D.6.8.

ASSESSMENT OF THE ECOLOGICAL

STATUS USING DIFFERENT QUALITY ELEMENTS IN
THE PRUT RIVER BASIN
WORK PACKAGE 6 Pilot Case Studies
Final Version
Date 18.12.2012

A. Galie, V. Popescu , C. Moldovan

INDEX
1. PREFACE ..........................................................................................................................................4
2. INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................4
2.1. GENERAL ASPECTS ON ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT ...................................................................4
2.2. ROMANIAN APPROACH ON ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT ..............................................................8
3. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING ECOLOGICAL STATUS
ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES (RIVERS) PHYTOPLANKTON ............................................12
4. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING THE ECOLOGICAL
STATUS ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES (RIVERS) - BENTHIC INVERTEBRATES
COMMUNITIES ...................................................................................................................................13
5. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING THE ECOLOGICAL
STATUS ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES (RIVERS) FISH FAUNA .........................................14
6. SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING THE ECOLOGICAL
STATUS ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES (RIVERS) CHEMICAL AND PHYSICO
CHEMICAL ELEMENTS .....................................................................................................................16
7. DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS
ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES (RIVERS) HYDROMORPHOLOGICAL ELEMENTS ..........19
7.1. HYDROLOGICAL PARAMETERS ..........................................................................................................20
7.2. MORPHOLOGICAL PARAMETERS........................................................................................................23
8. APPLICATION OF THE METHODOLOGY REGARDING THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS
ASSESSMENT OF WATER BODIES HYDROMORPHOLOGICAL ELEMENTS ON A CASE
STUDY - ROMANIAN PILOT BASIN (THE PRUT RIVER BASIN) ....................................................27
9. CONCLUSIONS ..............................................................................................................................28
10. REFERENCES ..............................................................................................................................29

Figure index
FIGURE 1 THE QUALITY ELEMENTS FOR THE CLASSIFICATION OF ECOLOGICAL AND CHEMICAL STATUS .................... 5
FIGURE 2 ECOLOGICAL STATUS CLASSES (PETER POLLARD, SCOTTISH ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION AGENCY) ...... 6
FIGURE 3 THE RELATIVE ROLES OF THE BIOLOGICAL, HYDROMORPHOLOGICAL AND PHYSICO-CHEMICAL QUALITY
ELEMENTS IN ECOLOGICAL STATUS CLASSES (GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS NO. 10 RIVERS AND LAKES TYPOLOGY,
REFERENCE CONDITIONS AND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEMS) .............................................................................. 7
FIGURE 4 BASIC PRINCIPLES FOR CLASSIFICATION OF ECOLOGICAL STATUS BASED ON ECOLOGICAL QUALITY RATIOS
.................................................................................................................................................................... 7
FIGURE 5 AN EXAMPLE OF HOW PARAMETERS CAN BE COMBINED TO ESTIMATE THE CONDITION OF THE BIOLOGICAL
QUALITY ELEMENTS (WFD CIS GUIDANCE DOCUMENT NO. 13 OVERALL APPROACH TO THE CLASSIFICATION OF
ECOLOGICAL STATUS AND ECOLOGICAL POTENTIAL) ....................................................................................... 8
FIGURE 6 ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT SCHEME FOR PHYTOPLANKTON - RIVERS........................................ 12
FIGURE 7 ECOLOGICAL STATUS ASSESSMENT SCHEME FOR MACROINVERTEBRATES RIVERS.............................. 14
FIGURE 8 GENERAL SCHEME FOR ESTABLISHING THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS FOR DISSOLVED OXYGEN................... 17
FIGURE 9 GENERAL SCHEME FOR ESTABLISHING OF ECOLOGICAL STATUS FOR NUTRIENTS (N-NH4, N-NO2, NNO3, P-PO4, TOTAL P) .............................................................................................................................. 18
FIGURE 10 GENERAL SCHEME FOR ESTABLISHING THE ECOLOGICAL STATUS FOR PH ........................................... 19
FIGURE 11 MAP - UNDERGROUND WATER SUPPLY CONDITIONS .......................................................................... 22
FIGURE 12 LITHOLOGICAL MAP......................................................................................................................... 23
FIGURE 13 THE LOCATION OF THE WATER BODIES ANALYZED WITHIN THE PRUT RIVER BASIN ............................... 27

