Operational monitoring and forecasting of bathing water quality through exploiting satellite Earth observation and models: The AlgaRisk demonstration service

Coastal zones and shelf-seas are important for tourism, commercial fishing and aquaculture. As a result the importance of good water quality within these regions to support life is recognised worldwide and a number of international directives for monitoring them now exist. This paper describes the AlgaRisk water quality monitoring demonstration service that was developed and operated for the UK Environment Agency in response to the microbiological monitoring needs within the revised European Union Bathing Waters Directive. The AlgaRisk approach used satellite Earth observation to provide a near-real time monitoring of microbiological water quality and a series of nested operational models (atmospheric and hydrodynamic-ecosystem) provided a forecast capability. For the period of the demonstration service (2008–2013) all monitoring and forecast datasets were processed in near-real time on a daily basis and disseminated through a dedicated web portal, with extracted data automatically emailed to agency staff. Near-real time data processing was achieved using a series of supercomputers and an Open Grid approach. The novel web portal and java-based viewer enabled users to visualise and interrogate current and historical data. The system description, the algorithms employed and example results focussing on a case study of an incidence of the harmful algal bloom Karenia mikimotoi are presented. Recommendations and the potential exploitation of web services for future water quality monitoring services are discussed.

A comparison of the degree of implementation of marine biodiversity indicators by European countries in relation to the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD)

The degree of development and operability of the indicators for the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) using Descriptor 1 (D1) Biological Diversity was assessed. To this end, an overview of the relevance and degree of operability of the underlying parameters across 20 European countries was compiled by analysing national directives, legislation, regulations, and publicly available reports. Marked differences were found between countries in the degree of ecological relevance as well as in the degree of implementation and operability of the parameters chosen to indicate biological diversity. The best scoring EU countries were France, Germany, Greece and Spain, while the worst scoring countries were Italy and Slovenia. No country achieved maximum scores for the implementation of MSFD D1. The non-EU countries Norway and Turkey score as highly as the top-scoring EU countries. On the positive side, the chosen parameters for D1 indicators were generally identified as being an ecologically relevant reflection of Biological Diversity. On the negative side however, less than half of the chosen parameters are currently operational. It appears that at a pan-European level, no consistent and harmonized approach currently exists for the description and assessment of marine biological diversity. The implementation of the MSFD Descriptor 1 for Europe as a whole can therefore at best be marked as moderately successful.

A review of climate change and the implementation of marine biodiversity legislation in the United Kingdom

1. Marine legislation, the key means by which the conservation of marine biodiversity is achieved, has been developing since the 1960s. In recent decades, an increasing focus on ‘holistic’ policy development is evident, compared with earlier ‘piecemeal’ sectoral approaches. Important marine legislative tools being used in the United Kingdom, and internationally, include the designation of marine protected areas and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) with its aim of meeting ‘Good Environmental Status’ (GES) for European seas by 2020. 2. There is growing evidence of climate change impacts on marine biodiversity, which may compromise the effectiveness of any legislation intended to promote sustainable marine resource management. 3. A review of key marine biodiversity legislation relevant to the UK shows climate change was not considered in the drafting of much early legislation. Despite the huge increase in knowledge of climate change impacts in recent decades, legislation is still limited in how it takes these impacts into account. There is scope, however, to account for climate change in implementing much of the legislation through (a) existing references to environmental variability; (b) review cycles; and (c) secondary legislation and complementary policy development. 4. For legislation relating to marine protected areas (e.g. the EC Habitats and Birds Directives), climate change has generally not been considered in the site-designation process, or for ongoing management, with the exception of the Marine (Scotland) Act. Given that changing environmental conditions (e.g. rising temperatures and ocean acidification) directly affect the habitats and species that sites are designated for, how this legislation is used to protect marine biodiversity in a changing climate requires further consideration. 5. Accounting for climate change impacts on marine biodiversity in the development and implementation of legislation is vital to enable timely, adaptive management responses. Marine modelling can play an important role in informing management decisions.

Identifying species and ecosystem sensitivities.

