This contribution provides a synthesis of the discussions at the second MonNO3 workshop on developments in monitoring the effectiveness of the EU Nitrates Directive Action Programmes in the European Community. The legal requirements for this type of monitoring are set down in the Nitrates Directive, Article 5 (6) (EC, 1991). The three main topics discussed were (1) the two different effect monitoring approaches of upscaling and interpolation, (2) the use of monitoring data for other purposes than trend analyses, and (3) the need for special monitoring networks for designation of nitrate vulnerable zones (NVZs) and/or the underpinning of the derogation. It is concluded that the upscaling approach gives more insight into processes involved in leaching of agriculturally used nutrients to groundwater and surface waters and is, in general, a cheaper approach than the interpolation approach. The interpolation approach is less sensitive to changes in a monitoring network and results have a higher acceptability for stakeholders. However, the discussion on pros and cons of the two approaches will be difficult if one does not take into account the four different types of monitoring networks: firstly, general networks and surveys for agriculture, groundwater and surface waters, secondly, quick response networks, thirdly, investigative monitoring, and finally, compliance checking surveys. Monitoring data from national networks can be used and are used to underpin new or additional policy measures, but there are certain restrictions regarding the details of underpinning depending on the type of monitoring approach used. The extent of the increase in monitoring effort needed to comply with the requirement of the European Commission depends on many factors, such as the extent of the agricultural area designated as NVZ (in case of designation), the extent of the area under derogation and the level of derogation, that is, the manure nitrogen application limit (in case of derogation), the intensity of agriculture (N surplus, livestock density), the monitoring approach used and the existing monitoring effort, the measures included in the Action Programme, and the pressure exerted on the government by stakeholders and interest groups, in particular farmers unions and environmental pressure groups.
|Deveopments in monitoring the effectivenss of the EU nitrates Directive Action Programmes
|Results of the second MonNO3 workshop, 10-11 June 2009
|B. Fraters, K. Kovar, R. Grant, L. Thorling, J.W. Reijs
|Bildhofen, the Netherlands.
|Udgivet - 2011
- Programområde 2: Vandressourcer