Post a comment on the text below

A closer look at the change in quality elements shows some improvement (Figure 2.7). The improvements are seen in all the most commonly used Biological quality elements (BQEs) in rivers, and in phytoplankton in transitional waters, but is less clear in phytoplankton in lakes and benthic invertebrates in coastal and transitional waters. For phytoplankton in coastal waters, there is even a slight deterioration.

Most of the changes are not reported as consistent, but are rather due to changes in methodology. However, many countries have not reported on consistency, so it is unclear how the changes should be interpreted.

Figure 2.7. Ecological status or potential for major biological quality elements in surface waters in the first and second RBMPs.

Notes: The numbers in parenthesis are the number of classified waters bodies that are classified for the single biological quality elements and that are comparable between the two cycles of RBMPs (WISE evolution types nochange, change, changecode).

Source: Preliminary results based on WISE-SoW database including data from 25 Member States EU28 except Greece, Ireland and Lithuania).

Further and detailed information on change in ecological status and status of quality elements from first to second RBMPs is available in WISE

·         Ecological status by category in first and second RBMPs graph*

·         Ecological status by category and Member States in first and second RBMPs graph* -

·         Ecological status by main quality elements by category in first and second RBMPs table* & graph*graph2*

* draft dashboards;

Previous comments

  • The Netherlands (invited by kristpet (disabled)) 12 Feb 2018 13:31:29

    “A closer look at the change in quality elements shows some improvement (Figure 2.7). The improvements are seen in all of the most commonly used Biological quality elements (BQEs) in rivers, and in phytoplankton in transitional waters, but is less clear in phytoplankton in lakes and benthic invertebrates in coastal and transitional waters. For phytoplankton in coastal waters, there is even a slight deterioration.” It has to be admit also that the status for phytoplankton and macro-invertebrates deteriorates, while fish is equal. Due to different definitions, no clear picture can be given from macrophyte/phytobenthos/etc. Only when you look at different categories and parameters, some combinations show an improvement.

  • voet (Jan Hendrik Voet) 26 Feb 2018 14:14:29

    BE-FLA (RV): Figure 2.7 Notes

    Changes have been indicated by MSs, but do not necessarily mean significant changes.

  • scheidand (Andreas Scheidleder) 27 Feb 2018 18:08:22

    (AT): 2nd sentence

    For RW benthic invertebrates there is no improvement in fig 2.7?!

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