent Authorities Committee.
2.2. Overall context of water resources and water use in the Guadiana
river basin
The Guadiana River has its source in the South-West of the Iberian Peninsula, flows into Portugal, in
the southern provinces of the Algarve and Alentejo and, in its lower reaches, marks part of the border
between the two countries (as illustrated in Figure 16). 83% of the basin surface lies in Spain
(covering part of the territories of the Autonomous Communities of Castilla-La Mancha, Andalusia and
Extremadura) and the remaining 17% lies in Portugal (in the regions of Algarve and Alentejo).
The basin is normally divided into three sections: the Upper Guadiana (Alto Guadiana, Spain) located
in the plains of La Mancha, reaching from its origin to the National Park “Tablas de Daimiel”, the
Middle Guadiana (Guadiana medio, Spain), and the Lower Guadiana (Spain/Portugal) from the
recently constructed Alqueva dam in Portugal to the Mediterranean sea. The predominant climate is
Mediterranean-continental, being the average rainfall of 522 mm/yr (340 mm in La Mancha plain in the
Upper Guadiana).
Figure 16: Guadiana river basin
Source: Adapted from Lopez-Francos and Lopez
Francos, 2010
Characteristics of the Guadiana River Basin:
Large hydrographical basins: it covers
66 800km2 of which 55 200km
2 (83%) are in
Spain and 11 580 km2 (17%) are in Portugal
Irregular hydrology, high variability in
precipitation and frequent dry periods
Main water use is for agriculture with a
water consumption reaching 90% of the
total water use (Spanish and Portuguese
River Basin Management Plans 2009-2015)
Great economic weight of agriculture in
Spain and Portugal. For example, in the
Spanish part: agricultural lands represent
47% of the territory of which 19% are
devoted to irrigated agriculture
Cultivations vary from region to region
Main water sources for irrigation also vary:
Upper Guadiana irrigation mainly based on
groundwater resources, Middle Guadiana
and Portugal irrigation based on surface
water
The Upper Guadiana has a prevailing groundwater regime, which makes it different from the rest of
Algarve
Alentejo
Upper
Guadia
na
Lower
Guadiana
Middle
Guadiana
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 62
the catchment, which is widely known for the aquifers of La Mancha. These groundwater bodies
emerge in surface wetlands creating very valuable ecosystems such as Lagunas de Ruidera (Natural
Park) and Las Tablas de Daimiel (National Park), among others, which led to the declaration of
UNESCO's Biosphere Reserve of “La Mancha Húmeda”. Some wetlands were included in the national
Ramsar list and thus they were declared as protected areas by national laws.
The rapid expansion of irrigation from groundwater since the early Seventies led to overexploitation of
the aquifer, with sinking water-table levels threatening the survival of the wetlands. Irrigated
agriculture, mainly in vineyards, is the socio-economic basis of the area. Over the years, the delicate
equilibrium or des-equilibrium between abstractions and available resources has given rise to conflicts
which have been addressed by several Plans, the latest of which is the Spanish RBMP 2009-2015, as
it is explained below.
The effectiveness of management measures, mainly based on huge abstraction restrictions, especially
in the 2006-2009 period and the 2009 to 2012 wet period, have led to an important rise of the water
table (up to 21 m). At this moment, the achievement of good quantitative status of main groundwater
bodies is close to its original state (see Figure 17).
Figure 17: Evolution of water table in Upper Guadiana aquifer.
The Middle Guadiana has a regulated hydrological regime due to the construction of several large
dams in the context of the hydraulic infrastructure reforms of Plan Badajoz, in the middle of last
century. These dams in turn have given rise to an intensive agriculture depending mostly on surface
water distributed in canal networks, regulated by the river basin authority. The management of these
dams has allowed for coping with drought periods without conflicts. The transformation of land into
new irrigated areas is still going on, encouraged by the regional government, due to its socio-
economic importance.
The Portuguese section of the Guadiana has a regulated hydrological regime due to the
construction of the Alqueva dam. The associated canal distribution networks have not yet been
finished and the irrigation transformation is still going on. The pre-existing irrigation schemes in this
area are regulated by small dams, like the one of the river Caia. Some of them are also fed by
groundwater. The Alqueva Scheme is located in southern Portugal, approximately 180 Km southeast
of Lisbon, Portugal capital. The irrigation water is diverted from the Alqueva Dam, located in Guadiana
River that forms the Alqueva reservoir. The irrigated area will comprise, in 2015, 110 000 hectares,
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 63
mostly under sprinkler and trickle irrigation. The autumn-winter-spring runoff is partially stored in the
Alqueva Lake, an artificial reservoir with a capacity of approximately of 4 100 hm3 that received the
flows coming part from Portugal and the other part from Spain. The volume of water is afterwards
pumped and used in the left margin of the river (±30 000 ha) and in the right margin (±80 000 ha) and
transferred to the Sado river basin. The storage and releases are controlled by the EDIA enterprise
that stores water for hydropower generation downstream.
The irrigation modernisation program carried out by the central Portuguese government has been
installing pressurised and non-pressurised systems in an area of 110 000 hectares. Using EU
structural funds it has also installed a network of agrometeorological stations for the purpose of
irrigation advisory that is being offered by the extension service COTR.
The whole Guadiana river basin counts 1 824 artificial water reservoirs or dams, the majority of which
are destined for water storage (NeWater 2005). Some of these dams date back to the Roman Age and
they are still in service. Irrigators can receive water from a water supply network managed by a Water
User Association or directly pump water from their own private wells.
In the 1980’s the depletion of the groundwater table was well known, since related wetlands
ecosystems were clearly affected by the lack of resources and abstractions seemed to far exceed
available renewable resources. The environmental damage was particularly evident in Las Tablas de
Daimiel National Park.
Besides, in the Campo de Montiel aquifer area, which is related with “Lagunas de Ruidera” lakes,
water springs disappeared and stream flows decreased, giving rise to important social conflicts.
Violent episodes took place involving groundwater farmers, people from nearby villages, surface water
farmers and environmental groups.
Some measures were applied to solve this situation:
Declarations of "Aquifer Overexploitation": This was a measure in the new 1985 Water
Law. Mancha Occidental and Campos de Montiel aquifers were declared
overexploited, and so: Abstractions were limited (water rights of 4,278 m3/has limited
to 2,000 m3/ha) and drilling of new wells was banned. There was a huge social
opposition against restrictions and Farmer Associations demanded compensation for
restrictions.
1992 Income Compensation Plan: This was one of the first agro-environmental
programs in the EU Common Agricultural Policy. Farmers were required to use less
water, abandon water-intensive crops (maize and beet) in favour of water-effective
crops. And they were compensated for income losses
2000 Plan for restructuring vineyard: The effect of this plan was an extraordinary shift
from herbaceous crops (high water-intensive crops 8.000 m3/ha) to vineyards (less than
1.500 m3/ha), and it consolidated the previous Income Compensation Plan.
As a result of these plans, there was a huge reduction of groundwater abstraction from 640 hm3/yr
(mid 80’s) to 230 hm3/yr. The quantitative status of water bodies improved significantly due to this
water table recovery. Aquifers are nowadays close to achieve the good status and environmental
damages have almost disappeared. It must be pointed out that nowhere in the world a reduction like
this because of environmental reason has occurred. Anyway, some social tension and governance
problems remained.
In all this process, since mid-80’s (first time in Europe) Earth Observation tools have been used, not
only for the control of the water level recovery, but also for other purposes that are out of the scope of
this project, such as the analysis of wetland surface evolution in the Tablas de Daimiel and the
surveillance of flooding and cultivated areas in Middle Guadiana. EO tools have been used in the
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 64
Guadiana basin for the recognition of water rights since 1994. The Guadiana basin was one of the
pilot basins of the research FP4 ASTIMwR project (1997-1999) where EO tools were used for
developing an application to improve water resources management. It was also one the only
transboundary pilot area (Las Vegas del Guadiana, Spain, and Caia, Portugal) in FP6 PLEIADeS
project (2006-2008) that developed operational irrigation water management tools and services.
Finally, the Guadiana Basin Authority has systematically used (up to 2010) EO tools for controlling the
exploitation regime of the declared over-exploited aquifers.
The practice in the use of EO tools in the framework of authorised water consumption assessments is
as follows:
Recognition of groundwater rights (from the Ancient Water Law – see Section
2.1): It was necessary to know which farmers were abstracting groundwater before
1985 when the new Water Law got in force, in order to register water rights from the
ancient XIXth century water Law. The only realistic possible source of this information
was from EO tools through the following process: 1) Firstly, mapping all the farms
potentially linked to an irrigation right was required, for which digital orto-photography
was elaborated As a result, a geo-database with location of wells and graphical
information of farms was obtained; 2) Secondly, real irrigated area was obtained from
EO data (infra-red colour composite satellite images); 3) Finally the geo-database of
farms and wells was compared each year (spring and summer) with real irrigated area,
so that if the farm was irrigated in this period, then it was an evidence to register, and
this resulted in proof of evidence in Court where many cases were trialled.
Evaluation of groundwater abstractions & Control of overexploitation regime in
La Mancha aquifers: For this activity, firstly the crop distribution along the aquifer of
La Mancha was obtained with the use EO methodologies (from multi-criteria analysis
using multi-spectral and multi-temporal satellite images). Then, groundwater abstraction
was evaluated by applying a quote by crop (from flow meters, agronomic models:
Penmann, Thornwaite, SIAR, etc. It was necessary to characterize the vegetative
development of crops, in order to capture all existing crops in an area (spring and
summer). Special attention had to be paid to irrigated cereal crops and irrigated
vineyard crops, which could not be identified only by conducting a multispectral and
multi-temporal analysis. This information was obtained for each parcel and checked if it
was according with limited groundwater abstraction right after the overexploitation
declaration.
Control of non-authorised water abstraction: It is necessary to differentiate two
types of non-authorised abstractions:
Wells with no permits.
Abstraction of larger volumes of water than entitled to.
The methodology to control these situations, in the Upper Guadiana River, was the use
of satellite images to obtain the irrigated surface and compare it with the farms with
administrative permit, so that all possible surfaces that irrigate without license can be
assessed. Finally, a relation of non-compliant farms and an estimation of the volume
extracted can be obtained.
This methodology results in an Early Warning tool in order to perform field inspections
(while crops are still in the field) which are necessary as definitive evidences for formal
complaints. With this methodology, thousands of reports were filed and tens of farmers
are even nowadays involved in criminal trials in court.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 65
Some challenges have still to be tackled from the current practices in the use of EO tools. The main
challenges for water managers related to monitoring water abstractions in this area are governance
issues because social and economic conflict still remains. Funding of these activities is a key issue as
well (EO, field inspections, procedures, etc., which are not considered as water services by the Water
Framework Directive, thus a cost-recovery mechanism for these activities is not easy to implement).
Specific and relevant challenges for the detection of non-authorised water abstraction relates legal
issues, which need be taken into account:
Not all groundwater abstractions without permit are illegal: they could be under an
authorisation process arising from the ancient law, or because of social reasons -
determined by Autonomous Government-, via an exchange in a Public Water Centre or
in a Water Market. A good management of Register of water rights and an Exchange
information system must be required.
Declaration of illegality of a non-authorised groundwater abstraction requires a complex
legal procedure: it has to be done according to a legal framework, and with all
guarantees for the potential offender. Therefore, we cannot speak about “illegality”
without omitting this necessary legal procedure. All these illegal declaration will finally
go into court, so quality of proof of evidences and legal formal issues are critical
As a general conclusion, the implementation and results of the initiative on monitoring of water
abstractions by EO, and in particular the detection of non-authorised abstractions, has been proven
highly effective and efficient (cost are not high and contributed to a successful implementation of the
general measures –which were really expensive-). However, the EO-derived tools, when used as a
proof of evidence in legal procedures, must be still completed with other ancillary legal evidences,
which make the process more expensive (i.e. field inspections).
