Table of contents
- Draft key messages
- Executive summary
- 1 Introduction - 1.1 Scope of theme: Why care about floodplains?
- 1 Introduction - 1.2 The catchment-river-floodplain ecosystem and policies
- 2 Floodplains under pressure - 2.1 Floodplain characteristics and extent
- 2 Floodplains under pressure - 2.2 Current floodplain status in Europe
- 2 Floodplains under pressure 2.3 - Climate change and altered flood risk
- 2 Floodplains under pressure - 2.4 Hydromorphological pressures and alterations
- 2 Floodplains under pressure - 2.5 Pollution pressures
- 3 Improving ecosystem services and measures - 3.1 Ecosystem services
- 3 Improving ecosystem services and measures - 3.2 Measures
- 3 Improving ecosystem services and measures - 3.3 Examples of river and floodplain restoration
- 4 Managing from an ecosystem perspective
- 5 Conclusions and Outlook
- References
- Annex 1 European and Global Policy Context
- Annex 2 Definitions
- Annex 3 Ecosystem service overview
- Annex 4 Measures that improve services
5 Conclusions and Outlook
Floodplain conservation and restoration is necessary for achieving good ecological status of the Water Framework Directive and good conservation status of species and habitats that depend on water of the Habitats and Birds Directives. Floodplains are widely recognised as an important part of the river system, and environmental improvements in floodplain are likely necessary to improve the ecological status of rivers and conservation status of species and habitats found in the unique floodplain environment.
The path to improving the environmental condition of floodplains has been established through European policies. Specifically, the link between the Floods and Water Framework Directives is essential because it establishes the need to consider other ways of providing flood protection than traditional structural measures. Strengthening the link between River Basin, Flood Risk and Natura 2000 management plans could support achieving good conservation status for species and habitats that depend on water. Often the same measures could fulfil achieving objectives for all directives.
Exactly how much restoration is planned or needed is not clear at present partly because this cannot be extracted from River Basin or Flood Risk Management plans, and planning across the three directives does not take place. Ecosystem based management could provide a unifying concept for developing a shared approach among the Water Framework, Floods, Habitats and Birds Directives. Such an approach would also support development of a more coherent knowledgebase.
At the same time it is clear that implementation of restoration projects is complex, and balancing the many trade-offs are likely to be needed. It may be helpful to support the flood risk, river basin and protected sites management plan process with a more holistic ecosystem based analysis to support the development of long term strategies towards achieving environmental objectives.
Today, the knowledgebase linked to understanding both the floodplain conditions and improvements achieved over time is still very limited; more is needed to develop a European overview. An actual assessment of floodplain condition that also enables tracking changes over time is still needed in order to approach assessment towards the 15% restoration target. Also more knowledge is needed on the link between restoring floodplains and achieving policy objectives. Today, the knowledge base is very fragmented. While the Water Framework Directive has been instrumental in establishing the importance of hydromorphological status for achieving good ecological status in rivers, many different methods and assessment approaches are in use, challenging a consistent European overview.
-
I suggest to include "the" twice in this sentence: "and environmental improvements in THE floodplain are likely necessary to improve the ecological status of rivers and THE conservation status of species and habitats found in the unique floodplain environment."
-
"Exactly how much restoration is planned or needed is not clear at present": This sentence addresses two concepts (i.e. what MSs have planned, and what's needed to reach the targets). In my view these are two very different concepts, and I just got stuck when reading this sentence ...
-
Due to an eventually additional subchapter about floodplain monitoring, it would be good to mention here the different assessment systems of the directives, their suitability for floodplain restoration measures and the manifold approaches of floodplain monitoring....which leads to the fact that a standardized floodplain monitoring is missing (and needed for cost-effecitve development of floodplains in future).
-
there are more Directives involved e.g. drinking water see also table and comment in previous chapter (services and related policies) propose to mention some of these not stress that maintaining and restoring flood plains is not a bi- but a muilti- environmental policy target see also Annex 1 and 3
-
Include a statement on how floodplain restoration increases the ecosystem services and benefits to communities, rather than achieving targets for status
-
NI.Should also discuss the linkage with Agricultural policy and how floodplain restoration needs to be supported via ‘greening’ payments. Unlikely to meet targets unless by in achieved from present floodplain users.
-
Section starts by emphasising the importance of "floodplain conservation and restoration". Looking back at the content of the report, the emphasis is clearly on restoration of degraded/lost floodplains. Is it possible to emphasise more throughout the report that the conservation of the very few natural floodplains left is very important, e.g. with a specific example/case study box on this issue; what measures can be taken to achieve this, what are the tools? This is also relevant for policy objectives, such as the non-deterioration principle of the WFD.
-
Third paragraph, first sentence: ".. planning across the three directives does not take place". Suggest to make the formulation softer here, as there are several examples of countries where at least the FD and the WFD are treated together.
-
POLAND
2nd paragraph
we suggest to change "providing flood protection" into "providing flood risk reduction"
-
HU
Measures taken on the floodplain are often financially supported by EU funds. The evaluation process of projects is one of the platforms where decisions can be made for the benefit of floodplain rehabilitations.
-
You should also add a conclusion paragraph from Chapter 3 concerning the NWRMs and green infrastructures and nature-based solutions.
Include single quotation marks here: "Floodplain conservation and restoration is necessary for achieving 'good ecological status' of the Water Framework Directive and 'good conservation status of species and habitats that depend on water' of the Habitats and Birds Directives."