Navigation
Notifications
Post a comment on the text below
Fig. 2 Percentage of monitoring sites with threshold exceedances of pesticides in surface waters, different sized rivers, lakes and groundwater in European countries, 2013 – 2019.
Note:
n.d. = No data; In brackets: Total number of reported monitoring sites.
The percentage of exceedance rates was calculated based on the number of reported monitoring sites with exceedances, divided by the total number of reported monitoring sites. River size could not be assigned to all monitoring sites (so total surface waters does not equal the sum of lakes plus large, medium and small rivers). This issue mainly affects Italy and Spain.
You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.
Previous comments
Clarity is needed in this table, and throughout, if the results refer to a 6 year period or 6 x 1 year periods. E.g. 13% of surface waters in Austria above the threshold - this could be 2.1% of rivers each year, (but always different rivers for each of the 6 years), or 13% of rivers (but the same rivers) each year
The use of the “lowest ecotoxicologically-based effect threshold” for an EU-wide assessment will lead to a worst-case picture, which does not reflect the national situation in MSs with regard to exceedance of national EQS values. This may be confusing for country stakeholders and citizens that know the national reporting on EQS exceedances in their countries. In addition, high exceedance levels at EU level may then not be used to trigger actions at MS level, as there the level of EQS exceedances calculated with the national EQS may be acceptable.
Alternatively, the EQS exceedances can be calculated for each country with the respective national EQS value.
The use of the “lowest ecotoxicologically-based effect threshold” seems logic for an EU-wide assessment since the overview should in fact be based on harmonised background values, if the values are chosen country-specific, the picture is not very meaningful.
We strongly support the comment given by Volker Laabs. Our main concern is the fact, that indicator like this is not in line with national classification systems where national EQS are being used.
Comment on Slovenian data:
We report 11 lakes through WISE. On three (3) lakes we do not measure pesticides, since there is no pressure identified. So the result for Slovenian lakes should state 36% (11). Data should be corrected accordingly.