Executive Summary The programme of work was commissioned in September 1998 to supply information to underpin the UK’s commitments to protection and conservation of the ecosystems and biodiversity of the marine environment under the 1992 OSPAR Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic. The programme also provided support for the implementation of the Biodiversity Convention and the EU Habitats Directive. The MarLIN programme initiated a new approach to assessing sensitivity and recoverability characteristics of seabed species and biotopes based on structures (such as the seabed biotopes classification) and criteria (such as for assessing rarity and defining ‘sensitivity’) developed since 1997. It also developed tools to disseminate the information on the Internet. The species researched were those that were listed in conventions and directives, included in Biodiversity Action Plans, or were nationally rare or scarce. In addition, species were researched if they maintained community composition or structure and/or provided a distinctive habitat or were special to or especially abundant in a particular situation or biotope At its conclusion in August 2001, the work carried out under the contract with DETR/DEFRA had: · Developed protocols, criteria and structures for identifying ‘sensitivity’ and ‘recoverability’, which were tested by a programme management group. · Developed a database to hold research data on biology and sensitivity of species and biotopes. · Defined the link between human activities and the environmental factors likely to be affected by those activities. · Developed a user-friendly Web site to access information from the database, on the sensitivity and recoverability characteristics of over 100 species and basic information on over 200 species. Additionally, the project team have: · Brought together and facilitated discussion between current developers and users of electronic resources for environmental management, protection and education in the conference ‘Using Marine Biological Information in the Electronic Age’ (19-21 July 1999). · Contributed to the development of Ecological Quality Objectives for the North Sea (Scheveningen, 11- 3 September 1999 and subsequent papers). · Provided detailed information on species as a supplement to the National Biodiversity Network Gateway demonstration www.searchnbn.net. · Developed a peer-reviewed approach to electronic publication of updateable information. · Promoted the contract results and the MarLIN approach to the support of marine environmental management and protection at European research fora and, through the web site, internationally. The information available through the Web site is now being used by consultants and Government agencies. The DEFRA contract has been of critical importance in establishing the Marine Life Information Network (MarLIN) programme and has encouraged support from other organisations. Other related work in the MarLIN programme is on-going, especially to identify sensitivity of biotopes to support management of SACs (contract from English Nature in collaboration with Scottish Natural Heritage), to access data sources (in collaboration with the National Biodiversity Network) and to establish volunteer recording schemes for marine life. The results of the programme are best viewed on the Web site (www.marlin.ac.uk). Three reports have been produced during the project. A final report detailing the work undertaken, a brochure ‘Identifying the sensitivity of seabed ecosystems’ and a CD-ROM describing the programme and demonstrating the Web site have been delivered as final products in addition to the Web site.

An Objective Framework to Test the Quality of Candidate Indicators of Good Environmental Status

Large efforts are on-going within the EU to prepare the Marine Strategy Framework Directive’s (MSFD) assessment of the environmental status of the European seas. This assessment will only be as good as the indicators chosen to monitor the eleven descriptors of good environmental status (GEnS). An objective and transparent framework to determine whether chosen indicators actually support the aims of this policy is, however, not yet in place. Such frameworks are needed to ensure that the limited resources available to this assessment optimize the likelihood of achieving GEnS within collaborating states. Here, we developed a hypothesis-based protocol to evaluate whether candidate indicators meet quality criteria explicit to the MSFD, which the assessment community aspires to. Eight quality criteria are distilled from existing initiatives, and a testing and scoring protocol for each of them is presented. We exemplify its application in three worked examples, covering indicators for three GEnS descriptors (1, 5 and 6), various habitat components (seaweeds, seagrasses, benthic macrofauna and plankton), and assessment regions (Danish, Lithuanian and UK waters). We argue that this framework provides a necessary, transparent and standardized structure to support the comparison of candidate indicators, and the decision-making process leading to indicator selection. Its application could help identify potential limitations in currently available candidate metrics and, in such cases, help focus the development of more adequate indicators. Use of such standardized approaches will facilitate the sharing of knowledge gained across the MSFD parties despite context-specificity across assessment regions, and support the evidence-based management of European seas.

An Objective Framework to Test the Quality of Candidate Indicators of Good Environmental Status

Large efforts are on-going within the EU to prepare the Marine Strategy Framework Directive’s (MSFD) assessment of the environmental status of the European seas. This assessment will only be as good as the indicators chosen to monitor the eleven descriptors of good environmental status (GEnS). An objective and transparent framework to determine whether chosen indicators actually support the aims of this policy is, however, not yet in place. Such frameworks are needed to ensure that the limited resources available to this assessment optimize the likelihood of achieving GEnS within collaborating states. Here, we developed a hypothesis-based protocol to evaluate whether candidate indicators meet quality criteria explicit to the MSFD, which the assessment community aspires to. Eight quality criteria are distilled from existing initiatives, and a testing and scoring protocol for each of them is presented. We exemplify its application in three worked examples, covering indicators for three GEnS descriptors (1, 5 and 6), various habitat components (seaweeds, seagrasses, benthic macrofauna and plankton), and assessment regions (Danish, Lithuanian and UK waters). We argue that this framework provides a necessary, transparent and standardized structure to support the comparison of candidate indicators, and the decision-making process leading to indicator selection. Its application could help identify potential limitations in currently available candidate metrics and, in such cases, help focus the development of more adequate indicators. Use of such standardized approaches will facilitate the sharing of knowledge gained across the MSFD parties despite context-specificity across assessment regions, and support the evidence-based management of European seas.