2.3. Non-authorised abstractions: what do we know?
Water resources are under pressure in some part of the river basin and ensuring compliance with
water rights represents therefore a real challenge for water managers.
Up-to-date information about the extent of non-authorised abstractions is difficult to come by. The
most frequently cited reference is a WWF report published in 2006, stating that:
“In the Upper Guadiana river basin, according to the Ministry for the Environment there
were around 22,000 illegal wells in contrast with 16,000 authorised ones in 2006”
(WWF, 2006).
“Series of inspections carried out in 2005 on 70 of irrigation farm in aquifer 23 revealed
that abstractions were being made of 54,1 hm3 above the amount authorised by the
river basin authority that year” (WWF, 2006).
More recently, we still find that “Illegal water abstraction in the Tablas de Daimiel National park
accounts for 10% of volume of groundwater consumed for cereal irrigation and around 30% for vine
and vegetables” (Dumont et al., 2011). However, these publications fail to take into account the
specific transition regime of water rights in Spain (from the old Water Act of 1879, where groundwater
use was private, to the new Water Act of 1985, where all water is public), see previous section. Along
with the review and registry of abstraction points (ALBERCA project) over the years a lot of effort has
been devoted to improve and implement effective aquifer monitoring and control mechanisms and a
process of legalisation has been conducted, largely with the help of EO (Calera et al. 2010). The
instrument of exchange of water rights via the Centre of Exchange of Rights (Upper Guadiana Special
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 66
Plan) has raised all potential illegality in the area (around 40 hm3), which will participate either in the
reallocation of rights from this Centre (14 hm3) or in the cession of private rights contracts (26 hm
3),
provided that the equilibrium of abstractions is guaranteed (River Basin Authority Information Source).
Ensuring that water abstractions are authorised requires verifying:
the existence of a water right to abstract water (case A in Figure 18); and
the compliance of water abstractions with this water right, i.e. verifying that volumes of
water abstracted do not exceed authorised amounts or that they comply with e.g.
seasonal use restrictions (case B in Figure 18).
In the first case, all irrigated areas need to be identified and cross-checked with any available
information or database on irrigable areas (i.e. areas with a right to irrigate). In the second case, water
consumption needs to be monitored and cross-checked with the authorised abstraction amount.
Figure 18 recapitulates all the steps that are necessary for the detection of non-authorised water
abstractions as well as the available tools/data that are used or could be used within the Water User
Association area to detect illegal abstractions. For each type of non-authorised abstractions, if any of
the three first steps is not met, the competent authority in charge of water abstraction monitoring will
not be able to conclude whether there is a case of illegal abstraction.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 67
Approaches for the detection of non-authorised water
abstractions
Available tools within the area
Defining the type of non-authorised abstraction to be identified 1
A. Absence of water rights B. Exceedance of authorised amount
s
Identification of irrigated areas through field inspections, land-use maps,
cadastral maps or Earth Observation-derived information (NDVI) supported
with ground truth
Identification of existing wells or surface water derivation through field
inspections, patrols or using orthophotos, record of registered wells
Cadastral and land-use maps
Identifying the areas of interest: irrigated areas or abstraction points 2
Patrols along the river in order to monitor and
prevent the extraction and derivation of water
(Water Users Associations, Confederación
Hidrográfíca and SEPRONA in Spain)
Earth Observation data
Verifying the existence of a water
right for the specific location of the
identified irrigated area, well or
surface water deviation point that
has been identified
Estimating water consumption
through field inspection and in-situ
metering or according to
operational hours and delivery flow
or using Earth Observation-derived
information (maps of
evapotranspiration)
Verifying that volumes of water
abstracted at the specific
abstraction point comply with the
authorised amount
Field inspections organised by regional
authorities and water user associations
Referring to a registry of water
rights that indicates the specific
spatial location of the intended
irrigated land
Referring to the Annual Exploitation
Plan that indicates the specific
spatial location of the abstraction
point and the authorised amount of
water abstraction
Concession rights are granted for a given
abstraction point and corresponding irrigated
land both of which must be indicated on an
official cadastral map
The water user must indicate also the amount
of water intended to be used.
Referring to registry of water rights and/or Annual Exploitation Plan 3
Verifying compliance of water use with water rights 4
Obligation for water users to install metering
devices and declare their water consumption
annually
Figure 18: Approaches for the detection of non-authorised water abstractions and available
tools within the basin
The special plan for the Upper Guadiana
River basin provides for the use of GSM
water meters and satellite data for water
abstraction surveillance
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 68
2.4. Identified challenges and water managers’ needs for the
detection of non-authorised abstractions
Despite all the tools available and efforts made by the regional authorities and the Water Users
Associations, technical, economic and governance issues make it difficult to have a clear vision of
non-authorised water abstraction. Several challenges for water managers have been identified.
Compiling and updating information on water rights
As shown in Figure 18, having an updated record of water rights and land use cover map is essential
for the detection of illegal water abstractions for both non-authorised abstraction types.
Although different initiatives have been implemented in order to update inventories of wells to keep
track of ownership and characteristics of every well in the country such as: the initiatives White Book
of groundwater, ARYCA, ALBERCA (well owners must join either the “Public Water Registry” or the
“Catalogue of Private Waters”), the total number of wells in the Guadiana river basin is not accurately
known at the moment (Fornés et al., 2007).
Controlling volumes of water abstracted at every abstraction site and point of use
Controlling every abstraction site and point of use within the river basin is a necessary step in order to
assess water consumption (step 4, case B in Figure 18) and can be a difficult task.
in some part of the river basin, many legal wells lack metering devices making the
estimation of how much water is currently pumped from the aquifer and thus the
implementation of the River Basin Management plan more difficult.
field visits are regularly required for every abstraction sites (ideally two or three visits
within an irrigation period) which can be hard to achieve considering the number of
water meters in the region.
the procedure requires field technicians to have access to the metering devices and
thus very often necessitates the presence of the owner (except for GSM devices for
which measurements can be done at distance). For the procedure to be efficient, a
large number of field technicians are required (generates costs) and field inspections
must be planned so that the owner is present when technicians visit an abstraction site.
given the difficulty to plan regular visits for each abstraction site, the approach used
today is to select randomly the abstraction site to be visited. This procedure raises
criticism about inspection bias: ‘why my farm is visited by inspection and not another
farm?’ The weakness of the controlling system within the river basin is mainly due to a
lack of human and financial resources making the visit of all abstraction sites more
difficult.
Volumetric metering can be a powerful tool if and only if properly implemented. This implementation
would need to be pushed with sufficient force by local or national governments, but real-world
experiences of forcing volumetric metering without cooperation of end users show the failure of this
approach. Only with a complete set of water meters on all sources of water, well maintained and well
operated, it could be feasible to perform an adequate monitoring and control, but usually such a
system is not available and technically (installation, maintenance and direct measurement) very
complex and costly. Moreover its good performance requires profound legal changes about private
property rights (access to metering device for WUA field technician), mainly in the case of areas where
irrigation is based on groundwater.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 69
3. How Earth Observation could meet your needs to address illegal water
abstraction
3.1. Opportunities related to the use of Earth observation by water
managers
Earth observation (EO) can provide, together with other, non-EO data, a set of products and services
that support the compliance with and/or enforcement of the Annual Exploitations Plan (AEP).
Moreover, EO-assisted products and services can also foster the required collaboration between all
users and to make the enforcement process transparent.
The detection of irrigation of land without irrigation rights is facilitated by means of EO-derived maps of
irrigated areas. Classification maps using this procedure have been accepted as evidence, e.g., in the
Supreme Court of Spain. Field inspection alone cannot cover large areas. Without images the only
approach is a random selection, which either requires a huge amount of resources-intensive field work
or (and still) leads to undersampling and underestimating of non-compliant farms, thus facilitating
over-exploitation and illegal abstractions.
The detection of over-irrigation (beyond the legally conceded volume) is equally facilitated by EO.
Measuring irrigation water consumption of plots by means of EO time series has been demonstrated
to be superior to the traditional approach of volumetric metering (Garrido et al. 2014). Dense EO time
series can provide accurate crop water requirements at pixel scale, according EO state of art, and by
applying a soil water balance we can determine irrigation water requirements.
Experience indicates that, for large areas, the EO approach is a system at least as efficient for
monitoring the AEP as is volumetric metering. EO products provide the same precision as a set of
water meters, while being cheaper by several orders of magnitude. A combination of both systems,
space-based and some volumetric metering (for ground truthing), would provide a realistic and
feasible alternative. Evapotranspiration (ET) and irrigation water requirements (IWR) need to be
provided for each plot during the whole growing cycle. Although the EO-based IWR is not a direct
measurement of water applied, it is directly related with it through the efficiency of the irrigation
system. Therefore, the EO-based IWR provides a valuable metering (in the sense of water
accounting) of the irrigation water applied.
3.2. Experience from implementation of EO in other river basins and
at national level
EO has been used in the majority of Spanish and Portuguese river-basins for many years. We present
here a brief overview of the most important cases (for the size of the area covered).
The use of EO for monitoring the irrigated areas has been important in the Upper Guadiana from the
early phase of its operational use. Recently a comprehensive control has been accomplished for the
years 2008-2011, identifying the irrigated surfaces and estimating crop water consumption for each
parcel (Calera et al., 2009, 2011). At the same time extensive experience has been gained in the use
of volume meters. The assessment by one of the former presidents of the Spanish Guadiana river
basin authority, Díaz Mora (1995), concludes that “…the direct measurement using flow meters has
proven to be useful. However, any system for controlling groundwater extractions cannot be based
only on them.” He proposes a three-component hybrid system, covering flow meters managed by the
irrigators themselves, EO, and piezometers.
In the Jucar River District, EO has been used to regularise water uses. Nowadays, water abstraction
control is being implemented through indirect methods, as well as through a global estimation of
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 70
abstractions in the aquifer. The current practice in the use of EO focuses on indirect control of water
abstractions based on theoretical crop consumption. Total consumption of the exploitation is
calculated as a product of the theoretical average consumptions per hectare of crops implemented on
the surface of each crop in the relevant period. To this end, a previous characterisation of water uses
is needed, both graphically and administratively. On these characterisations, the owners declare the
crops to be grown during a particular period and those declarations are cross-referenced with EO-
derived images. This methodology allows to compare the declarations and to estimate the global
volume of water abstracted. In order for the process to be efficient, it is essential to previously
characterise water uses, both administratively and graphically. The experience has also showed that it
is fundamental to have the previous declaration of the owner.
On the basis above, the WUA “Junta Central de Regantes La-Mancha Oriental (JCRMO)”, in the
upper Júcar river has successfully been operating for many years a system of water management
based on the identification of crops with similar water requirements by means of a sequence of EO
images and subsequent assignation of water volumes per class (multi-annual averages also
supported by agronomic knowledge base). Beyond this multiannual average, EO-based products
developed in SIRIUS can provide actual irrigation water requirements for each plot during the whole
growing cycle. This service has been implemented at the Junta Central de Regantes La-Mancha
Oriental. A demonstration is available online44
.
The Ebro basin, located in NE Spain, is one of the most intensively irrigated river basins in Europe.
The Autonomous Region of Aragón is located in the middle Ebro basin. In Aragón the irrigated surface
area is about 3950 km2 and the irrigation water comes mainly from surface resources, the Pyrenees
and the Iberian mountains. In the irrigated lands, climate is semiarid or arid with strong interannual
precipitation variability. The water sources largely depend on snowmelt and fall and winter
precipitation. The temporal variability of water availability is high and determines the crops production.
