Navigation
Notifications
Post a comment on the text below
Fig. 2 shows the percentage of monitoring sites with threshold exceedances of pesticides in surface waters, different sized rivers, lakes and groundwater in European countries. This was used to examine threshold exceedances according to Surface Waters; Rivers, small; Rivers, medium; Rivers, large; Lakes, and Groundwater. Exceedance rates higher than 30% occurred in 15 out of 30 countries in surface waters, and in one out 24 countries in groundwater. High exceedance rates were mainly related to monitoring sites in small and medium-sized rivers.
You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.
Previous comments
Suggest to explain what are small rivers, medium rivers etc., e.g. length, water volume etc.
Exceedance rates for pesticide in surface water shall be based on the “lowest ecotoxicologically-based effect threshold”. However, looking at Annex 4 (list of used EQS values) it becomes apparent that for several pesticides (or metabolites) a precautionary value of 0.1 µg/L was used as lowest AA-EQS value (presumably based on the drinking water quality standard), instead of a truly ecotox-effect based threshold. This is the case for the following substances:
2,4,5-T
2,4-D
Ametryne
Bentazone
Chorfenvinphos
Chloridazon
Demeton-O
Demeton-S-methylsulfon
Desethyl-terbuthylazine
Dichlorprop
(2,4-DP)
MCPB
Mecoprop
Mecoprop-P (MCPP-P)
Methamidophos
Metolachlor
Oxydemeton-methyl
Phosalone
In a few countries (e.g., Italy, Germany, Luxembourg), surface water AA-EQS values were derived for some substances based on precautionary or drinking water quality standards (see national ordinances). For instance, in Italy an ordinance (Legislative Decree 172, 2015) defines that where an ecotox-based EQS value has not been set for an individual pesticide (listed in the respective table), a value of 0.1 µg/L should be used for both parent and metabolites.
As this is not in accordance with the WFD CIS guidance for establishing surface water EQS values (which should be ecotox based), we strongly propose to not use the (precautionary) value of 0.1 µg/L in the EQS exceedance calculation method for surface water, but to use the next lowest truly ecotox-based EQS value available in MSs for these substances.
Additional information as a list of pesticides exceeding the thresholds in each country can be given on the same figure or with a separate table elsewhere.
Would be interesting to know if the focus in the screening was only on pesticides active substances or if also specific biocides were included (e.g. isothiazolinone or in general actives with a high DT50 and the potential to accumulate)
Comment from German Federal State Schleswig-Holstein (repeated from 1. Key Messages):
The indicator concept was tested with a dataset derived from the WFD monitoring of the German Federal State Schleswig-Holstein. The results were:
- Surface waters: EQS exceedances were found especially in small rivers with the herbicides Flufenacet and Diflufenican, followed by the herbicide Nicosulfuron and the insecticide / biocide Imidacloprid on top of a list of 10 pesticides. Flufenacet was found in bigger rivers too, but, due to dilution, no EQS exceedances have been detected.