Ken Irvine – Freshwater Ecology Group, School of Natural Sciences, TCD

The value of biological data for decision making

The Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC)

Set a framework for the comprehensive management of water resources within a common approach and with common objectives, principles and basic measures

Reliance on biotic monitoring

Biological Indicators approach to determine Ecological Status

High

Good

Moderate

Poor

Bad

EQR=1

EQR=0

Status Deviation

No/minimal

Slight

Moderate

EQR= Observed value Reference value

Classboundary

High/good status

Good/Moderate status

Long-term trends (2,900km baseline). A Unpolluted, B Slight Pollution,

C Moderate Pollution and D Seriously Polluted.

Source EPA

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

9084

78

6966

58

51

57

5

11

20 19

2729

26

57 8

13 1518

14

6 4 3 2 1 2 2

1971 (a) 1981 (b) 1986 (c) 1990 (d) 1994 (e) 1997 (f) 2000

% S

urve

yed

Cha

nnel

Len

gth

Class A Class BClass C Class D

1971 1981 1986 1990 1994 1997 2000

C

han

nel

len

gth

(%

)

Based on Q-values of river invertebrates

Q-values and water quality

Seems fairly consistent since 1990

WFD monitoring-2006

White clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes,

Pearl mussel, Margaritifera margaritifera & M. durrovensis Salmon, Salmo salar

Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC)

Recent emphasis for more focussed and improved monitoring by NPWS for aquatic sites

Need to align objectives between Habitats and WFD1

Irvine, K. (2009). Harmonising assessment of conservation with that of ecological quality: Fitting a square peg into a round hole? Aq. Con. Mar. Fresh Sys 19: 365-369

Pearl mussel distribution

Pre 1970s

Longest lived animal in Ireland, >100 years

1970-1989 1990s 2005

Source: friendsoftheirishenvironment.net

A protected species under the EU Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC)

Margaritifera margaritifera population structure

Larvae rely on passing salmon as temporary host

Ref: E. A. Moorkens (1999) Conservation Management of the Freshwater Pearl Mussel Margaritifera margaritifera. Duchas, the Heritage Service, Dublin

WFD POMs

Too little, too late?

Salmon

Net benefit angling >€10 million p.a (2000)

http://www.cfb.ie/pdf/CFBMIDAPRFI_17.pdf

Minister for Industry and Commerce, Patrick McGilligan, in 1925 White Paper on the Shannon Scheme "fishing interests will not be allowed to predominate against the greater interests of power production".

1920s Shannon fishery ca 100 nets worth annual income of £20000

THE BATTLE OF TAIL RACE (http://www.limerick.ie/media/Media,3936,en.pdf)

Estimated returns, spawners and conservation limits for Irish river. Source: ICES (2009)

Atlantic Salmon: Census returns of returning adult salmon to Burrishoole, Co Mayo .

Time (years)

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

No.

ret

urns

to

trap

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Article 17 Habitats Directive Report (2008) http://www.npws.ie/en/media/Media,6136,en.pdf

Drift Netting-now banned

Salmon-declining populations

Habitat restoration

Farming

Pollan, Coregonus autumnalis

Arctic Charr, Salvelinus alpinus

Killarney Shad, Alosa fallax killarnensis

Brook Lamprey, Lampetra planeri

Other freshwater fish under pressure

Ecological standards

Howarth, W. (2006). The progress towards ecological Quality standards. J. Env Law. 18: 3-35.

Clear Need for biological data to support policies

Species and habitat management

Black-tailed skimmer, Lough Carra (courtesy L. Huxley; loughcarra.org)

Lough Carra SAC

Ten species of Odonata1

Phragmites

Cladium

Chara

Cobbles

Targeted monitoring of habitats needed

1Huxley & Irvine 2008. The Great Western Lakes: Ecology, Heritage and Management.

2McGoff. Invertebrate-habitat assoc. in the littoral and riparian ecotone of Lough Carra

2

•Setting clear objectives (eg Habitats & WFD)

•Temporal and Spatial effects

•Taxonomic levels of identification

•Quality Assurance

•Consistency of methods

•Trends and comparisons

•Statistical analysis and need for replication.

