The European Water Framework Directive -

On 23 October 2000, the “Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a framework for the Community action in the field of water policy” or short the EU Water Framework Directive (or even shorter the WFD) was finally adopted by the member states of the European Community. The purpose of the directive is formulated in Article 1:

Article 1 The purpose of this Directive is to establish a framework for the protection of inland surface waters, transitional waters, coastal waters and groundwater which:

(a) prevents further deterioration and protects and enhances the status of aquatic ecosystems and, with regard to their water needs, terrestrial ecosystems and wetlands directly depending on the aquatic ecosystems;

(b) promotes sustainable water use based on a long-term protection of available water resources;

(c) aims at enhanced protection and improvement of the aquatic environment, inter alia, through specific measures for the progressive reduction of discharges, emissions and losses of priority substances and the cessation or phasing-out of discharges, emissions and losses of the priority hazardous substances;

(d) ensures the progressive reduction of pollution of groundwater and prevents its further pollution, and

(e) contributes to mitigating the effects of floods and droughtsand thereby contributes to:

- the provision of the sufficient supply of good quality surface water and groundwater as needed for sustainable, balanced and equitable water use,

- a significant reduction in pollution of groundwater,

- the protection of territorial and marine waters, and

- achieving the objectives of relevant international agreements, including those which aim to prevent and eliminate pollution of the marine environment, by Community action under Article 16(3) to cease or phase out discharges, emissions and losses of priority hazardous substances, with the ultimate aim of achieving concentrations in the marine environment near background values for naturally occurring substances and close to zero for man-made synthetic substances.

The directive includes a pathway for its implementation with clearly stated requirements and dates. Until 2003 the governments of the EC member states were requested to transpose the directive in national legislation and to identify river basin districts and responsible authorities (Art. 23, Art. 3). The basic units of the directive – the river basin districts – have to be characterised regarding pressures, impacts and economical analysis until the end of 2004 (Art. 5). In 2006 a monitoring network has to be established and the public has to be informed at latest about the implementation process. In 2008 draft river basin management plans have to be presented to the public. And in 2009, the finalised river basin management plans should include a programme of measures to achieve the directives objectives (Art. 13, Art 11). It is expected that member states of the EC will meet the environmental objectives in 2015. The wording of the directive does not use the terms peatland or mire.

The term wetland is used twice. In Article 1 wetlands belong to the list of ecosystem types where a further deterioration should be prevented and where their ecological status should be enhanced and when necessary be protected. The term wetland is used in the expression “recreation and restoration of wetlands areas” in Annex VI, part B a non-exclusive list of supplementary measures which Member States within each river basin district may choose to adopt as part of the programme of measures required under Article 11(4). Also the Horizontal Guidance Document on the role of wetlands for the WFD adopted by the Commission does use the terms peatland and mire rarely (EC 2003).

However, this document clarifies how wetland and peatlands can be included in the WFD. From this we can conclude that, although mires and peatlands are not directly included in the water framework directive, they are clearly indirectly included as wetland systems directly depending on the aquatic ecosystems. In principal, there are 3 official ways, how peatlands, can be included in the WFD. Large peatlands can be – similar to lakes – identified as a single water body or part of a water body. For lakes, the size limit is 50 ha. Additionally, peatlands can be identified as terrestrial ecosystems depending on groundwater.

The most ecological valuable peatlands are of course included as Natura 2000 sites. In many European countries (Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Poland, to name a few) peatlands are the most widespread inland wetland type. Mires have developed under a variety of hydrogeomorphological and climatic conditions but their development was always directly dependent on the hydrological conditions in their surrounding landscape. Also at present the hydrological conditions inside and outside a mire or peatland control the functions and uses of the individual systems. Mires and peatlands contribute to the human well-being with several functions (De Groot 1992; Maltby et al. 1994; Joosten & Clarke 2002). Peatlands offer space for agriculture, forestry or peat excavation, where the direct yield creates an income for an individual farmer or company. Peatlands also contribute to the regulation of the global and regional climate, of water quality conditions in rivers and streams, and of their discharge patterning.

