Transcript WG GES proposals for amendment

MSFD monitoring
guidance
WG GES proposed amendments
and way forward
Nikolaos ZAMPOUKAS
Andreas PALIALEXIS
Georg HANKE
Drafting the MSFD monitoring
guidance
• Core drafting group led by JRC and
including DG ENV, DG MARE and some MS
and RSCs
• Extended drafting group: RSCs, ICES, EE,
FR, FI, DE, GR, IT, PL, PT, RO, NL, UK
2
WG GES proposals for
amendment
DK, DE, ES, SE, FR
231 proposed amendments
Vast majority accepted/ accommodated
Very few not accepted
Some controversial
3
Not accepted proposals
• Incorrect ones/ misunderstandings
• Asking for passages on additional subjects that are
not feasible in terms of time and resources
• Proposing changes to text that was originated from
or based on documents of the RSCs
• Adding text to the summary not corresponding to
the content of the respective chapter
• Reflections not proposing a change
4
Controversial proposals
HELCOM CORESET as a good practice for monitoring
DK proposal:
The approach of HELCOM on developing a core set of biodiversity
indicators could be highlighted as a good practice aiming to form the
basis of an indicator-based follow up system for measuring progress
towards achieving good environmental status with a full set of
operational core indicators. monitoring of these indicators by all
contracting parties and consequently to a coherent monitoring
approach in the Baltic Sea.
The CORESET project developed the set of core indicators for
biodiversity with the aims that the core indicators will be monitored
by all Contracting Parties, cover the entire convention area, reflect
or directly measure anthropogenic pressures, be scientifically sound,
be……
5
Controversial proposals
DE: proposal to eliminate text on DNA-based monitoring
Marine organisms are often hard to count. However, they consistently shed DNA in various
ways (plant parts, decay, fish slime and scales, etc.) which can be sampled, purified and
easily amplified by a PCR. Downstream analysis can either be species specific, through cheap
PCR or hybridisation techniques, or open ended, with high throughput sequencing. Machine
time and analyses are rapidly becoming cheaper. Taking samples is relatively straightforward
and protocols can be developed for opportunistic sampling. Sampling, processing and relating
to actual occurrence of the organism are investigated in many projects, in most cases in fresh
water. There is an ever increasing information resource available on the internet.
There is no restriction on the type of organism studied and it is relatively easy and cheap to
develop a species specific DNA marker, as long as their DNA occurs in the water column and a
pure sample can be obtained for validation of probes. However, due to the vast number of
marine species, particularly for components such as phytoplankton, the development of
markers for all species of the community is of questionable feasibility. The method is
particularly useful to determine the absence or presence, since the DNA concentration
depends on currents, rate of decay, size of the water body, characteristics of the species (e.g.
much higher DNA concentrations during spawning periods), etc. The collected DNA may
therefore not adequately reflect the abundance of the species. The method is therefore good
to determine species composition and occurrence of rare and invasive species. Well-designed
sampling schemes taking into account characteristics of the water body already generate
6
semi-quantitative data and experts predict that it can generate sufficiently reliable
Controversial proposals
DE: strong objection against monitoring of
genetic structure and proposal to eliminate
following text:
Genetic diversity is the basis of all biological diversity, as cited by the
CBD, which puts it explicitly in its objectives and at the centre of the
Nagoya Protocol . The definition of a GES on the genetic structure of
populations (indicator 1.3.2) offers some advantages such as to provide
information directly to the adaptive potential of a species and to infer
such information from a relatively small number of samples. The species
should be selected on the basis of their ecological importance in the subregions and the information that may be deducted from their genetic
structure. For the evaluation of GES in the different sub-regions should
be implemented indices resulting from the combination of some genetic
parameters, chosen according to the nature of the genetic marker used,
the size and consistency of the datasets analysed and taking into account
the biological characteristics of the selected species.
7
Controversial proposals
Should we start from scratch for alien species
monitoring?
“Existing monitoring programmes (e.g. for the WFD) should
be adapted to explicitly record non-indigenous species…”
ES: It seems not easy to obtain all the data needed in
relation to D2, by using the WFD monitoring. Indeed, the
vectors analysis, the spatial scale required for D2, the riskbased approach, etc, are issues that are not easy to be fit in
the WFD to monitoring scheme, which is focused on the
assessment of the quality of water bodies. We think it would
be rather better to assume that existing monitoring
programs do not properly cover D2, and thus a new
monitoring scheme has to be created for that purpose.
8
Issue to be considered by an
expert group
Monitoring of biological effect of contaminants
(8.2.1): Levels of pollution effects on the ecosystem
components concerned, having regard to the selected biological
processes and taxonomic groups where a cause/effect relationship
has been established and needs to be
monitored
Biological effect based methods are important,
but difficult to use for legally defendable
compliance checking.
9
Next steps
GES is requested to forward this guidance to
the MSCG
By 29 October the MSCG will receive:
• The proposed amendments of DK, DE, ES,
SE, FR together with the JRC response
• An updated version including the accepted
amendments
• A request for additional proposed
amendments on remaining outstanding
issues
10