• Uncertainty

•Further testing and development

Basic Considerations for Monitoring

Temporal and Spatial variability

White, J. & Irvine, K. (2003). Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Systems. 13: 331-351.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Jan

Mar

May Ju

l

Sep

Nov

Jan

Mar

May Ju

l

Sep

Nov

Con

cent

ratio

n ( g

l-1)

Chl a and TP

0

10

20

30

40

500

to

5

5 t

o 1

0

10

to

15

15

to

20

20

to

25

25

to

30

30

to

35

35

to

40

40

to

45

45

to

50

50

to

55

55

to

60

60

to

65

Number of lakes, % of total

Nu

mb

er

of

sp

ec

ies

, %

of

tota

l

Nuphar lutea

Elodea canadensis, Lema minor

Other algae, Potamogeton natans

85 % of species occur in less than 30 % of the lakes

Sampling effort required? Most species are rareAquatic macrophytes in 570 (NILS) lakes

Source: Rippey & Dodkins

metric of the environmental factor

me

tric

of t

he

qu

alit

y e

lem

en

t

classboundary

Ecosystems are dynamic with temporal and spatial variability

Biological metrics vary across environmental drivers.

A common approach across elements is a significant challenge

Return trajectory often different from original pressure response

Interpreting the data and ecological complexity

Scheffer, et al. (1993) TREE 8, 275-279

•Uses both multimetric and multivariate approach.

•Individual “canaries” indicative of environmental change probably a naïve aspiration

•Multiple pressures largely ignored or

lacking data

•Still need for fundamental understanding

WFD classification tools (assessing dose-response relationships) have made

substantial progress

Verifying reference conditions remains a

conceptual and analytical challenge.

Reference is not, however, “Best available”

Dedicated research to support policies and monitoring procedures

Species distributions and ecology

Pressure –response relationships

Predictive models for impact and restoration

Research and communication to support monitoring

Communicating results

Scientists

Policy makers

Stakeholders

Managing large ecosystems should not rely merely on Science but on Civic Science; it should be irreducibly public in the way responsibilities are exercised, intrinsically technical, and open to learning from errors and profiting

from successes1

1Lee, K. (1993) Compass and Gyroscope: Integrating Science and Policy for the Environment. Island Press, New York

Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler (Albert Einstein)

Conditions for civic science

Trust- needs connection, respect and inclusion in decisions

Representative interests-needs network of constituent interests

Inclusiveness-created by a successful process

Fairness-needs consensus and confidence in the process

Among stakeholders and citizensInherent suspicion of Government and its agenciesRequirement of a simple messageUncertainty equated to lack of understandingDebate confusing or polarised Imbalanced influence of vested or single interests

Requires well considered and time-consuming internal and external

communication process

Uncertainty in the data affects reliability of conclusions.

Data shortage-especially from the past

Model deficiencies

Indeterminate process: highly complex, chaotic or stochastic

Uncertainty

Risk of misclassification

No estimate of quality based on sampling will equal to the true value in the underlying population (except by a lucky chance). Because of this inevitable ‘sampling error’, estimated EQR for a quality element may differ from the class that would be obtained given perfect information for that location and time period.

Ellis, J. (2006). Uncertainty estimation for monitoring results by the WFD biological classification tools. Science Report to the UK Environment Agency.

An example using European Fish Index

Risk of Face-Value Misclassification (%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

Observed EFI

Ris

k of

pla

cing

wat

er b

ody

in

wro

ng c

lass

(%

)

Ellis (2006)

Unless stakeholders appreciate uncertainty in

ecology they will have unrealistic demands for

certainty of model outputs

Key challenge for ecological classification

Data provision

Who holds the data?

State agencies

Universities

Commercial interests

Naturalists

Who funds the data?

Almost always the tax payer

Mostly the tax payer

The tax payer and industry

Charities, agencies or no-one

So, what is the problem with data availability?