Additionally these systems offer aesthetic and spiritual inspiration for tourism and recreation. Planning authorities have to be aware – especially in case of near natural systems – that the highly valued peatland ecosystems are the result of thousands of years of development, whereas economic profit from peatland exploitation associated with deep drainage (agriculture, forestry, peat extraction) is only for the short- or medium term. In many regions, subsidence of the peat surface will become the major water management problem in the coming years. In the current discussion on the implementation of the water framework directive the peatland issue is underrepresented. This has probably several reasons.

(I) Peatlands are not considered by the implementing environmental agency as a wetland type directly depending on aquatic ecosystems due to a lack of data or knowledge.

(II) Mire conservationists are not aware of the principles of the new European water policy.

(IV) The status and quality of peatlands in many countries in Europe are unknown.

These reasons have some implications for our work in IMCG. We should come up with arguments why all peatland types can be considered as wetlands sensu the WFD definition. For this purpose, peatland occurrence has to be linked to the hydrological conditions that underlie these systems. For mires with a direct connection to a river or a lake, the dependency from aquatic ecosystems is evident. Mires without such a connection have developed in close connection to the first aquifer. The water framework directive requests to map and assess the different groundwater bodies and to describe the impacts of groundwater abstraction to groundwater dependent ecosystems. Spring mires, percolation mires, and most terrestrialization and paludification mires are directly fed by groundwater, and can thus be linked to the water framework wetlands definition. Bogs, in common definition, form their own water level by holding rainwater in their peats and vegetation. However, the domed water level in raised bogs is also the water table position of the first aquifer. The major principle of the water framework directive is to achieve a good ecological status of all water bodies until 2015. The status is assessed by biological and physico-chemical quality parameters.

The suggested organism groups all occur in the water body itself, but some of these species depend during their life cycle on different hydrological conditions in the river. They often use neighbouring fields to the river during various life stages. The restoration of a natural flow pattern in rivers is seen as a major prerequisite for healthy river systems (Poff et al. 1997). This implies that the river is allowed to flood the neighbouring fields, conditions which favour the development of peat forming vegetation types. The creation of shallow lakes is an often practised measure to improve nitrogen retention from agricultural fields. These systems will terrestrialize gradually when they are not managed. As mire conservationists we should take the whole variety of mire and peatland systems into account as well as the whole variety of strategies to support their conservation and restoration.

Conservation should focus on mires with the highest ecological value in a given region. For Europe it is important to strengthen the conservation activities in central and eastern Europe to prevent the destruction of valuable raised bog systems against the invading peat industry and the developing agricultural industry. Valuable mires of central and eastern Europe should be (and are being) included in the European Habitat Network Natura 2000. A listing and description of these sites is automatically required in the river basin management plan. On the other hand, peatland restoration, especially of riverine peatlands, can be one of the main measures to improve the quality of the surface water bodies and their surrounding in the next years.

For the above it is at least necessary to have an inventory of peatlands in a given region including an assessment of their current status. For IMCG it is a task to inform about new developments in the European water management and to identify options for peatland restoration and mire conservation. The aim of this contribution is to start the discussion.

Olivia Bragg, Elve Lode and Tomasz Okruszko improved this contribution with comments on an earlier version.

Official web site of the European Commission http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/water/water-framework/index_en.html

De Groot R.S. (1992): Functions of nature. Evaluation of nature in environmental planning, management and decision making. Wolters Noordhoff, Deventer (The Netherlands), 315 pp.

EC 2003: Horizontal Guidance Document on the Role of Wetlands in the Water Framework Directive. European Commission, Brussels, 67 pp.

Joosten H. & Clarke D. (2002): Wise use of Mires and peatlands – background and Principles including a Framework for decision-making. 303 pp.

Maltby E., Hogan D.V., Immirzi C.P., Tellman J.H. & Van der Peijl M.J. (1994): Building a new approach to the investigation and assessment of wetland ecosystem functioning. In: Mitsch W.J. (eds.) Global Wetlands: Old World and New Elsvier 637-658.

Poff N.L., Allan J.D., Bain M.B., Karr J.R., Prestegard K.L., Richter B.D., Sparks R.E. & Stromberg J.C. (1997): The natural flow regime - A paradigm for river conservation and restoration. BioScience 47: 769-784.

The European Water Framework Directive - A chance for mire conservation and peatland restoration?

The European Water Framework Directive -
A chance for mire conservation and peatland restoration?