Tools for support decision-making, planning and management in hydrographic basins and irrigated
areas are required by the Water Basin Authority (Confederación Hidrográfica del Ebro, CHE) and
Irrigation districts managers which see in Earth Observation (EO) an important data source to improve
water management. In response to this request, the Irrigation, Agronomy and the Environment
research group (RAMA) integrated by researchers from two public research institutions, CSIC
(Spanish Council for Scientific Research) and CITA (Agrifood Research and Technology Centre of
Aragón) has developed some applications based on remote sensing techniques:
Irrivol, a method to predict, estimate and map irrigation water volumes by using ground
information, meteorological data and satellite images;
Assessment of Water Irrigation Use based on performance indicators derived from
ADOR database (a software for water management at district level), cropping pattern
and actual crop evapotranspiration derived from satellite images;
Irrigation Water Management Support-Tool based on water demand prediction obtained
from satellite data (Crop-Development-Water demand relationship using crop maps and
vegetation indices at real time) and water availability information (stored volumes,
current flows, time series models and information about booking snow).
These applications have been tested and implemented in the two largest Irrigation districts of Spain,
Comunidad General de Riegos del Alto Aragón (Irrigated area of 1,250 km2) and Comunidad General
de Regantes del Canal de Aragón y Cataluña (Irrigated area of 1,050 km2).
44 http://zeus.idr-ab.uclm.es/publico/webgis/
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 71
The Duero River Basin Authority and the ITACyL (Castilla y León Agricultural Technology Institute)
have used remote sensing technologies for the following tasks:
Development of River Basin Management Plan (2009):
To perform the characterisation of agricultural demand units for incorporation into the River Basin
Management Plan using satellite imagery of 2008 and 2009 years. It was based on Landsat 5 TM,
with images from March to September 2009, and SPOT 5 as the support in areas with clouds. The
results were used to contrast the reality with concession information available to the basin authority in
their records.
Work monitoring abstraction irrigation crops in the years 2010 to 2013:
The irrigated areas and theoretical irrigation crops abstraction has been monitored using Landsat 5
TM images, in 2011 and 2012, and Deimos-1 in 2013. This information helps to identify on illegal
abstractions and over abstractions. They have also served to establish rules for giving new allocations
in poor status groundwater bodies.
Decision making in the administrative work of the basin authority:
To recognise historical water rights, news concessions and its modifications to adapt to the RBMP.
On the national level in Spain, drought indexes are implemented in drought mitigation systems to
derive information about the hydrological status in a territory. They bring together hydrometeorological
information to derive a characterisation of a drought state. So, mitigation or prevention strategies can
be adopted. Drought mitigation plans propose a compilation of drought indexes and a collation of
activities to react and minimise drought impact on water uses and environment. Considering that, they
are useful tools to mitigate droughts. Current practice in deriving a drought index is based on using
different bands of EO in order to remark the contrast existing in reflectance when water availability for
vegetation changes. Some examples of indexes used are the Normalised Drought Index taken from
MODIS bands or its adaptation to MERIS information considering data availability in Spain. According
to recent research from CEDEX, drought indices derived from EO are easily managed and permit to
manage the whole Spanish territory with reduced costs at least with spatial resolution used (1.000 m).
The Spanish Deputy Directorate-General for Irrigation and Water Economy of the Ministry of
Agriculture, Food and Environment has collaborated with University of Castilla-La Mancha (the
coordinator of EU Sirius Project) to develop SPIDER using the Earth Observation in combination with
the data of the Agroclimatic Information Service for Irrigation (that counts with more than 400
automatic stations situated in irrigation areas http://eportal.magrama.gob.es/websiar/Inicio.aspx )
during years 2010-2011. The main goals of the developed experience, so called SPIDER-CENTER,
were mapping irrigated surfaces and estimating irrigation water requirements of the irrigated crops in
this area. It was decided to assess the SIRIUS toolset by applying it in a large area of Spain, where
there are very different climatic conditions and crop types. The area covered has been the Tagus,
Guadiana, Júcar and Segura river basins, the Sierra Filabres-Estancias and Gador-Filabres systems
(Mediterranean river basins in Andalusia). This is a surface area of 1.200.000 ha (36% of total
irrigation surface in Spain).), with spatial focus on 1790 irrigation schemes distributed along the study
area. All generated information by the project SPIDER-CENTER is available to water managers and
farmers via web without the need of installing specific software (http://zeus.idr-
ab.uclm.es/publico/indexSPIDERCenter.html?zone=386; Login: demo; Password: demo).
In Portugal, Earth Observation has not been used to monitor water abstraction and to detect non-
authorised abstractions.
However, it should be noted that the Algarve regional water authority (ARH Algarve) uses
orthophotomaps namely to obtain information on land use/cover. Regarding agriculture, land cover is
use to estimate crop water demands.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 72
Nevertheless, there are some EO relevant projects in the scope of water resources management,
namely linked with support systems for irrigation management (e.g. Aquapath-Soil Project -
http://www.agro-evapo.eu/), desertification susceptibility evaluation and riparian buffers evaluation.
Several institutions are responsible for these projects, such as administration, universities and
irrigation users associations.
It should be note that, in Portugal, the existing systems to support irrigation management are mainly
base on irrigation warning systems or on soil moisture sensors/probes. Concerning irrigation warning
systems, they take into account weather conditions and evapotranspiration evaluation, e.g. those
performed by Operative Centre for Irrigation Technology, COTR, for Alentejo, Algarve and part of
Ribatejo regions.
The absence of initiatives on Earth Observation to monitor water abstraction is linked with several
factors, which can be overcome with the collaboration and assistance performed by the European
Commission, being the APA I.P. available to participate in case studies in Portugal, such as on
Guadiana and Xarrama river basins on the Alentejo river basin district, and on Algarve river basin
district.
The conclusions from these experiences are included in section 3.5.
3.3. Requirements for operational implementation and maintenance
For this technology to be operational for the detection of non-authorised water abstractions, the
following data are required:
dense time series of high resolution imagery; Landsat8, DeIMOS and, ideally,
SENTINEL2 covering crop growing season;
agrometeorological station network;
cadastral limits of plot with water rights;
ancillary information about main crops phenology and development;
existing land use/land cover maps.
This service requires bi-weekly to monthly EO images from a high-resolution (HR) Virtual Constellation
(multi-sensor time series at 10-30m resolution), plus the following non-EO data:
vector maps of farms and water management units (e.g., from WUA exploitation plan;
rural cadastre; orthophoto; public maps) for the purpose of verifying AEP compliance;
daily agrometeorological station and rain gauge data for the calculation of crop water
consumption;
flow meter data in selected locations for ground truthing of crop water consumption.
Ideally, these data need to be integrated in a webGIS in order to provide a tool for stakeholder
participation, collaboration and transparent governance.
The cost of implementing and running such a service has been estimated at the order of 60-100,000
EUR per year for an irrigated area of 50-100,000 ha, spatially distributed on the field of view of a
typical Landsat scene (180x180 km) (depending on image overpass location).
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 73
The following steps and corresponding technical capacity are needed in order to provide this service
to users:
1. Data repository and web-GIS-based DSS ;
2. EO image data procurement;
3. Non-EO data procurement;
4. Operational production line for processing and generation of products;
5. Quality control of products ;
6. Delivery of products to users (online via webGIS, email, paper, media);
7. Dialogue with users.
As an example, in the SIRIUS project the above sequence has been implemented as follows:
Step 1 has been implemented in pilot areas in a centralised way by UCLM hosting a
global webGIS, offering either fully global navigation within and between pilot areas in
its “global” access configuration (maintained and fed by UCLM centrally) or individual
pilot area access in its local configuration (each limited to its wider pilot area territory),
administrated and fed by each pilot area Service Provider.
Step 2 can be a combination of centralised (in view of potential Copernicus services)
and local procurement.
Data for step 3 will always come from local procurement.
Two different service models for step 4 have been implemented and tested during
SIRIUS, based on a centralised and a de-centralised processing and production line,
respectively. The best strategy here depends on image source and local processing
capabilities.
Step 5 goes through several levels of quality control, some included in the central
production line and some confined to the local level.
Step 6 consists of uploading products to a webGIS and (optionally) providing output by
email, SMS, or printout. This is a task of the Local Service Providers.
Step 7 is one of the key tasks of the Local Service Providers.
3.4. Existing enabling environment
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 74
Table 6 specifies, for the example of SIRIUS, for each step as described above who (which
company/organisation) has the required operative capacity and where the source of the required
operational data procurement is. An important concept here is “Core User uptake capability”, defined
as the capability of the user to plug the EO Services into their existing operational routines. This
requires both some technical capacity (e.g., GIS) and some previous experience with and/or
exposition to EO-based concepts.
Similar tables can be generated for the other services mentioned above, thus all in all demonstrating a
wide coverage and high level of operative capacity.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 75
Table 6: Details of operative capacity for each element of EO Service provision line for Spain and
Portugal, example of SIRIUS.
Element of Service
provision line
Who has operative capacity to
provide /
Source of data procurement
Current status in Spain and
Portugal
SPIDER family UCLM and spin-off
System operational in over 10
different projects
EO data procurement Spanish National Remote
Sensing Plan
provides yearly coverage of
national territory in Spain
Landsat Fully operational; high-quality; free
Sentinel coming (expected to be free)
Rest of multi-sensor constellation Mostly fully operational; high cost
Vector data
procurement
Local Water User Associations mostly available;
may need digitalisation (including
validation field work)
Rural cadastre available
LPIS SIGPAC (Spain)
Agro-meteorological
data procurement
National or local station networks Operational access available;
SIAR network in Spain
In case of need: new installation,
to be maintained by LSP
Installation cost 2-3kEUR; some
instrumentation skills
Production line for
processing and
generation of products
Centralised: Astrium UK Operational production line (NDVI
& RGB colour composite)
demonstrated in SIRIUS
Local: Network of Local Service
Providers (UCLM & spin-off
leading the way)
Operational (including all additional
products) at UCLM/spin-off, others
can be trained
Quality control of
products
Centralised: Astrium UK;
local: Network of Local Service
Providers (UCLM & spin-off
leading the way)
same as in production line
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 76
Element of Service
provision line
Who has operative capacity to
provide /
Source of data procurement
Current status in Spain and
Portugal
Delivery of products to
users
(upload to webGIS;
further communication
channels)
Network of Local Service
Providers
Years of operational experience at
some LSPs, others in learning
process
Dialogue with users Network of Local Service
Providers
long standing record and excellent
collaborative relationship in some
areas (within and beyond pilot
areas), growing in others (through
active process, facilitated by
SPIDER)
Note: Partly similar capacities are available in other examples throughout Spain and Portugal (see
section 3.2 above).
3.5. Synthesis of assets and shortcomings of the use of EO, including
MS-wide applicability
Given their long standing record in the use of EO for water and land monitoring purposes, both Spain
and Portugal are in optimum conditions to benefit from all possible opportunities that EO offers for the
monitoring and control of irrigation water abstractions. These are:
large geographical coverage at adequate spatial and temporal resolution;
good accuracy;
vastly increased efficiency of surveillance and inspection;
objective assessment tool and trusted by water users as such;
additional development of land-use datasets through LPIS;
vastly reduced monitoring cost and needs for human resources;
acceptance by users and demonstrated high interest of representatives of water
authorities;
consideration as legal evidence in cases up to Supreme Court (in Spain).
extended and long-standing EO capabilities and expertise is available and numerous
pilots as well as first operational implementation of EO for monitoring and control of
water abstractions have been successfully accomplished.
rural cadastral databases are available where needed.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 77
Barriers identified in general could mostly be overcome, as follows:
the reliance on cloud conditions can be alleviated by using a multi-sensor constellation
of satellites combined with a multi-annual agronomic knowledge base (available in most
important irrigated areas in both countries).
area with small cultivated parcels can be covered with higher resolution images
(Sentinel-2 will allow for resolving 0.3 ha, several commercial satellites provide even
much higher resolution).
difficulty discriminating non-irrigated areas with irrigated areas of winter crops,
especially in years with a rainy spring, as well as of some perennial crops can be
overcome by using additional information from agro-met stations, soil moisture balance,
annual crop declarations (CAP), maps of land use, flow meters, etc.
The most essential remaining barrier is full recognition of EO as legal evidence and its full anchoring in
national policy.