Blocks to information provision

Many and Varied-real and imagined

•IT issues

•Suspicion information will be misused

•Concern about Quality Assurance

•Protectionism and paranoia

•Intellectual Property rights

•Commercial interest (e.g. IPPC licensing; OSI)

Ordnance Survey Material is supplied by permission of the Government (Permit Number 5953). Anyone wishing to reproduce Ordnance Survey Ireland material, or use it as a basis for their own publications, must obtain a licence from Ordnance Survey Ireland, for which a fee may be payable.

So how accessible is biotic data for water monitoring?

Example 1: Queensland EPA http://www.epa.qld.gov.au/register/p02735bf.pdf

Ecosystem Health Evaluation:– Tartrus Weir 18km

29th October 2009: Extensive suite of physiochemical data [NB TP of 0.2mg l-1 considered “mildly elevated”].

Invert Macroinvertebrate sampling (done quarterly)

“An ecosystem health value has been assigned to the macroinvertebrate samples. According to SIGNAL 2.iv – A Scoring System for Macroinvertebrates (Water Bugs) in Australian Rivers (Chessman, 2003). The higher the SIGNAL 2 scores the better the ecosystem health.

The signal score at this site was 4.0

http://www.epa.vic.gov.au/water/environment/default.asp

Monitoring Victoria's freshwater environment. Since 1996 Review of Env. Water Quality Monitoring …. provision of Statewide database of water quality information on the internet.

<5 minutes to get extensive data on water quality up to 10th June 2006

Hello Kenneth, Thanks for your enquiry via the Victorian Water Resources Data Warehouse.

Unfortunately we do not hold biological data on the VWRDW, however the EPA should be able to help you. I've been informed you will need to get in touch with Warwick Hoffman at the science labs at EPA Macleod, and he may be able to help you with this information.

Best regards, Steve

Response to a query within 24 hrs:

http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/monitoring/data_proj/glenda/index.html

Great Lakes Environmental Database (North America)

Data that have not been verified through the Research Data Management and Quality Control System (RDMQ) or other verification protocols will be

preliminary data. *Preliminary data may be released, upon request, by the Principal Investigators only.

Verified Data

After verification by the RDMQ system and approval by the Principal

Investigator, the data are released to the LMMB modelers at EPA's Large Lakes Research Station.

Validated Data

After validation by the PI and modelers, data released on a request-by-request basis. If only a few datasets are requested, the data will be sent via e-mail. If several datasets are requested, a LMMB Data CD or large-capacity disk will be produced and mailed.

Data Request FormgrtlakeslmmbdataLMMB Dahttp://wwwyes

Your name:

Your organization:

Your street address:

Your city, state, and zip code:

Your e-mail address:

Your phone number:

Dataset you are interested in:

Do you want the RDMQ ouput files or are you downloading .csv files? RDMQ  .csv files

How do you intend to use the data?

http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/lmmb/drform.html

Recent data

In addition to the extensive historic data that are available…researchers are working to integrate the data … into an updated database. The eventual goal is to make this database web accessible for easy browsing and downloading. Please stay tuned for progress on this front

Monitoring results: This section will contain links to the latest results from the Irish Water Framework Directive (WFD) monitoring programmes for the Rivers, Lakes, Groundwater, Transitional and Coastal Water monitoring programmes. The monitoring programme became operational on 22 December 2006.

While not all datasets will be immediately available, we aim to provide links to datasets as soon as they are published.

An electronic data exchange network will be used to speed up the flow of data and make it publicly available as soon as is feasible after the analyses are completed in the various laboratories around the country

Irish EPA. http://www.epa.ie/whatwedo/wfd/monitoring/results/

Example of using information from projects for general use

Eric Wienckowski (lakemapdata@gmail.com)

Bathymetric surveys of natural lakes and release the database as a series of PDF files.

Value: Estimating residence times

Future sampling and survey

Management and recreation

Conclusions

•Biological data essential to support policies

•Many, and often difficult questions about what, how and where data is collected

•Wealth of information from agency and other sources

•But, not always ready available, or easy to use

•All publicly funded data should be publicly available

•Communicating data and results can be time-consuming but an essential component of policy implementation (e.g Article 14 of WFD)