WFD

442 views

Published on

Assignment from the River Basin Management module

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
442
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

WFD

  1. 1. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework Directive SCHOOL OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT 7005BEPG STUDENT: Sergio Arenas Gayoso 1MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  2. 2. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework DirectiveIndexIntroduction Pag. 3The WFD in the WWRBD Pag. 3Prior to the implementation of the WFD Pag. 4The significance of the WFD Pag. 5Current monitoring in WWRBD Pag. 6Influence of the WFD on the improvement Pag. 7of water quality in the WWRBDHow the WFD has influenced in the European legislation Pag. 8related to water qualityRepercussion Pag. 13Conclusion Pag. 14References Pag. 15 2MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  3. 3. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework DirectiveIntroductionThe Western Wales River Basin District (WWRBD) represents an area over 16.000km2 with a population of about 1.5 million people. With renowned lakes and riversand coastal waters offering a wide range of activities both commercial andrecreational, this district is predominantly rural in nature. However, it is increasinglysuffering from different sources of pollution such as those which come from theagriculture, construction, forestry and tourism. Furthermore, all water bodies alsomay be at risk from physical modification (EA, 2008).Even though Wales accounted with legislation for water since Victorian times (WaterUK, 2007), a number of European laws have taken over the careful of these watersduring the last few years. Some of them, however, will be repealed by 2013 by theWater Framework Directive (WFD), which provides a common framework for all theEuropean countries and which has been designed to improve and integrate the waywater bodies are managed (Griffiths, 2002) with the objective of achieving goodqualitative and quantitative status of all water bodies by 2015.Thus, having chosen the WWRBD, the impacts (both positive and negative) Europeanlegislation has had on water quality in a historical, present and future context havebeen assessed, with particular emphasis on the effectiveness of the WFD in this RiverBasin.The WFD in the WWRBDThe Directive 2000/60/EC or in other words, the WFD was adopted in 2000 by theEuropean Union in order to establish the management, protection and analysis ofwater bodies and aquatic ecosystems as well as setting out the targets to achieve ina 15 years period (Irabien et al, 2008). In addition, the WFD has also set theprocedures and the organization about the management of these water bodies at theriver basin level (Ireson et al, 2006). 3MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  4. 4. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework DirectiveOverall, within the EU members and in particular for the WWRBD, the WFD hasintroduced important changes related to environmental principles. Thus, due to theDirective, it becomes necessary to recognize the aquatic biota for assessing thewater bodies and also it has established ecological objectives taking into account theEuropean legislation (Logan and Furse, 2002). Therefore the water bodies need toachieve a good ecological status, so to speak, without significant changes from initialconditions (EC, 2003).Another important principle is the fact of public participation as is an issue seen asnecessary for a transparency philosophy (Alvarez-Guerra et al, 2010).It could be said that, regarding past, this Directive it is marking a new period in thedevelopment of European water legislation and this is basically because of itscomplete approach to river basin and water management (Kaika, 2003).Considering a first period started in 1975, based on the protection of drinking waterand its quality standards, a second one (1991) focus on emission levels as atechnique of achieve quality standards (Urban Wastewater Management Directiveand the Directive for Integrated Pollution and Prevention Control), the WFD has beenconsidered crucial as it introduces monitoring as the most important tool for theDirctive’s success (Martins et al, 2009).Therefore, regarding WWRBD, the fact of addressing the implications this Directivehas on monitoring requirements has meant a great challenge. Thus, the transitionfrom well-known, controlled and established monitoring networks to those thatinvolve a holistic approach to water management is not being an easy task.Prior to the implementation of the WFDBefore the WFD was implemented, Wales in general and WWRBD in particular havehad the monitoring process divided into three different management points of view:quality, quantity and physical structure. 4MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  5. 5. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework DirectiveSince 1970, water bodies have been monitored with the General Quality Assessment(GQA) which consists of monthly spot monitoring on stretches of water with flowsover 1 m3/s (EA, 1997).Thus, during the 1990’s and 2006, thousands of sites received grading and weremonitored for chemistry under the GQA in the WWRB (DEFRA, 2007). From 2006on, the GQA and the WFD were applied concurrently. In 2011, the EnvironmentAgency monitored only for the WFD (EA, 2012).Apart from the implementation of the GQA, another scoring process has taken part.It is known as BMWP so that set a biological classification system according to thesensitivity to pollution (Logan, 2002). This process, however, is nowadays calls RiverInvertebrate Prediction and Classification System (RIVPCS). Only in 2000, about5000 sites were monitored with this system whilst this number dropped to less than3000 when conducted with GQA and WFD concurrently (Collins et al, 2012).The Fish Identification Scheme (FIS) was adopted in 1994 so that investigate qualityof rivers (Logan, 2002)It is seems that, before the WFD, there were so many different systems formonitoring and managing but without an integrated approach. It meant, as Logan(2002) stated, that the networks offered poor information about the interactionsamong fundamental aspects in management such as water quality, quantity andphysical structure. Thus, the change in approach, several technical challengesrequired to be overcome regarding monitoring due to the WFD (UKTAG, 2005).The significance of the WFDIn 2006, the WFD was implemented in the WWRBD. Even though it seems relativelyrecent, the first cycle in river basin planning has been already done and completedand it is also feasible and helpful to control the progress that was made in monitoringsince the Directive has been working during the last years.Thus, it is clear how important is monitoring for the success of both the WFD and theWWRBD in this case. 5MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  6. 6. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework DirectiveWith the WFD an integral and complete overview of the water bodies will be carriedout as the monitoring process is supposed to be more detailed and has widerobjectives with regard to the past.It is worth to mention that the WFD has implemented three kind of monitoring:surveillance (in order to investigate the overall waters status either in a catchment orsub-catchment), operational (to evaluate whether the water bodies at risk previouslydefined with the surveillance monitoring, fail or not the WFD objectives) andinvestigative (further investigation will be required in case of unknown reasons forfailing good status) (EC, 2000).However, as the WFD has set out different objectives it has brought about differentnumber and intensity of sampling as well as different locations (Artiola and Warrick,2004). In fact, for each location, different monitoring may be required.On the other hand, the Directive fails when it needs to define the method of judgingrisk. Thus, neither the WFD nor the documents which go with it explain how to do it,which leaves unclear many questions (M3, 2011).Therefore, the evaluation of risk depends on expert judgment and high level ofunderstanding of the processes that establishes the status of the water bodies (EC,2003). This is an important issue because it may influence frequencies and numberof monitoring stations, in other words, it becomes necessary the specification of whatlevels of risk are required and theirs precision as it may mean little cost effectiveapproach (EC, 2000).Current monitoring in WWRBDIn 2007, data from surveillance and operational monitoring in the UK were submittedto the EC. The data and the RBMP for the WWRBD are useful in order to review themonitoring networks.The principal problems identified in this River Basin are diffuse pollution fromagricultural sources and point source pollution from the water industry (EA, 2009). In 6MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  7. 7. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework Directivefact, currently monitoring is used to confirm failures and their reasons for failing. Italso identifies measures (EA, 2012b). Even though the WFD allows inferringinformation from water bodies with similar characteristics it is still not clear whereand when can be done. Thus, in this part of Wales there is a lack of informationabout the decisions are both reached and informed.Influence of the WFD on the improvement of water quality in the WWRBDRegarding the above and according to the EA (2008) an important number ofenvironmental outcomes are to be achieved with the implementation of the WFD inthe WWRD.Thus, by encourage a better rural land management the drinking water resources willbe protected and groundwater will suffer less pollution.The directive also aims to reduce the impact of building and transport on the waterbodies in order to protect and restores water habitats and avoid surface water runoffand therefore preserve drinking water supplies and bathing areas. It will besupposed to be carried out by using Sustainable Drainage Systems, Sustainablemanagement of surface water as the WFD considers both pressures on water bodiesand pollutants in groundwater.Another point is the fact of securing amounts of water, making sure the waterenvironment is not degraded as a result of growing population which will bring aboutinvestigations in case of impact of abstractions in identified water bodies.The WFD tries to improve wildlife habitats by removing, for example, barriers tomigratory fish and eels. It is also worth to mention that, in order to meet Natura 2000objectives by 2015, code of conduct as well as settlement of marine protected areasalong with plans and programs on invasive non-native species are to beimplemented.Finally, by addressing localized sources of pollution, especially those which comefrom industrial and agricultural sources is expected to avoid and protect water 7MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  8. 8. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework Directivesupplies from further pollution, emphasizing the importance of organic pollution andexcess of phosphorous.With all these actions the achievement of significant outcomes for the environmentacross the WWRBD by 2015 will be allowed. Thus, the results of this works willmean an improvement in 27.7% of rivers (by length), achieving good or high status.This actually represents 1027 km of river, over 3326 km2 of coast, 11 km2 of estuary,1.15 km2 of lakes (12100 km2 of aquifer outcrop in total). 24 groundwater bodies withgood status are also expected by 2015. However, around 14% of natural rivers (bylength) have yet to be assessed.Thus, to date, the main achievements in the WWRBD under the WFD are thefollowing (EA, 2009):13% of surface waters are going to improve for at least one biological, chemical orphysical element. It means an improvement of 900 km of the river network. Yet, 59%of assessed surface will be at good biological status by 2015.On the other hand, 36% of surface waters are going to be at good or betterecological status (Charts 1-4) and 60 % of groundwater will be at good status by2015.How the WFD has influenced in the European legislation related to waterqualityStarting with the Bathing Water Directive (BWD), and in order to follow analphabetical order, this has established the limits of microbiological and chemicalvalues in order to protect the public health in bathing waters which are then classifiedinto four categories such as excellent, good, sufficient and poor.Obviously, it seems that such classification will be an easier and better way tounderstand how is the quality of the water bodies which is something used to beunnoted. At least there will be a target to achieve since the bathing water must be“sufficient” by 2015. Thus, after generating the first list of bathing waters under thisDirective in 2008, the water profiles for all bathing waters was established in 2011(EA, 2009b). 8MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  9. 9. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework DirectiveCharts 1-4. Ecological status/potential of surface water bodies now and in 2015 (1-2);Biological status/potential of surface water bodies now and in 2015 (3-4) (EA, 2009). 1 29% of water bodies are at least good 2 36% of water bodies will be at least ecological status/potential now good ecological status/potential in 2015 High Good Moderate Poor Bad High Good Moderate Poor Bad 6% 0%0% 5% 0%0% 29% 36% 65% 59% 41% of assessed water bodies are at 49% of assessed water bodies will be at 3 4 least good biological status in 2015 least good biological status now High Good Moderate Poor Bad High Good Moderate poor Bad 11% 1% 10% 9% 1% 10% 31% 37% 41% 49%Furthermore, the directive has been useful for water company discharges withregard to sewage works and therefore, it has meant and improvement for theenvironment as well.Apart from that and according to the EA (2010), the target may be achieved by 2015since 90% of all bathing water in the WWRBD met the standards required for waterquality in 2010. However, throughout the current year (2012) a monitoring programwill be carried out for a four year classification (EA, 2009b).On the other hand, the BWD needs to be simpler and should be adapted to theexperience and developments its implementation has caused and also it would benecessary that this Directive ensured compatibility with the WFD (DEFRA, 2002).Next directive is Biocidal Products Directive which may provide a high level ofprotection for people, animals and the environment from the presence of biocideproducts in water (EA, 2009b). 9MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  10. 10. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework DirectiveEven though this Directive was implemented on the WWRBD in 2001, the review ofthe list with around 800 defined active substances has not been completed yet whichhas led to delay the review period expected to finish by 2014. Therefore, it meansthat from 2001 to nowadays, everyone may continue to market biocide productscontaining such existing active substances (Businesslink, 2010).The Dangerous Substances Directive, basically aims either to prevent or reducetoxic substances (classified into two lists depending whether they are highly toxic –list I- or less severe –list II-) in surface waters.A positive impact may be related to the fact that it becomes necessary a greatercontrol of this kind of substances in water which is highly required in the WWRBD asthe waters would meet the existing standards of this Directive but might not meet thenew standards once the WFD takes over the DSD by the end of 2012 (EA, 2009b).Maybe, one of the most relevant legislation in water quality under the effects of theWFD is the Drinking Water Directive (DWD). The current Directive (98/83/CE)protects public health by making sure that the drinking water meets the standardsestablished for both drinking and use in food and drink manufacture.Overall, the DWD has a significant impact on the companies of water services sincethey have had to improve their techniques and methods in order to supply drinkingwater with good quality standards (Kramer, 2000). It could be said that, due toamount of waste water being used for drinking water before the 80’s there was anincreasingly concern with the entering of bacteria and toxic substances into thenetwork (CEC, 1980).Thus, in the WWRBD in particular, the drinking water has improved substantiallybetween 1990 and 2002 thanks to the guideline set out by this Directive (Kramer,2000). However, according to the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) (2011), furtherimprovements are required during the following years as 28% of the samples takenfrom consumers taps were of suspect quality, considering the DWD standards and14% of them showed a potential hazard to human health due to the E.coli.Another Directive is the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive. So to speak,authorities are responsible for assessing proposals which may have significant 10MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  11. 11. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework Directiveimpacts on water bodies and therefore accomplish with the environmental objectivessettled (EA, 2009b).Because projects permissions are under the Town and Country PlanningRegulations 1999 in Wales, this might lead to delays in many projects as they shouldbe supervised by experts which is positive unless there were either political interests,with a consequently loss of objectivity, or private companies which would increasethe budget of the project.On the other hand, it becomes necessary an environmental control in order to bothprevent and minimize the risk of environmental impacts in the water bodies causedin the past but with influence now and in the future.With the Freshwater Fish Directive is not only to be protected the biodiversity in bothrunning and still waters but also those water bodies which are considered as suitablefor sustaining fishing, setting physical and chemical minimal values, at least until2013 since the WFD will take over this Directive.Since this Directive established the quality criteria such as guidelines, analysismethods and frequency for sampling (in those water classified by DEFRA), it has ledto an improvement in the management and quality of the waters in the WWRBD.However it could be affected by the WFD in case of new techniques, methods andreferred values were set, something that will not be unnoted by the stakeholders asfor example industries and sewage treatment plants that discharge to the designatedwaters (EA, 2009b).The Directive which was created in order to protect groundwater from dangeroussubstances was the Groundwater Directive.However, even though this Directive could deal with this aspect, the WFD will takeover it in 2013 since there was a lack of understanding about how actually theGroundwater Directive. Thus, prevention measures could exclude the consequencesof dangerous substances from authorized direct sewage if they cannot be preventedfrom either a technic point of view (of designated authorities) or high cost of removalmethods. 11MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  12. 12. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework DirectiveThe Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (IPPC), regarding waterquality, forces operators to have a permit and they must use best availabletechniques to prevent emissions to water or, reduce them to an acceptable level (EA,2009b).This legislation has a positive aspect and helps deliver the WFD objectives to theWWRBD in a number of ways, including, for example, objectives for priorityhazardous substances (cease or phase out discharges, emissions and losses) andby minimizing other releases from major installations.Another directive which has had a significant impact is the Nitrates Directive. Itprotects water quality against nitrate pollution from agriculture. In Wales discreteareas of land have been designated as Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZ), where thesurface and groundwater bodies could contain 50 mg/l of nitrate. They must bemonitored every four years for eutrophication and nitrate levels (EA, 2009b).Currently about 3% of land is designated as NVZ in the WWRBD. The next review isexpected to be implemented in 2013 (EA, 2011). However, 11% of the groundwaterbodies are at risk of failing to meet the WFD objectives due to nitrate pollution(Rivett, 2007).It seems that this directive benefits the public and water companies if high nitrate is aproblem in waters that are abstracted for drinking water. Where the ecology of thewaters is protected by a reduction in nitrates, the people who use those waters forrecreation, such as anglers, can benefit.However it has brought problems as well as the amount and timing of application ofchemical fertilizer, manure and slurry to land in NVZs is tightly restricted. Besides,farmers are required to keep detailed records and risk maps for their farms and theywould need economic support as the compliance with the ND could be costly (WAG,2011). So many farmers could not meet the norm. In fact, In May 2009 the UK wasgranted derogation on the Nitrate Directive allowing some farmers to increase theamount of manure spread on their land (WAG, 2011b).It is worth to mention the Shellfish Waters Directive as it establishes the qualityparameters to support shellfish life and growth setting physical, chemical andmicrobiological water quality requirements. 12MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  13. 13. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework DirectiveAs in the freshwater fish Directive, the guidelines, analysis methods and frequencyfor sampling could be affected by the WFD in the WWRBD due in 2013, which maycomplicate the processes in some cases and lead to misunderstanding in others(EA, 2009b).Finally, the Surface Water Abstraction Directives is focus on the quality of drinkingwater which comes from water abstracted in the surface (for example, rivers, lakes,etc.), making sure it satisfies certain guidelines before the water is put into publicThe WFD has affected positively in combination with this Directive, thus, by using theDrinking Water Protected Areas, about 500 have been established for surface watersin WWRBD (EA, 2009b). In fact, this Directive may be supported by the UrbanWaste Water Treatment Directive in the sense that a higher control of waste waterfrom homes and industry are required in order to identify those areas which may beaffected by direct discharges.RepercussionEven though it was released a draft for the water legislation by the EC in 1996 it didnot alter the fact that the response for radical changes implied several problems atpolitical, economic and social levels which obviously may affect the way objectivesare reached (Woolcock, 1998).Thus, having seen how the WFD has impacted on the European legislation alreadyimplemented in this river basin, it is no surprise that, stakeholders and theauthorities, found it very complex to deal with these changes and implement theminto their water policies (Swyngedouw, 2000). In fact, the WFD recasts therelationship between political, physical and administrative limits, turning this into acomplicated issue.Therefore, according to Kaika (2003), both the Chemical Industry and theAgricultural Sector have been heavily affected from three points of view: hazardoussubstances (the need to control them), cost-incurring and short implementation 13MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  14. 14. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework Directivetimeline which has also affected negatively to Local Authorities. Hence, the industrymay accept that diffusion pollution is a waste of resources but also a loss to thefarms, but it thinks that this problem should be faced by educating farmers (aboutpesticides use) and with primary resource management (Tompkins, 2000).ConclusionEven though Wales accounted with legislation for water since Victorian times, anumber of European laws have taken over the careful of these waters during the lastfew years.Some of them, however, will be repealed by 2013 by the WFD in order to meetrigorous objectives so that achieve a good quality status for all the water bodies inthe WWRBD.Thus, the WFD has meant significant changes to the way the river basins in generaland the WWRBD in particular are monitored and managed as new concepts havebeen introduced. Hence, every water body needs to be monitored, no matter thetype, with a more complete and holistic approach and taking into account the costeffectiveness. Unfortunately, a number of water bodies have been identified as beingat risk of failing the Directive’s objectives. It brings about the fact that there isrequired expert judgment which could affect the monitoring process which may implydifferent methods in different areas.However, there is no balance in biological monitoring hence more research shouldbe done on the relationships between stressors and biotic response.Two more important concepts have been incorporated with the WFD: more detailedecological targets related to anthropogenic impacts and the innovative idea of publicparticipation in decision taking related to the transparency principle.On the other hand, the fact of changing current legislation has brought aboutimportant problems mainly for the industry (Chemical) and the Agriculture sector aswell as Local Authorities which have found it difficult to deal with it in a relativelyshort time. 14MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  15. 15. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework DirectiveReferences  Alvarez-Guerra, M, Canis, L, Voulvoulis, N, Viguri, J.R, Linkov, I (2010) Prioritization of sediment management alternatives using stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis. Science of the Total Environment 408, pp. 4354-4367.  Artiola, J, Warrick, A (2004) Sampling and data quality objectives for environmental monitoring. In: Artiola, J, Pepper, I, Brusseau, M (Eds.), Environmental Monitoring and Characterization, pp. 11-27.  Businesslink (2010) Available at: <http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/ruDetail?itemId=1084825159&type=RE GUPDATE> [Accessed 26 October 2011].  Collins, A, Ohandja, DG, Hoare, D, Voulvoulis, N (2012) Implementing the Water Framework Directive: a transition from established monitoring networks in England and Wales. Environmental science & policy 17, pp. 49-61.  Council of the European Communities (CEC) (1980) Directive relating to the quality of water intended for human consumption (80/778/EEC). Official Journal L229.  DEFRA (2002) Proposal for a directive of the European parliament and of the council to revise directive 76/160/EEC concerning the quality of bathing water partial regulatory impact assessment. Available at: <http://archive.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/water/waterquality/bathing/document s/partial-ria.pdf> [Accessed 26 October 2011].  DEFRA (2007). Available at: <http://archive.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/environment/inlwater/iwquality.htm> [Accessed 06 February 2012].  Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) (2011) Letter to Minister – Wales. Available at: <http://dwi.defra.gov.uk/about/annual-report/2010/index.htm> [Accessed 02 November 2011].  