Areas for application can be grouped into 3 classes:
regions with irrigation essentially fed by ground-water (by far the most important class
here); these are the most difficult to control, essentially due to the large number of
individual farm holdings (i.e. abstraction points) which are very often not part of any
irrigation users community;
regions with surface-water-fed irrigation; these are easier to control, because each
surface irrigation scheme is managed by an irrigation users community which is in
charge of hydrological planning and keeping records of abstractions at least at the
major channel network distribution points;
regions with mixed irrigation sources; these exhibit characteristics of both.
The general conclusions of the workshop held in Madrid on 17 February 2014 show that
COPERNICUS (pan-European, national) is relevant for the detection of non-authorised abstractions,
but also for water management and governance in general, for the following reasons:
standardisation of products and homogenisation of methodology are needed (many
water authorities have been using EO without a common background, interoperability
and integration with land-use Systems like SIOSE and CORINE is required to make
activities effective and efficient);
strengths and weaknesses of EO services for identification of irrigated areas and
estimation of water consumption correspond to those listed above;
local post-processing is required in order to adapt the products and services to regional
and local needs, also by integrating all ancillary data and information (cadastre, water
rights);
legal sanctioning based on EO alone is difficult, but EO maps can direct field inspection
to critical points and provide contextual information (time records and/or maps of
surroundings). EO plus field inspection testimony is the solution;
the EO techniques allow comparison of points where water is consumed with authorised
points, but don’t always allow to identify the point of abstraction. Additional field
inspection is necessary to confirm;
EO images are a good tool to support RBMPs and water accounts. They need
additional tools for the daily management of the RB;
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 78
shared EO tools by water users and water and agricultural authorities can help improve
water management;
financing for EO-based services to control abstractions should come from public
sources (EU, LIFE, rural development funds), because it is a service for all;
financing for EO-based water management should come from the users and entities in
charge of management (public administration, irrigation users communities).
The following statements were expressed by the Deputy Directorate-General for Irrigation and Water
Economy of the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment:
“Climatic information combined with Earth Observation Systems is useful to improve irrigation water
management by users and Administrations and to better irrigation and hydrological planning. SPIDER-
CENTER experience has had relevant results related to:
increase water irrigation efficiency;
rational use of water resources;
monitoring use of water (by Irrigators Communities and individual irrigators);
enforcement of water laws, Water Framework Directive;
sustainability.
Everybody can access to SPIDER Project GIS in the website given in section 3.2 above (it is a Web-
based GIS that doesn’t need to install any software in the client PC and offers the main functionalities
of a GIS).
As a final remark we would like to emphasise our compromise to continue improving water efficiency
in irrigation using Earth Observation tools, as we have included it as part of the programme of work of
Agroclimatic Information Service for Irrigation 2014-2016.”
The following statements were expressed by the Portuguese Environment Agency:
“We consider positive to have tools to improve water resources management and the control of water
uses. It would also be challenging (e.g. in the Alentejo region) to have tools to manage water users
conflicts, taking into account water abstraction upstream of assigned “water resource use permits”.
The evaluation of global amount of groundwater and surface water abstracted by agriculture is also
important. Nevertheless, that evaluation may require data that are not easy to collect, especially in
more complex areas, having different crops, irrigation technologies (and irrigation efficiencies) and
water sources. The Alentejo and Algarve regional water authorities, currently integrated in APA, I.P.,
are interested on case studies aiming improving of water resources management and the control of
water uses. The Alentejo regional water authority (ARH Alentejo) is available to participate in studies
in the Guadiana river basin district, shared with Spain, or in the Sado-Mira river basin district, in the
Xarrama sub-basin of Sado basin. The Algarve regional water authority (ARH Algarve) is willing to
participate in studies comprising the Algarve river basin district. In other perspective, studies to
support irrigation management aiming at improving the efficiency of irrigation would also be positive. In
this case, the involvement of irrigation users associations or agriculture associations is required.”
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 79
The following statements were expressed by the Hydrological Planning Office of the Guadiana River
Basin Authority.
“Based on this experience, the main assets and shortcomings of the use of EO to detect non-
authorised water abstractions are:
availability of data. Copernicus must offer free quality images.
multi-spectral and multi-temporal satellite images analysis, could be offered centralised
(defining accuracy and uncertainties). Multispectral and multi-temporal analyses need a
territorial segmentation where extracted variables are extrapolated.
an additional multi-criteria analysis is necessary to obtain truthful information that can
be used in administrative procedures and judicial processes. This Multi-criteria analysis
needs other data sources outside remote sensing which would be developed at local
scale: Well location, farms with water abstraction permits (plots’ layers), historical
exploitation, agricultural practices in the area, field activities to identify crops, definition
of quotas per crop, etc. (different methodologies required for different River Basins)
all treatment of EO evidences must take into account the future use of them: planning
information, ordinary groundwater management, control of non-authorised abstraction in
order to denounce or to go on a trial.
financing of implementation of these activities (not considered in WFD) is a key issue to
solve.
EO could be a powerful data source to improve management, but does not generate
operatives’ products that can be applied directly to an effective reduction of water
abstraction or non-authorised water abstraction control. However, its characteristics
make it a primary tool to address a better water resources management. »
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 80
This page is left intentionally blank.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 81
Annex 2: Status of non-authorised
abstractions in the EU
The status of non-authorised abstraction varies across the EU: most Member States (MS) are aware
of this issue but have difficulties in clearly identifying and tackling it, especially in countries where the
regularisation of water rights is still at its infancy. Based on different personal communications carried
out during the study with the representatives of different MS, the issue of compliance with water rights
appears particularly sensitive politically. With the exception of a few regions that specifically work on
reducing water abstraction through better compliance with the regulation (e.g. Guadiana region in
Spain), the priority is rather placed on identifying and monitoring abstractions to have a better picture
of the overall water requirements, than on ensuring compliance with water rights. In Europe, Southern
Member States are generally pointed to when mentioning non-authorised abstractions, which is partly
linked to the fact that they are experiencing water stress and that irrigation contributes to a very high
share of water use in these countries (up to over 80%). In Italy, for example, non-registered irrigation
activities may account for up to 20% of Italy’s total water abstraction45
and Spain was historically taken
as an example of a country with numerous cases of water abstractions managed with no public
control, although the situation now seems to be progressively regularised. Central and Eastern
European Member States seem mostly concerned about developing irrigation capacity and access in
a sustainable way, rather than focusing on compliance with water rights, often in their infancy. The
question can however raise attention in hotspot areas, where conflicting water use and water scarcity
threaten the sustainability of socio-economic activities. In Slovenia, for instance, a specific study was
carried out in the Vipava valley where suspicions of non-authorised abstractions were particularly high,
but this remained an isolated initiative in the country. The collected information on illegal abstraction
for each Member State is detailed in Table 7.
45www.globalwaterintel.com/archive/10/5/general/truth-behind-italys-illegal-abstraction.html#sthash.JiNQAtbt.dpuf
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 82
Table 7: Non-authorised water abstraction within Member States (selected following available
information)
Member States Level of non-authorised abstraction
Bulgaria No data on illegal water abstraction46
Cyprus 50 000 illegal bore-holes in 2008. Level of abstraction around 130 mill. m3/yr vs.
the recommended 80 million m3/yr.
Czech Republic
(Confidential47
)
Water authorities have great difficulties to deal with excessive withdrawals of
water for irrigation purposes in the South Morovia, Dyjákovice, Pavlovice,
Northwest Czechia, Raakovnicko, Mid-Czechia regions.
Greece
Greece still faces serious water challenges, in particular in terms of its
agricultural water use, which represents about 85% of overall abstraction.
Excessive pumping of groundwater has caused water levels to fall dramatically
in some rural areas, as well as salt water intrusion in some coastal aquifers.
Illegal abstractions and discharges pose a hurdle to improving water
management. Enforcement of regulations and water permit conditions has not
sufficiently improved. Agricultural water prices neither cover the cost of supply
nor provide sufficient conservation incentives. Little attention has been paid so
far to ecological aspects of water quality.
Hungary No data on illegal water abstraction48
Italy
The estimates are of about 1.5 million illegal wells (Contratto Mondiale
dell’Acqua).
In eight regions (Abruzzo, Molise, Puglia, Campania, Basilicata, Calabria, Sicilia
and Sardegna), about 830 000 ha are irrigated legally while the total of irrigated
area reaches about 1.6 million ha. In the Puglia region alone, 300 000 illegal
wells are estimated, which provide for one third of the total irrigated area in that
region in 2005.
Illegal abstraction volumes tend to range between 12% and 20% of total
abstraction49
. More frequent droughts and increasing salinisation are making the
problem worse, but more intensive action by the forestry police in recent years
has had an impact on these illegal activities. Fines of more than €1 million and
criminal proceedings against more than 400 people are the result of nearly 44
46 Petya Balieva, Ministry of Environment and Water, Bulgaria, personal communication
47 This information is confidential – for internal use only.
48 Agnes Tahy and Miklos Szalay, National Institute for Environment, Hungary, personal communication
49/www.globalwaterintel.com/archive/10/5/general/truth-behind-italys-illegal-
abstraction.html#sthash.JiNQAtbt.dpuf
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 83
Member States Level of non-authorised abstraction
000 checks on freshwater-related activities carried out by the Italian forestry
police (Corpo Forestale dello Stato) in 2008.
Malta
According to Resources Ministry, current abstraction level of groundwater is
around 30 million m3/year, 7 million m
3/year more than the sustainable yield.
According to the Water Services Corporation “legal” water abstraction in 2007
was of 15 million m3, while illegal abstraction was 18.5 million m
3.
Portugal
Non-authorised abstraction is a major problem in Portugal, not only in the
agricultural sector but also in other uses. At this moment, farmers in Portugal are
doing a great effort to legalize water abstractions existing before the year 2007.
Farmer’s organizations are working together with the official authorities to
legalize these non-authorised abstractions until the end of 2014.
In 2007, in the Algarve river basin district, according to the river basin
management plan, the amount of water abstracted from groundwater bodies
should have been 71,5 hm3. However, based on orthophotomaps of the region,
the amount of groundwater abstracted was estimated at 126,72 hm3.50
The same year, the orthophotomaps enabled the detection of 4000 small dams
whereas only 1000 were licensed at that time.
In the Alentejo River Basin District only 1/3 of water abstraction (both from
surface water and groundwater) are thought to have water use titles.
Romania No known illegal abstraction51
Slovenia
No data on illegal water abstraction52
at the national level, but a specific study
was conducted in the Vipava valley where suspicions of non-authorised
abstractions were particularly high (results expected soon).
Spain
The most frequently cited reference about the extent of unauthorised water
abstractions is the 2006 report on Illegal water use in Spain prepared by WWF,
which describes the situation in 2006 as 22,000 illegal wells in contrast with
16,000 authorised ones.
However, this report does not take into account the fact that Spain is in a
transition phase after entry into force of the new water legislation of 1985.
According to the old law, groundwater was private property, whereas in the new
law all water resources are considered public domain. This means that most of
50 Sofia Batista, oprtugues Environment Agency, Water Resources Department, personal communication
51 Elena Tuchiu, National Administration "Apele Romane", personal communication
52 Jana Meljo, Institute for water of the Republic of Slovenia (IZVRS), personal communication
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 84
Member States Level of non-authorised abstraction
these abstractions are not considered illegal, but “a-legal”, i.e. in need to be
adapted to the new legislation. Approximately 43% of private abstractions still
need to be registered.
According to the National Ministry of Agriculture, unauthorised abstractions
would amount to about 5% of total water abstractions at the national scale.
In Castilla La Mancha, about 672 wells would be considered a-legal, but a large
number of them are in the process of adapting to the new legislative situation (70
to 80% of them). Same for the Upper Guadiana River Basin, where series of
inspections were carried out in 2005 on 70 % of irrigated farms that revealed that
abstractions were being made of 54,1 hm3 above the amount authorised by the
river basin authority that year (170 hm3).
