Post a comment on the text below

The northern countries, particularly the northern Scandinavian region and Scotland show a high proportion of water bodies in high or good ecological status. In contrast, the central European river basin districts as well as some southern RBDs show the highest proportion of water bodies not in good ecological status or potential.

Figure 2.3. Percentage of water bodies not in good ecological status in Europe’s river basin districts in 2016 <Maps from 2012 (first RBMPs)

An updated map has not been included – EEA is exploring different option on presenting the information on interactive map services. The map service should present ecological status per RBD for either the first or second RBMP with filters for the four categories (rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal waters) and by count of water bodies and by size (Length for rivers; and area for the other categories) and with pop-up windows with the results for the specific RBD. See results for map Table

Previous comments

  • mitiksar (Sari Mitikka) 26 Feb 2018 18:33:04

    You should use word Fennoscandia here instead of the northern Scandinavian region.

  • Martin Schönberg (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 27 Feb 2018 13:02:56

    The northern countries, particularly the northern Scandinavian region and Scotland show a high proportion of water bodies in high or good ecological status. In contrast, the central European river basin districts as well as some southern RBDs show the highest proportion of water bodies not in good ecological status or potential.

    This does not correspond to the figure. Figure 2.3. shows quite good results for Southern Europe but bad results for Benelux/Germany/Poland.

  • Martin Schönberg (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 27 Feb 2018 13:03:52

    Maybe it is possible to include an analysis of percentage of river km and area of lakes in GES or GEP? This picture describes the situation much better than a number of WB.

  • Martin Schönberg (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 27 Feb 2018 13:04:47

    There is no use in including figure 2.3. and the repsective text as they are not corresponding to the report's timeframe (2 RBMP).

  • WWF (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 05 Mar 2018 21:22:02

    Figure 2.3: We wondered if it would also be possible to prepare a figure that would show the picture of the state of European waters based on the size/length of the water ecosystem. Moreover, text below the figure referes to 'interactive map service' - how will the updated map feature in the printed version of the report?

You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.