Environment Agency (EA) (1997) Environment Agency Programme for the Monitoring of Water Quality. Part 2. Design of Monitoring Programmes for General Quality Assessments.  Environment Agency (EA) (2008) Water for life and livelihoods. A consultation on the Draft River Basin Management Plan Western Wales River Basin District.  Environment Agency (EA) (2009) Water for Life and Livelihoods: River Basin Management Plans Western Wales River Basin District.  Environment Agency (EA) (2009b). Water for life and livelihoods. River Basin Management Plan Western Wales River Basin District. Annex F: Mechanisms for action. 15MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  16. 16. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework Directive  Environment Agency (EA) (2010) Bathing Waters working in partnership in England and Wales. Available at: <http://publications.environment-agency.gov.uk/PDF/GEHO1010BTDR-E-E.pdf> [Accessed 23 November 2011].  Environment Agency (EA) (2011) Nitrates Directive. Available at: <http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/regulation/31901.aspx> [Accessed 23 November 2011].  Environment Agency (EA) (2012). Available at: <http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/research/planning/34383.aspx> [Accessed 6 February 2012].  Environment Agency (EA) (2012b) Available at: <http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/research/planning/33106.aspx > [Accessed 07 February 2012].  European Commission (EC) (2000) Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliment and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities.  European Commission (EC) (2003) Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) Guidance Document No. 7: Monitoring under the Water Framework Directive. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, ISBN: 92-894-5127-0, ISSN: 1725-1087.  Griffiths, M (2002) The European Water Framework Directive: An Approach to Integrated River Basin Management. European Water Management Online Official Publication of the European Water Association (EWA). Available at: <http://www.ewaonline.de/journal/2002_05.pdf > [Accessed 19 October 2011].  Irabien, M.J, Cearreta, A, Leorri, E, Gómez, J, Viguri, J (2008) A 130 year record of pollution in the Suances estuary (southern Bay of Biscay): implications for environmental management. Marine Pollution Bulletin 56, pp. 1719-1727.  Ireson, A, Makropoulos, C, Maksimovic, C (2006) Water resources modelling under data scarcity: coupling MIKE BASIN and ASM groundwater model. Water Resources Management 20, pp. 567-590.  Kaika, M (2003) The Water Framework Directive: a new directive for a changing social, political and economic European framework. European Planning Studies 11, pp. 299.  Kramer, L (2000) EC Environmental Law. Sweet and Maxwell: London.  Logan, P (2002) Ecological quality assessment of rivers and integrated catchment management in England and Wales. Journal of Limnology 60, pp. 25. 16MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12
  17. 17. Western Wales River Basin District Evaluation of the European legislation throughout the time under the Water Framework Directive  Logan, P, Furse, M (2002) Preparing for the European Water Framework Directive- making the links between habitat and aquatic biota. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 12.  M3 (2011) Monitoring Data Assessment Report: Application of Integrative Modelling and Monitoring Approaches for River Basin Management Evaluation. Available at: <http://www.life-m3.eu/fileadmin/M3- life/downloads/guidelines/Monitoring_Data_Assessment.pdf > [Accessed 08 February 2012].  Martins, F.A, Janeiro, J, Gabriel, S, Venancio, A, Neves, R (2009) Integrated monitoring of South Portugal water bodies: a methodology towards WFD. Water Science and Technology 60, pp. 1979-1988.  Rivett, M.O, Smith, J.W.N, Buss, S.R, Morgan, P (2007) Nitrate occurrence and attenuation in the major aquifers of England and Wales, Quarterly Journal of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, 40, pp. 335-352.  Swyngedouw, E (2000) Authoritarian governance, power and the politics of rescaling, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 18, pp. 63-76.  Tompkins, J (2000) Diffuse Pollution, in Water Framework Directive Conference, The Barbican, London, 7 November 2000: ice magazine, EA and Water UK.  UK Technical Advisory Group on the Water Framework Directive (2005) Guidance on the Selection of Monitoring Sites and Building Monitoring Networks for Surface Waters and Groundwater. TAG Work Programme 12 a) Monitoring Networks.  Water UK (2007) Water companies and the law. England and Wales. Available at: <http://www.water.org.uk/home/policy/positions/legislation> [Accessed 16 November 2011].  Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) (2011) Press Release. NVZ grant helps Welsh farmers. Available at: <http://wales.gov.uk/newsroom/environmentandcountryside/2011/110128nvzgrant/?l ang=en&ts=1> [Accessed 09 November 2011].  Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) (2011b) Information for Occupiers. Available at: <http://wales.gov.uk/topics/environmentcountryside/epq/waterflooding/nitratezones/o ccupierinformation/?lang=en> [Accessed 09 November 2011].  Woolcock, M (1998) Social capital and economic development: toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework, Theory and Society, 27, pp. 151-208. 17MSc WEE-7005BEPG River Basin Management School Of The BE - JMU 2011-12

×