Source: Update of the work from (Dworak, T., Schmidt, G., de Stephano, L., Palacis, E. and Berglund,
M., 2010. Background paper to the conference: Application of the EU water-related Policies at farm
level, 28-29 September 2010, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.), personal communication Carlos Escartín
(2014)
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 85
Annex 3: Details of EO-based
methods to monitor abstractions
1. Overview
This Annex describes in detail the EO-based methodology used to monitor abstractions summarized
in Step 2. Earth observation (EO) can supply maps of irrigated areas as well as time series of maps of
irrigation water consumption and abstracted water volumes. Both can be obtained from the same
source data and following the same initial processing steps, as shown in Figure 19 and Figure 20.
Figure 19: Overview of steps in using EO for detecting non-authorised abstractions
Note: Crop Water Requirements (CRW) can be obtained either directly from visible and near-infrared
(NIR) bands (left strand*) or through the surface energy balance from additional thermal bands (right
hand strand**).
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 86
The variation of water storage determine the irrigation requirements
Maps ofET/CWR* or ET/CWR**
Derived from the water balance. A simple approach (one layer model) is described in the FAO-56 manual.
Maps of Capillarity rise (estimated)
Maps ofRun-off (estimated)
Maps ofDeep percolation
Net irrigation water requirements
Maps ofPrecipitation
Precipitation data from
agrostations
Spatially distributedSoil Water Balance
I=ET+DP-Pp-RO-?S
Maps of variation in water storage in the soil
Water consumed at irrigation scheme
Water abstraction/Water demand
Uncertainties:-Precision of the LU/LC map-Efficiencies of the irrigation systems
Uncertainties:Efficiencies of the distribution/storage systems
Uncertainties:-Precision of soil maps(soil depth and hydraulic properties)-Knowledge of irrigation strategies (deficit irrigation?)
Figure 20: Overview of processing steps from crop water requirements (CWR) to water
abstraction
Figure 19 shows on the left hand side the pathway of processing EO images in the visible and NIR
spectral range into time series of reflectance, vegetation indices (VI) and colour composite maps. VI
maps (in particular the NDVI, Normalized Differential Vegetation Index) are the basis products for the
derivation of land-use/land-cover maps (for the identification of irrigated areas) and for the derivation
of crop coefficient maps. From the latter, maps of crop water requirements can be calculated using
further input data from agrometeorological stations, which in subsequent steps (which rely mainly on
the soil water balance in the root layer) lead to estimates of abstracted water (Figure 20). The soil
water balance brings here a large body of agronomy scientific-technic knowledge. Some linked
uncertainties to this procedure are mentioned in Figure 20. Crop water requirements can also be
obtained from a combination of all EO satellite bands, including the thermal, by using a surface-
energy-balance (SEB) based approach as shown on the right hand side of Figure 19. The Kc-VI
methods provide a daily estimate, while the SEB-based methods give an instantaneous value of
evapotranspiration. Translating this into the required daily or weekly estimate may introduce large
errors difficult to quantify (Glenn et al. 2011).
The detection of non-authorised abstractions of the first type (irrigated areas) requires land-use/land-
cover maps that allow distinguishing irrigated crops. This is accomplished by multi-temporal
classification on the basis of a time series of EO images (see sections below for details of this
processing). The temporal resolution required by water managers and commissaries for this purpose
is to have a fairly cloud-free image (<10% cloud) every 2-4 weeks from about 2 weeks before the start
of the growing season until its end.
The detection of non-authorised abstractions of the second type (abstracted volumes) requires
mapping crop water consumption over time during the growing season. This is accomplished by using
the same time series of images as above in type 1, but processing them further in a series of steps
(Figure 20) described in detail in the sections below. The temporal resolution requirement for this
purpose is slightly different from type 1 above in that one fairly cloud-free image is needed every 1-2
weeks, again from shortly before the beginning of the growing season until its end.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 87
The required time resolution for both purposes can best be achieved on the basis of a multi-sensor
constellation, integrating data from all available EO platforms. The corresponding inter-sensor cross-
calibration algorithms have been developed (Martínez-Beltrán et al., 2009) and a comprehensive
cross-calibration database has since been established.
The required spatial resolution for both types depends on the parcel size statistics in the area.
Covering at least 90% of the area is normally sufficient, which means that the current Landsat-8 type
satellites can be used in most areas. Table 8 summarises the options, taking into account the need to
always aggregate 3x3 sensor pixels (compensating for georeferencing uncertainties) in order to obtain
a stably geo-localized time series (i.e. making sure that the same pixel is in the same location in all
image-based maps) (Martínez-Beltrán et al., 2009). With the advent of Sentinel-2 (expected to deliver
operationally in 2015) parcels from 0.1 ha size can be resolved. In areas with particularly small
parcels, commercial satellites offer higher resolution, albeit at higher image and processing cost.
Sensors on-board low flying aircraft, ultralights or drones accomplish the same, while offering more
local flexibility at high cost.
Table 8: EO sensors fulfilling water managers’ spatial resolution requirements
EO satellite/sensor Sensor
resolution
Resolvable
parcel size Image cost Comments
Landsat-8 30 m 1 ha free standard
processing
Landsat-8 type
(Spot, IRS, DMC) 20-30 m 1 ha
1,000-5,000€
per 100x100
km2
standard
processing
Sentinel-2 10 m 0.1 ha free planned 2015
commercial very-
high-resolution around 1 m 0.03 ha
1,000-5,000€
per 10x10 km2
increases
processing
effort (many
small images)
2. Use of EO to detect irrigated areas
The detection of irrigated areas requires land-use/land-cover maps that allow distinguishing irrigated
crops. This is accomplished by supervised multi-temporal classification on the basis of a time series of
EO images. The multi-temporal classification functions as follows. Each crop is characterised by its
phenological curve (crop coefficient vs time during the growing season). These curves are similar
within annual crop classes with similar phenology, and thus with similar water requirements and very
different between different crop classes. This allows for attributing a characteristic curve to crop
classes like a signature and to recognise them on the basis of their signature. Most irrigated crops
belong to an easily identifiable class.
The signals from an EO satellite sensor can be converted into reflectance and vegetation indices (by
combining the various spectral bands). In particular, the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index
(NDVI) has been demonstrated to be linearly related to the basal crop coefficient (defined as the ratio
of the unstressed crop transpiration to the reference evapotranspiration, Allen et al. 1998). Therefore,
the phenological curves can also be expressed in terms of NDVI vs time.
Given a time series of EO images, they can be converted into a time series of NDVI maps. A spatial
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 88
online analysis system (SOLAP) can then “drill” through the stack of maps at any given location and
extract the phenological curve, which allows for identification of the crop class as a first guess through
analysis such as maximum likelihood, minimum distance (which is implemented in the usual software
of digital image treatment). More refinements may be necessary and then tree decision classifier may
be necessary. Identification of some irrigated wooden crops such as fruit trees, vineyard, or olives may
require additional information like orthophotos and existing land use/cover maps. The whole procedure
is not an automatic system, but still needs further corroboration by an experienced operator. It requires
precise knowledge of crops and their phenology.
The accuracy of this procedure depends on the contrast in the temporal pattern between irrigated and
non-irrigated crops, which is crop and weather dependent. But a multiannual perspective can increase
the global accuracy. Usual accuracy in semiarid areas reaches typically over 90% of precision, which
is comparable to field work accuracy.
Figure 21 shows an example of accuracy for a range of crops in the Spanish La-Mancha Oriental
aquifer. It gives irrigated surface declared by farmers vs obtained from multi- temporal supervised
classification.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Barley-2012
Maize 2011 Maize-2012
Wheat-2010 Wheat-2011 Wheat-2012
Es
tim
ate
d s
urf
ac
e (
ha
) b
y r
em
ote
se
ns
ing
Surface (ha) declare by farmer
Source: Adapted from (Garrido-Rubio et al., 2014)
Figure 21: Comparison between declared irrigated surfaces per plot by farmers and classified by
remote sensing
3. Use of EO to estimate abstracted volumes
The estimation of abstracted volumes requires mapping crop water consumption over time during the
growing season. This is accomplished by using the same time series of images as above in type 1, but
processing them further in a series of steps Figure 19 and Figure 20.
The need for irrigation water results from the difference between water inputs and water outputs. The
information required to control irrigation water requirements are described in Figure 22.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 89
=Irrigation need
Evapotranspiration (E)*
Precipitation (P)
Water runoff (Q)
Soil water storage (S)***
Information required to control irrigation need
Land use (type of crop)
Crop coefficient (Kc)**
Climate data (temperature and humidity)
Soil data (structure, texture, depth)
Soil data (structure, texture, depth)
Climate data (rainfall)
* Water transpired by crops
** Crop coefficient traducing the evapotranspiration characteristics of a crop compared to the reference
*** Water contained by soil accessible for crops
Legend: *Water transpired by crops and evaporated by soil **Crop coefficient traducing the evapotranspiration characteristics of a crop compared to the reference ***Water contained by soil accessible for crops
Figure 22: Calculation of irrigation requirements and associated information required for
calculation control
Traditionally, crop water requirements (CWR) have been expressed through actual evapotranspiration
(ET) from agricultural fields, which has been calculated by multiplying the reference ET (obtained from
agrometeorological stations) by a crop coefficient determined from tables according to the crop type
and the crop growth stage ("FAO-56", Allen et al., 1998). This generic procedure does not account for
variability of actual crop growth stage between and within parcels of the same crop.
There are two main approaches for the determination of crop coefficients and ET using EO. The first
approach consists of using the information derived from thermal images to solve a surface energy
balance or to adjust a model that calculates crop ET and simulates the Earth surface temperature.
The second approach uses satellite images in the visible and NIR spectral to calculate vegetation
indexes (e.g. NDVI) and to determine NDVI time profiles. These NDVI time profiles can be related to
crop coefficients and then to ET and water consumption.
Both approaches need also additional, non-EO data that can be provided by weather stations or
agrometeorological stations, such as wind speed, solar radiation, precipitation, humidity.
The approach based on crop coefficient derived from NDVI allows proceeding at higher spatial and
temporal resolution than the approach based on thermal bands. Thermal bands are available only in
Landsat data, with a typical spatial resolution of 100 meters, therefore resolving plots around 9 ha.
Multispectral bands to obtain NDVI are available from the majority of sensors on board of space
platforms. Typical spatial resolution ranging from 5 to 30 m. Research about the coupling among both
described procedures is currently on going.
The crop coefficient Kc is defined as the ratio of actual evapotranspiration ETc by reference
evapotranspiration ET0:
Kc=ETc/ET0(B.1)
The Kc coefficient integrates the effect of characteristics that distinguish a typical field crop from the
grass reference, which has a homogenous appearance and covers completely the ground (with its
reference evapotranspiration ET0). The values of Kc are influenced by crop type, climate, soil
evaporation and crop growth stages (Allen et al., 1998; Bailey, 1990).
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 90
There are two main possibilities to obtain Kc from satellite imagery:
(i) The direct empirical approach, based on the direct (usually linear) relationship between
NDVI and Kc.
(ii) The analytical method, relying on the application of the Penman-Monteith equation, using
EO-based estimates of leaf area index, albedo and vegetation height.
We briefly describe here the first (see Box below) and refer to (D’Urso et al., 2010) for the second and
a discussion of accuracies and validation requirements.
Kc-empirical approach: steps and equations
The dual crop coefficient approach (Allen et al., 1998; Wright, 1982), splits the total crop
coefficient into crop transpiration (Kcb) and soil evaporation (Ke):
Kc = Kcb + Ke (B.2)
The basal crop coefficient Kcb can be obtained from NDVI as shown in Eq. (B.3) (Bausch and
Neale, 1987)
Kcb*=1.36·NDVI-0.06,(B.3)
where Kcb*, the “spectral” basal crop coefficient [typical value range 0.10 – 1.15], can be
assimilated to the FAO 56 basal crop coefficient, and
NDVI is calculated from Landsat5TM and 7-ETM+ bands. [Typical range values: bare soil 0.12-
0.16; maximum NDVI value 0.91, (D’Urso et al., 2010)]
Similarly an approximation for obtaining Kc from NDVI is given in Eq. (B.4).
