Classification

1. Classification Monitoring, assessing and classifying the environment

2. RBMP Why we need to classify • Provides information on the environment’s quality to the Scottish public • Classification allows us to define targeted objectives for the RBMPs • We have to report results to the EU

3. Ecostat How was classification devised? Increasingcontrol Increasingcomparability

4. HIGH GOOD MODERATE POOR BAD Objectives and state of the water environment in Scotland • No deterioration • Improve to Good Status by 2027 • Protected Areas R e s t o r e

5. What is classification? • All Scotland’s baseline water bodies have to be classified • Classification based on ecological, chemical and hydromorphological data • WBs will be classified as High, Good, Moderate, Poor or Bad status (GEP) • Large emphasis on ecology • Classification informs the setting of objectives

6. Priority substances & other dangerous substances Nutrients Temperature pH Oxygen Banks Shore/riparian zone Bed What are we looking at? Water flows & levels Toxic pollution Alien species

7. What do we do where?

8. How we monitor and classify? • Risk-based, in response to pressures • Good spatial extent 3 types of monitoring • Surveillance – long term change • Operational – sites at risk • Investigative – pollution incidents or intensive to improve confidence • REVIEWED ANNUALLY

9. Grouping • Grouping – why? • Have to classify all water bodies; can’t afford to monitor them all • How were the groups created? • Based on risk, pressure profile and typology. Each group has monitoring in and these classification results used to classify the group

10. What’s in classification? • Then for each final box, varying numbers of parameters below • Type of parameter varies, depending on the water category

11. One out all out • What are the problems with this approach? • Negative ratchet – you can only fail with this system; two goods don’t equal a bad • The more we monitor, the more likely we are to get a fail • Are there any advantages? • Simple and transparent system • Will concentrate SEPA’s (and the Government’s ) mind – no hiding unwelcome results by averaging them out! • Consistent across EU and UK

12. Pass Pass Pass Pass High High High High High High High High High Good Bad High High High High High High e.g. rivers Bad Pass Bad Bad

13. Confidence of class Why do we need confidence? To determine whether expensive PoM can be justified Requirement of the Directive (must report “adequate confidence and precision”) Helps us target action and further monitoring How is it determined? At the moment, methods vary – some mathematically calculated (invertebrates, chemical parameters), other are expert judgement (hydrology, macrophytes)

14. Confidence of class • Use confidence to prioritise action • Only take expensive action once highly confident Increasing confidence

15. Heavily modified water body • “so affected by human activity . . . that it may be unfeasible or unreasonably expensive to achieve good status . . . less stringent environmental objectives may be set” • So, we assess HMWBs for “ecological potential”, not ecological status

16. HMWB • Check mitigation measures: • Fish ladder • Compensation flows/ freshets • Temperature okay • Sediment regime ok • Water quality is fine • Morphology bad status • However, is at GEP

17. Information for you • All of this information is published and available for you to use at your convenience. • We welcome people questioning it – especially people like yourselves with expert local knowledge about the local ecology. • Only by questioning it can we refine our monitoring and improve our confidence.