Table index
TABLE 1 DEFINITION FOR HIGH, GOOD, MODERATE ECOLOGICAL STATUS (WFD) .................................................... 6
TABLE 2 ELEMENTS, PARAMETERS AND FREQUENCY OF MONITORING IN THE SURVEILLANCE AND OPERATIONAL
MONITORING PROGRAM RIVERS ................................................................................................................. 10
TABLE 3 OUTPUT EXAMPLE (ONLY FEW COLUMNS FROM THE REPORT) ................................................................ 14
TABLE 4 DATA USED FOR FISH FAUNA ................................................................................................................ 15
TABLE 5 LIST OF THE MIGRATORY FISH SPECIES ON MEDIUM AND LONG DISTANCES FROM THE ROMANIAN RIVERS . 21
TABLE 6 TOP OF FORM - SYNTHESIS OF HYDRO-MORPHOLOGICAL PARAMETERS ................................................. 24
TABLE 7 HYDRO-MORPHOLOGICAL PARAMETERS FOR ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT RIVERS.................................. 26

Annexes index
Annex 1 .. 30
Annex 2 .. 33

1. Preface
The present work is an outcome of the project SEE HYDROPOWER, targeted to improve water
resource management for a growing renewable energy production, in the frame of the South-EastEurope Transnational Cooperation Programme, co-funded by the European Regional Development
Fund (www.seehydropower.eu).
The project is based on the European Directive on the promotion of Electricity from Renewable
Energy Sources respect to the Kyoto protocol targets, that aims to establish an overall binding target
of 20% share of renewable energy sources in energy consumption to be achieved by each Member
State, as well as binding national targets by 2020 in line with the overall EU target of 20%.
Objectives of the SEE HYDROPOWER deal with the promotion of hydro energy production in SEE
countries, by the optimization of water resource exploitation, in a compatible way with other water
users following environmental friendly approaches. Therefore, it gives a strong contribution to the
integration between the Water Frame and the RES-e Directives.
Main activities of the project concern the definition of policies, methodologies and tools for a better
water & hydropower planning and management; the establishment of common criteria for preserving
water bodies; to assess strategies to improve hydropower implementation, such as small
hydropower; testing studies in pilot catchments of partner countries; promotion and dissemination of
project outcomes among target groups all over the SEE Region countries.
In particular, the report D.6.8. Assessment of the ecological status using different quality elements
in the Prut River Basin, which is part of the Work Package 6 Pilot Case Studies, is presented
here.

2. Introduction
2.1. General aspects on ecological status assessment
The implementation of the Water Framework Directive within the Member States of the European Union
requires a 5-classes classification system for surface water status, for all water types (rivers, lakes, etc.).
The surface water status has two components:

ecological water status

chemical water status

The quality elements for the classification of ecological and chemical status are shown in figure 1:

Figure 1 The Quality elements for the classification of ecological and chemical status
The quality elements for the classification of chemical status are priority substances.
The quality elements for the classification of ecological status are detailed below (Annex V 1.1.1. - WFD):
Biological elements:

Composition and abundance of aquatic flora

Composition and abundance of benthic invertebrate fauna
Composition, abundance and age structure of fish fauna

Chemical and physico-chemical elements supporting the biological elements:

General
Thermal conditions
Oxygenation conditions
Salinity
Acidification status
Nutrient conditions
Specific pollutants

Hydro-morphological elements supporting the biological elements:

Hydrological regime
Quantity and dynamics of water flow
Connection to groundwater bodies
River continuity
Morphological conditions
River depth and width variation
Structure and substrate of the river bed
Structure of the riparian zone

The ecological status of water according to European guidelines is determined by integrating the biological
elements with the chemical and physico-chemical elements (general and specific pollutants) and those
related to hydromorphological alterations, the last two groups of elements are stipulated as supporting the
biological elements in Annex V of the Water Framework Directive. The supporting elements should ensure
the optimal conditions for the aquatic organisms.
Each quality element is expressed by several indicators/indices/parameters, which may differ from one
country to another.
The ecological status of water bodies should be classified in 5 classes, according to WFD (Annex V): high,
good, moderate, poor and bad (figure 2).
5

Figure 2 Ecological status classes (Peter Pollard, Scottish Environment Protection Agency)
General definition of ecological quality for rivers, lakes, transitional waters and coastal waters for high, good,
moderate ecological status, according to Annex V, is shown in the table no. 1.
Element
General

High status
There are no, or only very minor,
anthropogenic alterations to the
values of the physico-chemical and
hydromorphological quality
elements for the surface water body
type from those normally
associated with that type under
undisturbed conditions.
The values of the biological quality
elements for the surface water body
reflect those normally associated
with that type under undisturbed
conditions, and show no, or only
very minor, evidence of distortion.
These are the type-specific
conditions and communities.