Kc*=1.15·NDVI+0.17,(B.4)
where the “spectral” crop coefficient Kc*[value range of 0.15 – 1.20], can be assimilated to the
FAO 56 crop coefficient, and
NDVI is calculated from red and NIR bands. [Typical range values: bare soil 0.12-0.16; maximum
NDVI value 0.91; (D’Urso et al., 2010)
Eq. (B.3) and (B.4) have been evaluated for irrigated crops in the area of La Mancha, Spain, using
NDVI measured from Landsat TM and ETM+ for high coverage herbaceous crops (Cuesta et al.,
2005). The relationships have been found to be stable and crop-independent for a wide range of
conditions (Cuesta et al., 2005).
For special cases, when no atmospheric correction method is available, Eq. (B.5) and Eq. (B.6)
offer reasonable estimations of Kcb and Kc.
Kcb*=1.15·NDVITOA+0.14(B.5)
Kc*=1.25·NDVITOA+0.20,(B.6)
where again Kcb* and Kc* are the “spectral” basal crop coefficient and “spectral” crop coefficient,
respectively, and
NDVITOA, is calculated at sensor reflectance (top of atmosphere).
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 91
Starting from the EO-based crop coefficient, the calculation of crop water requirements (CWR) or
ETc follows directly from inversion of equation B.1. The required reference evapotranspiration data are
normally obtained from agrometeorological stations (using Penman, Penman-Monteith, or Hargraves
formulas, depending on data availability, see (Allen et al., 1998)). They can also come from high-
resolution numerical weather prediction models.
In a simplified way, the irrigation water, required by a crop growing under standard conditions, is then
calculated as a function of ETc and the precipitation rate (Pn), actually infiltrating through the soil
surface :
IWR = ETc - Pn (B.7)
The full step from CWR to irrigation water requirements (IWR) is accomplished by the use of a soil
water balance (SWB) model. Soil water balance models are fundamental tools for irrigation purposes
and a physical description of the soil-plant-atmosphere continuum must be based on an understanding
of this balance (Hillel, 1998). In addition to its conceptual relevance, the practical application of the
SWB method in irrigation agriculture allow to considers the use of the water resources stored in the
soil by the crops and the benefits of the precipitation reducing the irrigation water requirements (IWR).
During a growing season, the crop water requirements (CWR) are covered by irrigation, the
precipitation retained in the root zone during the growing season and the depletion of the water
resources stored in the soil. The relative importance of each component of the water budget varies
depending on the meteorological conditions during the growing season and the crop characteristics.
Annual crops generally exhibit low soil profundities, and in semiarid areas the CWRs are mainly
covered by irrigation or occasional precipitation. In contrast, annual crops growing in semiarid areas
explore great soil profundities and almost 60% of the CWR are covered by the water resources stored
in the soil (Campos et al., 2010).
Current operational and spatialised applications of SWB models include HidroMORE (Sánchez et al.,
2010; Sánchez et al., 2012; Torres, 2010) and SAMIR (Le Page et al., 2009) and simplified
approaches such as MINARET (González-Dugo et al., 2013; Mateos et al., 2013). The accuracy of
this satellite-assisted procedure is similar to that reached by field work to determine crop coefficient,
which is widely used in agronomy since 1977, when FAO published a complete manual about this
procedure (Doorenbos and Pruitt, 1977). This manual was updated and refined by (Allen et al., 1998).
HidroMORE® is an operative model for CWR and IWR estimation integrating remote sensing and
meteorological data in the dual crop coefficient FAO-56 methodology. HidroMORE® computes the
balance at daily scale and spatially distributed. The spatial scale is only limited by the resolution of the
input images and the extension of the study area is equally limited by the extension of the satellite
images. HidroMORE and SAMIR are operative models computing spatialized estimates CWR and
IWR on large areas, based on the use of satellite images. The computation of the water budget
requires climatic data and land cover data. Irrigation is estimated from the computation of the water
budget, using hypotheses on the water management modes and especially the average water stress
level allowed. The main difference between both models is the approaches used to compute CWR.
HidroMORE assimilates multi spectral data according to the relationship between vegetation indices
and crop coefficient and SAMIR uses EO data to describe the crop development for estimating crop
coefficients according to the FAO56 method (Allen et al., 1998).
Crop water consumption refers to the water evapotranspirated by the cover and it is determined by the
procedure above indicated, by calculating evapotranspiration. IWR is the net amount of water to be
supplied by irrigation in the root soil layer that the crop requires to grow without stress.
Irrigation Water Applied (IWA) is the amount of water that is applied by the irrigation system to meet
the IWR and it depends on soil, irrigation system and meteorological conditions, mainly wind. The step
from IWR to IWA is usually performed by using an average efficiency involving all factors. For
simplified calculations an efficiency coefficient of 85% for modern irrigation system is assumed. It
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 92
means that only an 85% of applied water is beneficial for the crop. The rest of applied water will be
lost by evaporation, run-off, or percolated. Spatialised data on irrigation installations and equipment
(surface, sprinkler, pivot, drip) contribute to increasing the accuracy of IWA.
Figure 23 shows the data supplied by farmers about the amount of water applied to the crops which
are compared with the amount of water calculated by the procedure above described. This dataset
indicates a global accuracy about of 10% (Garrido-Rubio et al. 2014). Accuracies obtained from
application of METRIC in Idaho (Allen et al., 2012) are in the same range.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000Irrigation in plots
Barley-2012
Wheat-2012
Maize-2012
Wheat-2011
Maize-2011
Wheat-2010
Irri
ga
tio
n (
mm
·ye
ar-1
) s
imu
late
d b
y H
idro
MO
RE
Irrigation (mm·year-1) declare by farmer
Source: adapted from Garrido-Rubio et al., 2014
Figure 23: Comparison among amount of irrigation water applied by farmer and irrigation water
applied estimated by the methodology kc-NDVI- ETo
Finally, the step from IWA to water abstractions may involve efficiencies of conveyor systems, if
applicable (usually in surface irrigation schemes). Moreover, individual farmers’ decisions about the
water effectively applied could be different from the IWA calculated considering no stress. Figure 24
shows an example of comparison at aquifer scale between estimated abstractions (aggregation of all
individual farms) and observed piezometric values in the La-Mancha Oriental aquifer (González et al.,
2013). An overall accuracy of 10-20% has been found.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 93
Source: González et al. 2013
Figure 24: Comparison of estimated abstractions at aquifer scale with observed piezometric
level variations
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 94
4. References
Allen, R.G., Pereira, L.S., Raes, D. and Smith and M., 1998. Crop evapotranspiration: Guidelines for
computing crop requirements. Irrigation and Drainage Paper No. 56, FAO, Rome, Italy, 300 pp.
Allen et al., 2012
Bailey, J.O., 1990. The potential value of remotely sensed data in the assessment of
evapotranspiration and evaporation. Remote Sensing Reviews, 4(2): 349-377.
Bausch, W.C. and Neale, C.M.U., 1987. Crop coefficients derived from reflected canopy radiation - a concept. Transactions of the ASAE, 30(3): 703-709.
Campos, I., Neale, C.M.U., Calera, A., Balbontin, C. and González-Piqueras, J., 2010. Assesing
satellite-based basal crop coefficients for irrigated grapes (Vitis vinifera L.). Agricultural Water
Management, Volume 98, pp. 45-54.
Cuesta, A., Montoro, A., Jochum, A.M., López, P. and Calera, A., 2005. Metodología operativa para la
obtención del coeficiente de cultivo desde imágenes de satélite. ITEA : Información Técnica
Económica Agraria, 101(3): 212-224.
Doorenbos, J. and Pruitt, W.O., 1977. Guidelines for predicting crop water requirements.
D’Urso, G., Richter, K., Calera, A., Osann, A., Escadafal, R., Garatuza-Payán, J., Hanich, L.,
Perdigão, A., Tapia, J.B. and Vuolo, F., 2010. Earth Observation products for operational irrigation
management in the context of the PLEIADeS project. Agricultural Water Management, Volume 98,
Issue 2, pp.271-282.
Garrido-Rubio, J. et al., 2014. Irrigation water accounting by remote sensing: three years case study in
Mancha Oriental in two water management scales, from plot to water user association. in-press.
Glenn, E.P., Neale, C.M.U., Hunsaker, D.J. and Nagler, P.L., 2011. Vegetation index-based crop
coefficients to estimate evapotranspiration by remote sensing in agricultural and natural ecosystems.
Hydrological Processes, Volume 25, issue 26, pp.4050-4062.
González, L.; Bodas, V.; Esposito, G.; ampos, I.; Aliaga, J.; Calera, A., 2013. Estimation of irrigation
requirements for wheat in the southern Spain by using soil water balance remote sensing driven. In:
E.G. Union (Editor), European Geosciences Union | General Assembly 2013, Vienna, Austria.
González-Dugo, M.P. et al., 2013. Monitoring evapotranspiration of irrigated crops using crop
coefficients derived from time series of satellite images. II. Application on basin scale. Agricultural
Water Management, Volume 125, pp.92- 104.
Hillel, D., 1998. Environmental Soil Physics. Fundamentals, Applications, and Environmental
Considerations. Academic Press, San Diego.
Martínez-Beltrán, C., Jochum, M.A.O., Calera, A. and Meliá, J., 2009. Multisensor comparison of NDVI
for a semi-arid environment in Spain. International Journal of Remote Sensing, 30(5): 1355-1384
Mateos, L., González-Dugo, M.P., Testi, L. and Villalobos, F.J., 2013. Monitoring evapotranspiration of
irrigated crops using crop coefficients derived from time series of satellite images. I. Method validation.
Agricultural Water Management, 125: pp.81– 91.
Sánchez, N., Martínez-Fernández, J., Calera, A., Torres, E. and Pérez-Gutiérrez, C., 2010. Combining remote sensing and in situ soil moisture data for the application and validation of a distributed water balance model (HIDROMORE). Agricultural Water Management, Volume 98, Issue 1, pp.69-78.
Sánchez, N., Martínez-Fernández, J., Rodríguez-Ruiz, M., Torres, E. and Calera, A., 2012. A
simulation of soil water content based on remote sensing in a semi-arid Mediterranean agricultural
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 95
landscape. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, Volume 10, pp.521-531.Torres, E.A., 2010. El
modelo FAO-56 asistido por satélite en la estimació n de la evapotranspiració n en un cultivo bajo
estrés hídrico y en suelo desnudo, Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha (UCLM).
Le Page, M. et al., 2009. SAMIR a tool for irrigation monitoring us ing remote sensing for
evapotranspiration estimate. Technological perspectives for rational use of water resources in the
Mediterranean region, Bari: CIHEAM(Options Méditerranéennes: Série A. Séminaires Méditerranéens;
n. 88): 275-282.
