Ecological status of rivers and streams in Saxony (Germany) according to the water framework directive and prospects of improvement

19Citations
Citations of this article
43Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The Federal State of Saxony (Germany) transposed the EU Water Framework Directive into state law, identifying 617 surface water bodies (rivers and streams) for implementation of the water framework directive (WFD). Their ecological status was classified by biological quality elements (macrophytes and phytobenthos, benthic invertebrates and fish, and in large rivers, phytoplankton) and specific synthetic and non-synthetic pollutants. Hydromorphological and physico-chemical quality elements were used to identify significant anthropogenic pressures, which surface water bodies are susceptible to, and to assess the effect of these pressures on the status of surface water bodies. In 2009, the data for classification of the ecological status and the main pressures and impacts on water bodies were published in the river basin management plans (RBMP) of the Elbe and Oder rivers. To that date, only 23 (4%) streams achieved an ecological status of "good", while the rest failed to achieve the environmental objective. The two main reasons for the failure were significant alterations to the stream morphology (81% of all streams) and nutrient enrichment (62%) caused by point (industrial and municipal waste water treatment plants) and non-point (surface run-off from arable fields, discharges from urban drainages and decentralized waste water treatment plants) sources. It was anticipated that a further 55 streams would achieve the environmental objective by 2015, but the remaining 539 need extended deadlines. © 2012 by the authors.

Figures

  • Figure 1. Map of Germany, Czech Republic and part of Poland with the location of Saxony in the tri-border region and the German parts of the rivers Elbe and Odra catchments.
  • Figure 2. Land use in Saxony (based on aerial photographs from 2005/2006).
  • Table 1. Stream types in Saxony (ecoregions according to [13]).
  • Figure 3. Stream types in Saxony.
  • Table 2. Assessment methods for classification of the ecological status of streams by biological quality elements (BQE).
  • Table 3. Orientation values of physicochemical quality elements according to the LAWA. Exceedance or shortfall of these threshold concentrations (annual mean concentrations, minimum and maximum values for pH) at which a significant impairment of BQE was expected.
  • Figure 4. Ecological status and potential of stream and river water bodies in Saxony.
  • Table 4. Results of the classification of the ecological status of stream water bodies by biological quality elements (BQE) and final classification results (according to the “one-out, all-out rule”).

References Powered by Scopus

Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity

5459Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

The European Water Framework Directive at the age of 10: A critical review of the achievements with recommendations for the future

779Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Global analysis of river systems: From Earth system controls to Anthropocene syndromes

580Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

The implications of climate change for the water environment in England

78Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Current status and future prospects of hydropower in Saxony (Germany) compared to trends in Germany, the European Union and the World

58Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Initial characterization and water quality assessment of stream landscapes in Northern Mongolia

29Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Spänhoff, B., Dimmer, R., Friese, H., Harnapp, S., Herbst, F., Jenemann, K., … Müller, U. (2012). Ecological status of rivers and streams in Saxony (Germany) according to the water framework directive and prospects of improvement. Water (Switzerland), 4(4), 887–904. https://doi.org/10.3390/w4040887

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 14

50%

Researcher 10

36%

Professor / Associate Prof. 4

14%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Environmental Science 17

65%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5

19%

Engineering 3

12%

Materials Science 1

4%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free