Wright, J.L., 1982. New Evapotranspiration Crop Coefficients. Journal of the Irrigation and Drainage
Division, 108(IR2): 57-74.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 96
This page is left intentionally blank.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised water abstractions | 97
Annex 4: Overview of EO tools and services
Table 9: Summary of existing Earth Observation initiatives currently used or with potential to detect non-authorised water abstractions
Service
Outputs
(all spatially distributed)
End user Satellites (spectral
range) Approach
Land Use/Cover
map source
Distribution via
References Geographical
coverage Web site
SIRIUS- IWMS /
ERMOT /
HidroMORE
CWR, IWR, CWC & more
Authority, farmer
Solar Kc-VI
multi-
temporal
Earth
Observation
+ ancillary
data
webGIS (SPIDER)
Osann et al. 2013 /
Sánchez et al., 2012
many areas on 4 continents; in Spain since
1996
www.sirius-gmes.es
www.hidromore.es
MINARET CWR, CWC Authority Solar Kc-VI LPIS+Earth
Observation internal server
González-Dugo et al., 2013
Guadalquivir river basin
n/a
Idaho department
of water resources
CWR, CWC Authority Thermal +
solar METRIC
Grower declaration
Web browser
Allen et al., 2007a; Allen et
al., 2007b
Idaho & more U.S. areas
http://maps.idwr.idaho.gov/ET/Map
WaterWatch CWR, CWC Authority Thermal +
solar SEBAL n/a
direct delivery
Bastiaanssen et al., 1998
Africa (several),
Saudi Arabia, Yemen
www.waterwatch.nl
MONIDRI CWR, IWR &
more Authority solar Kc-VI
cadastral data base
web Nino et al. 2012 Italy (several) n/a
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised water abstractions | 98
Service
Outputs
(all spatially distributed)
End user Satellites (spectral
range) Approach
Land Use/Cover
map source
Distribution via
References Geographical
coverage Web site
(national project)
TOPS-SIMS CWR, IWR Farmers Solar Kc-VI Grower
declaration Web
browser
Melton et al., 2012
California http://ecocast.arc.nasa.g
ov/dgw/sims/
IrriSatSMS CWR, IWR Farmer Solar
spectra Kc-VI
Grower declaration
SMS Hornbuckle et
al., 2009
Australia (various); California
http://www.irrigateway.net/
IRRISAT CWR, IWR Farmer Solar
spectra Kc-VI
(analytic) Grower
declaration Web
browser Vuolo et al. 2013
Southern Italy (several)
http://www.irrisat.it/
SIRIUS-IFAS CWR, IWR,
input req., yield Farmer solar Kc-VI
Earth Observation + producers
webGIS (SPIDER)
Calera et al., 2013
Spain www.agrisat.es
IrriLook /FieldLook
(eLeaf) CWR Farmer
thermal +solar
SEBAL n/a web Bastiaanssen et
al., 1998 NL
http://www.waterwatch.nl/products/irrisat.html
SAMIR CWR, CWC Authority solar Kc-VI / water
balance Grower
direct delivery
Le Page et al., 2012
Morocco (Tensift)
n/a
AGRASER CWR & input
req., yield Farmer solar Kc-VI
Earth Observation + producers
web Palacios et al.
2003 Mexico n/a
TELERIEG CWR Farmer,
authority
solar + airborne sensors
Kc-VI n/a (project) Jiménez-Bello
2011 several areas ES, PT, FR
www.telerieg.net (project information)
Isareg / GISAREG
CWR farmer solar Kc-VI producer web /
webGIS Fortes et al 2004
Portugal, Argentina
n/a
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised water abstractions | 99
Service
Outputs
(all spatially distributed)
End user Satellites (spectral
range) Approach
Land Use/Cover
map source
Distribution via
References Geographical
coverage Web site
Pereira et al., 2003
Farmstar
crop state; input
requirements (cereals only)
Farmer, distributor
s
solar + airborne sensors
n/a n/a web n/a France https://www.farmstar-
conseil.fr/
CROPIO Input
requirements Farmer solar n/a n/a
Web browser/
Smartphone
n/a US, CA, UK, RU, Ukraine
https://cropio.com/
FARMSAT Input
requirements Farmer solar n/a n/a
Web browser/
Smartphone
n/a France &
global
http://www.farmsatpro.geosys-na.com
FieldLook (Eleaf)
Input requirements
Farmer thermal + solar
SEBAL+ Kc-VI
producers web Bastiaanssen et al., 1998
NL, CA, PL, Ukraine
ww.fieldlook.com
agrosat crop state general solar NDVI n/a web n/a Spain www.agrosat.info
Legend for table:
Blue = Earth Observation applications related to irrigation water abstractions Green = Earth Observation applications related to irrigation advisory / irrigation scheduling Gold = Earth Observation applications related to precision farming No colour = Earth Observation applications using additional models CWR = crop water requirements IWR = irrigation water requirements Inputs = fertilisers, pesticides CWC = crop water consumption
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to
detect and manage non-authorised water abstractions | 100
References:
Allen, R.G., Masahiro, T., Morse, A., Trezza, R., Wright, J.L., Bastiaanssen, W., Kramber, W., Lorite, I. and Robinson, C.W., 2007a. Satellite-Based Energy Balance for Mapping Evapotranspiration with Internalized Calibration (METRIC) – Applications. Journal of irrigation and drainage engineering, July-August 2007, pp. 395-406.
Allen, R.G., Tasumi, M. and Trezza, R., 2007b. Satellite-based energy balance for mapping
evapotranspiration with internalized calibration (METRIC)-Model. Journal of irrigation and drainage
engineering, July-August 2007, pp.380-394.
Bastiaanssen, W.G.M., Menenti, M., Feddes, R.A. and Holtslag, A.A.M., 1998. A remote sensing
surface energy balance algorithm for land (SEBAL). 1. Formulation. Journal of Hydrometeorology,
212-213: 198-212.
Calera, A., Osann, A., Campos, I., Garrido, J. and Bodas, V., 2013a. The SIRIUS Integrated Farm Advisory Service. Manuscript for submission to Agric. Water Management.
Calera, A. et al., 2013b. Evolución de las superficies en regadío, en el ámbito del acuífero de la
Mancha Oriental, mediante el empleo de técnicas de observación de la Tierra (ERMOT). Campaña
2013, UCLM (Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha), Albacete
Fortes P., Pereira L. and Campos A., 2004. GISAREG, a GIS based irrigation scheduling simulation
model. In: M. Kuiper et al. (Ed.) Modernisation de l’Agriculture Irriguée (Semin. Wademed, Rabat,
Maroc, Apr. 2004), IAV Hassan II, Rabat et IRD, Montpellier.
González-Dugo, M.P. et al., 2013. Monitoring evapotranspiration of irrigated crops using crop
coefficients derived from time series of satellite images. II. Application on basin scale. Agricultural
Water Management, Volume 125, pp.92- 104.
Hornbuckle, J.W., Car, N.J., Christen, E.W., Stein, T.-M. and Williamson, B., 2009a. IrriSatSMS.
Irrigation water management by satellite and SMS - A utilisation framework. CRC for Irrigation Futures
Technical Report No. 01/09 and CSIRO Land and Water Science Report No. 04/09
Jiménez-Bello, M. Á., Ballester, C., Castel, J.R. and Intrigliolo, D.S., 2011. Development and
validation of an automatic thermal imaging process for assessing plant water status. Agricultural Water
Management, Volume 98, Issue 10, August 2011, pp.1497 -1504.
Le Page, M., et al (12 authors), 2012. An Integrated DSS for groundwater management based on
remote sensing: The case of a semi-arid aquifer in Morocco. Water Resources Management, Volume
26, pp.3209-3230.
Melton, F.S. et al., 2012. Satellite Irrigation Management Support With the Terrestrial Observation and
Prediction System: A Framework for Integration of Satellite and Surface Observations to Support
Improvements in Agricultural Water Resource Management. IEEE Journal of selected topics in applied
Earth Observations and remote sensing, Volume 5, Issue 6.
Nino, P., Dono, G., Severini, S., Bazzoffi, P., Napoli, R. and Giannerini, G. 2012. MONIDRI – A
participatory IDSS for water use management in agriculture at river basin level.
Osann et al. 2013 /
Palacios, E., Martínez, M., Mejía, E., Paz, F. and L.A. Palacios 2003. El concepto de Agricultura
Asistida por Sensores Remotos, In: A. de Alba, L. Reyes y M. Tiscareño (editores), Memoria del
Simposio Binacional de Modelaje y Sensores Remotos en Agricultura México-USA, INIFAP-
SAGARPA, Aguascalientes, México, pp. 39-45Pereira et al., 2003
Sánchez, N., Martínez-Fernández, J., Rodríguez-Ruiz, M., Torres, E. and Calera, A., 2012. A
simulation of soil water content based on remote sensing in a semi-arid Mediterranean agricultural
landscape. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, Volume 10, pp.521-531.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to
detect and manage non-authorised water abstractions | 101
Vuolo, F., D'Urso, G., De Michele, C. and Cutting, M. 2013. Satellite-based Irrigation Advisory
Services: a common tool for different experiences from Europe to Australia submitted to Agric. Water
Management.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to
detect and manage non-authorised water abstractions | 102
This page is left intentionally blank.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 103
Annex 5: Background on water rights
in the EU
In each Member State, water abstraction is “regulated” more or less formally through the allocation of
water rights to different users, especially in regions where over-abstractions were identified or regions
with high risk of water stress. Controls on withdrawals are basic measures listed in article 11(3) of the
WFD.
1. The attributes of water rights
Water rights can be defined following a number of attributes related to:
Water resources used: quantity and quality of the water, the source and location;
Characteristics of use: use, location and duration; and
Administration of the right: ownership and transfer, security and enforcement (Table 10).
Table 10: Possible attributes of water rights
Attributes of
water rights Definition
Quantity The amount of water the holder of the right may abstract, in terms of volume or
maximum flow.
Quality The quality of the water to be abstracted or disposed of.
Source The specific resource (surface water, groundwater) and location from which the
right is awarded.
Timing Restrictions on the time that the right applies, i.e. times that the volume may be
abstracted.
Assurance
Some rights are absolute – 100% of supply guarantee of a certain quantity and
quality, while other rights have variable assurance of supply and quality
depending on the available resource. This can be based, for example, on
principles of priority or proportionality.
Use The specific use for which the water is abstracted (e.g. irrigation, mining, etc.)
Duration
The duration for which the holder is entitled to the rights conferred. Some rights
are permanent while other rights are authorised for a specified period of time
(from 10 to 75 years).
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 104
Attributes of
water rights Definition
Ownership and
transfer
Whether the right can be sold, transferred to another person or location, or
inherited.
Security and
enforcement
Details of the administrative body that has the legal mandate to award the
right, including the extent of that mandate.
Source: Adapted from Le Quesne et al., 2007
2. Criteria for the attribution of water rights
In some Member States such as Denmark, Germany and Ireland, the attribution of water rights is
systematically mandatory for a user to be able to abstract water. In other Member States, like in
Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Poland and Hungary, this obligation can be restricted to specific
activities or to intended volumes of abstraction or hectares of irrigated areas beyond a certain
threshold. For instance in Bulgaria abstractions of more than 10 m3 per day require a permit. In
Estonia the limit above which water permits are required is set to 30 m3 per day for surface water and
5 m3 per day for groundwater abstractions. In Portugal, depending on the surface area to be irrigated,
the water user may apply for a water license (surface under 50 ha) or to a concession title (surface
exceeding 50 ha). Similarly, depending on countries, the right to abstract water can be associated to
specific abstraction points or to defined irrigated areas. In Spain, Portugal and Slovenia water rights
that are granted for irrigation purposes are associated to a specific abstraction site and to the land
intended to be irrigated.
3. Mechanisms for the allocation of water rights
In the most frequent cases, where water resources belong to the public domain, the definition,
attribution and control of water rights are managed by public authorities or other management bodies
at different scales. In many Member States, water is considered private, but its use is publically
regulated (the owners need a permit to be able to use it). Most Member States manage water rights at
regional level, which are then further allocated at river basin level, and further down at the level of the
irrigators’ community. Water rights can therefore be owned by one or several types of stakeholders
(public, such as State, public institution, public water supplier; or private organisations, such as private
water suppliers, farmers).
The main forms of public allocation mechanisms found in the EU in the public domain include (EC,
2012; Dvorak et al., 2010):
Public allocation: the right to abstract or use water is issued by an official authority
(local, regional, river basin district (RBD)-wide or national public water authorities /
ministries, depending on the management scale), for varying durations. Depending on
the Member State, the responsibilities of allocating water rights, monitoring water
abstractions and managing land use will be given to one unique organism or to several
ones. In the latter case, the different authorities have to cooperate and share
information in order to achieve an efficient management (Figure 25).
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 105
Water userspecific water needs (e.g. 10000 m3 per year for irrigation purposes)
Authority responsible for water rights allocationdifferent levels (local,
regional, river basin district, national)
- Water resources management- Elaboration of water
management plans
Authority responsible for water abstraction
surveillance
Authority responsible for land administration
different levels (local, regional, river basin district,
national)- Official land cadaster update
Application
for water
rights
Allocation of water
rights depending on
the water
management plan
Declaration of
water
consumption
Water abstraction control:
- Analysis of water
declaration
- Organisation of field
inspections
- Penalising in case of
non-authorised
abstraction
Application for:
- Changes in
land use
- Authorisatio
n for drilling
a new well
Information
sharing
Information
sharing
Information
sharing
Authorisation
delivery
Figure 25: Schematic illustration of water governance
Note: These are key principles that are likely to vary across countries.
Traditional or customary user-based allocation: based on traditional, non-state law or
custom, water allocation is based on criteria such as timed rotation, arable land area or
flow shares. A locally respected, non-state institution such as a village council is
generally employed to regulate water allocation. This allocation mechanism is usually
confined to the beneficiaries of a local tank/pond or part of a large irrigation scheme.
Water markets: in some Member States, water rights can be legally transferred from
some users (public organisations, private companies, individuals) to others through the
exchange of a number of tradable certificates or permits, even across sectors. The
scale of this type of transfer can vary from the local level to inter-basin transfers. Many
informal water markets also exist where, for example, a seller offers water pumped from
his own well to neighbouring water users. This informal type of transaction mostly
occurs at local scale. In Spain, for example, contracts for the temporary transfer of
rights between users with a licence are possible under certain conditions. River Basin
organizations can make public offers of water rights sales to transfer them to other
users.
In the EU, there are still a number of countries where water resources are attached to land ownership
and still belong to private owners. This different legal status of water resources makes the
management and monitoring of abstractions challenging for the water authorities, which may have
difficulty identifying the different sources and overall volumes of abstractions. In Spain for instance,
both situations could be found until all water resources were declared public with the Water Law of
1985. The transition period from private ownership to the public domain extends until 2035. Another
challenge for water management can be observed in Cyprus and in the Netherlands, where certain
individual farmers may have historical rights to abstract water although water resources are
considered part of the public domain.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 106
4. Compilation of information on water rights in selected countries in the EU
Information has been collected for countries with identified risks of water shortages, high water
abstractions for irrigation and/or identified willingness to expand irrigation in a near future (Table 11).
Table 11: Overview of information on water rights for irrigation for selected countries in the EU
Member
States
Authority
responsible for
water rights
Type of water rights
Bulgaria Ministry of
Environment and
Water, Basin
Directorate and
local municipality
Extractions of more than 10 m³/day require permission.
Cyprus53
Ministry of
Interior, through
District Offices
Allocation of water abstraction rights from surface water or
groundwater relies on a permitting system, although historical rights of
use may persist.
Every year (except years with satisfactory rainfall inflow), the Water
Development Department of the Ministry of Agriculture Natural
Resources and Environment (WDD) estimates the available total water
quantities for the coming period, the water needs and prepares a
scenario for the allocation of water for the different uses for the coming
year (Drought Mitigation and Response Plan).
Farmers submit to the WDD their application for the supply of irrigation
water, and give information related to the area and type of crops they
cultivate.
Czech
Republic
Regional and
local
government
Permission for water withdrawals are required if the volume of water
exceeds a certain level (no quantitative information could be
collected).
In water balance, as adopted in state watersheds plans, there are
registered volumes of water for irrigation exceeding 6 000 to 10 000
m3 per year
54.
Denmark Local
municipalities
Permits are required for water abstractions.
53 Representative from the Ministry of Agriculture, Cyprus, personal communication
Water Development Department website. [Online] Available at: http://www.moa.gov.cy/moa/wdd/wdd.nsf/index_en/index_en?OpenDocument
54 Research Water Institute for Soil and Water Conservation, unpublished document
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 107
Member
States
Authority
responsible for
water rights
Type of water rights
Estonia Water abstraction is charged according to Environmental Charges Act
in Estonia. However in 2009, there was no water abstraction charge
for irrigation of agricultural land.
Water permit is necessary if surface water is abstracted above 30
m3/day. Water permit is necessary if groundwater is abstracted above
5 m3/day
France Department Since 1992, water withdrawals are subject to authorisation or
declaration with the prefect or department (s) concerned (s),
depending on the type of use and limits explained in the
Environmental Code (Article R 214-1, Article R 214-6 and R 214-32).
These abstractions can be limited or revoked seasonally in situations
of water shortage.
Historically, water rights refer to water flows from the river. Since 2007,
declarations and authorisations are based more often on volumes
abstracted.
Declarations and authorisations for groundwater abstraction are based
on volumes abstracted (> 1000 m3/yr).
Greece General
Secretary of the
Decentralised
Region (in which
the River Basin
District is
located)
Both the groundwater and surface water abstractions require licenses.
Approval of environmental permits is mandatory for every water
abstraction, as well as proof of ownership of the area to be irrigated .
According to the national law there are 19 categories of water rights,
grouped in five main groups. Anyone can apply for a water permit, as
long as he/she fulfills the criteria imposed by the law.
Hungary Hungarian
Environment
Protection
Agency
Under the Water Management Act water licences are needed for all
water-using activities, and approval is needed for building any
irrigation infrastructure. Both landowners and other users have equal
rights to use water. Water licenses are granted for a given quantity of
water for a given abstraction point and for a specific use. Deeper
groundwater and karstic water cannot be used for irrigation.
Abstractions of more than 500 m3/yr require a license.
Abstractions of less than 500 m3/yr require a license for households
but not for agricultural or industrial uses.
2470 irrigation licences were granted on surface waters by mid- 2014.
They are granted for maximum 5 years, and reviewed when
necessary.
The licence is given by the regional water authority depending on the
technical approval of the water directorates.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 108
Member
States
Authority
responsible for
water rights
Type of water rights
Italy Inter-Regional
River Basin
Authorities
(RBAs),
Regional
authorities and
Consortia
System of licences for water withdrawals. Different quantities allowed
for summer and winter irrigation. Mix of private and public owned water
rights. Nationally about 50% of the irrigated area makes use of water
supplied by water companies (mostly public, but some private), with
the other 50% directly abstracted by farmers.
In the case of water rights for irrigation purposes, each Consortium
(association of farmers) receives from the regional authority a certain
amount of water that has been decided by the RBAs. The Consortium
distributes this amount to its members.
Malta Water rights are still under development.
Netherlan
ds
Regional Mix of private and public owned water rights.
Under the Resource Management Act, licences are required but
individual farmers have historical rights to extract water (up to a certain
threshold for groundwater), excluding water used for drinking or
livestock. Water permits may contain a number of conditions (e.g.
volumetric controls, land titles, location of use). Occasionally water
boards deliver water to a group of farmers.
Poland Regional sub-
basin
Water is a public good. Extractions of more than 5 m³/day require
permission, which is issued for a specified period. For ground water, a
permit is also required, but land owners are entitled to ‘normal’ use
within their property.
Portugal
Portuguese
Environment
Protection
Agency
Local water
users
associations
Water resources use permits are required, under national legislation:
Law No. 58/2005 of 29 December (Water Law, which partially
transposes WFD) and Decree-Law No. 226-A/2007 of 31 May that
regulates the use of water. In this scope, water abstraction (whatever
its purpose - for irrigation, human consumption, industry or other) is
subjected to an authorization (or a previous communication), a license
or a concession depending on the use rights of the water resource
(public or private).
Authorisation is required for water abstraction of water (except when
extraction equipment has a power lower than 5 horsepower (hp) and
has no significant impact on water resources; in this case, water
abstraction only needs a previous communication).
License is required for water abstraction of public water. In the case of
water abstraction of public water for irrigation of areas higher than 50
ha, for public supply or for energy production, a concession is
required.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 109
Member
States
Authority
responsible for
water rights
Type of water rights
Romania River Basin,
control by
National
Environmental
Guard and the
National
Administration
“Apele Romane”
(both under the
authority of
Ministry of
Environment)
Irrigation
systems
managed by the
National Land
Reclamation
Agency (ANIF)
subordinated to
the Ministry of
Agriculture. The
tariff for irrigation
water delivery
established by
Government
ordinance
There is no restriction for the use of surface water providing that no
installation or low capacity installation up to 0.2 l/s is used (and only
for domestic use). In other cases, the allocation procedure is based on
water balance calculations aiming to meet the water demands of all
water users within the river basin, including the requirements for
satisfying the downstream users, such as for the servitudes
discharges.
The water reservoirs from hydro-electrical plants are used primarily for
producing energy and secondarily for irrigation.
Slovenia District Permits are required and issued for a period of 10 years.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 110
Member
States
Authority
responsible for
water rights
Type of water rights
Spain Region (intra-
regional basins)
or River Basin
Authorities
(inter-regional
basins)
The competent authority issues entitlements and use rights. Water
rights are attached to land ownership. In Spain there are currently
three different types of legal title to obtain the water use:
The legal license: a maximum period of 75 years.
The legal disposition: direct recognition of the water use by the
Water Act (groundwater abstractions less than 7,000 m3/yr).
The property title: in accordance with the repealed Act (generally
valid until 2035, but in the process of disappearing).
For irrigation, water rights are defined for a specific abstraction site
and corresponding irrigated land. They give right to a certain annual
volume of water over a certain period of time (max. 75 years).
The legal license is the general rule. The legal license is not a static
title and can be modified by the administration or at the request of the
license-holder.
As an exception to the rule, a legal disposition allows use of 7.000
m3 of groundwater in the same soil where it is extracted.
River basin authorities are responsible for the allocation of water
rights,but Water User Communities or Irrigation Communities acquire
the commitment to monitor their own water use.
The Canary Islands have a different regulation because of their
insularity. Currently it’s studying the possibility of regulating water
rights.
Water rights cannot be traded, but they can be lent under certain
conditions during a period of time and in specific situations such as
scarcity of water resources and drought, with the approval of the
competent authority.
The Water Act of 1985 created a transition period to adapt the former
private exploitation of groundwater (property title water), which is now
considered as a public resource. This transition period will last until
2035. Within this period, water owners are given the option to keep
their private rights for a certain time. The Water Register regroups
legal licenses, legal dispositions (minor groundwater abstractions) and
property titles.
European Commission - Use of Earth observation by water managers to detect and manage non-authorised
water abstractions
| 111
Member
States
Authority
responsible for
water rights
Type of water rights
United
Kingdom
Regional offices
of Environment
Agency (at river
basin level)
Right of access to the point of abstraction is required. Water
entitlement can be owned by public/private individuals/companies.
In the UK, water abstraction licences are required for quantities above
20 m3/day. Licence is usually given for 12 years and carries with it
environmental conditions. Same is applied for ground water although
consent from the Environment Agency is required before granting the
pumping license.
In 2006, Scotland introduced a risk based legislative framework to
control activities likely to have an adverse impact on the water
environment; including abstractions for agriculture. Extractions > 10
m³/day require authorisation: registration up to 50 m³/day, simple
licence if > 50 m³ and ≤2.000 m³/day, complex licence if >2.000
m³/day.
References:
Dworak, T., Schmidt, G., de Stephano, L., Palacis, E. and Berglund, M., 2010. Background paper to
the conference: Application of the EU water-related Policies at farm level, 28-29 September 2010,
Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
European Commission Final Report, 2012. The role of water pricing and water allocation in agriculture
in delivering sustainable water use in Europe.
Le Quesne, T., Pegram, G. and Von Der Heyden, C. , 2007. Allocating scarce water, A primer on
water allocation, water rights and water markets.
Literature complemented with the results from the consutation of Member States’ experts.