Good status
The values of the
biological quality
elements for the type of
surface water body
show low levels of
distortion resulting from
human activity but
deviate only slightly from
those normally
associated with the type
of surface water body
under undisturbed
conditions.

Moderate status
The values of the
biological quality
elements for the type of
surface water body
deviate moderately from
those normally
associated with the type
of surface water body
under undisturbed
conditions. The values
show moderate signs of
distortion resulting from
human activity and are
significantly more
disturbed than under
conditions of good
status.

Table 1 Definition for high, good, moderate ecological status (WFD)

The establishment of thresholds among the classes is a major challenge for European scientific community.
The relative roles of the biological, hydromorphological, chemical and physico-chemical quality elements in
the ecological status classification and the basic principles for classification of ecological status are
6

presented in the figures 3 and 4.

Figure 3 The relative roles of the biological, hydromorphological and physico-chemical

quality elements in ecological status classes (Guidance Documents no. 10 Rivers and Lakes
Typology, Reference Conditions and Classification Systems)

Figure 4 Basic principles for classification of ecological status based on Ecological Quality
Ratios
Deciding if a particular ecological status or potential class can be assigned to a water body depends on
whether the quality element worst affected by anthropogenic alterations matches its normative definition for
that class. ((WFD CIS Guidance Document no. 13 Overall Approach to the Classification of Ecological
7

Status and Ecological Potential). The one-out all-out principle has to be used on the quality element level
as indicated in the phytobenthos example (figure 5).

Figure 5 An example of how parameters can be combined to estimate the condition of the
biological quality elements (WFD CIS Guidance Document no. 13 Overall Approach to the
Classification of Ecological Status and Ecological Potential)
The one-out all-out principle has to be used when evaluating the results obtained for the
ecological/potential status and chemical status in order to assess the surface water status.

2.2. Romanian approach on ecological status assessment

In order to assess the water bodies status, the monitoring programs for surface water, groundwater and
protected areas were required by Article 8 (1) of the Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). Therefore,
EU Member States have established the monitoring programs aiming to collect information for "water bodies
status assessment" within each river basin. Monitoring programs for the surface water bodies, groundwater
bodies and protected areas established in Romania, became operational on 22.12.2006. The monitoring
program (according to WFD) is established by the National Management Plan, which was approved by the
Governmental Decision/Order no. 80/26.01.2011 (for the approval of the National Management Plan related
to the Romanian sector of the international Danube River District , published in the Official Gazette no.
265/14.04.2011).
The monitoring of water, sediments and biota, quality elements and parameters is done through investigative
activities. The minimum monitoring frequencies are in accordance with the requirements of the Water
Framework Directive, taking into account the type of program (surveillance, operational and investigative
monitoring).
The monitoring of water body status in Romania based on the monitoring programs established in
accordance with Article 8 of the Water Framework Directive is carried out by the National Administration
8

"Romanian Waters" through its 11 River Basin Authorities. For some water bodies from the Danube Delta,
the monitoring is carried out by the National Institute for Research and Development "Danube Delta", from
Tulcea town. The monitoring of coastal water bodies is carried out by Dobrogea Litoral Water Directorate in
collaboration with the National Institute of Marine Research and Development "Grigore Antipa" (NIMRD) Constanta.
Table 2 presents the biological, chemical and physico-chemical elements and hydromorphological elements
and the minimum monitoring frequencies, as defined in the surveillance and the operational monitoring
program for rivers within the National Administration "Romanian Waters (according to Annex V of WFD).
Quality components

Parameters
Phytoplankton

Biological
components

Microphytobenthos
Macrophytes
Zoobenthos
Fish fauna

Taxonomic component
(list and no. of species)
density (exp / l)
Taxonomic component
(list and no. of species)
density (exp / m2)
Taxonomic component
(list and no. of species)
density (exp / m2)
Taxonomic component
(list and no. of species)
density (exp / m2)
Taxonomic component
(list and no. of species)
density (exp/100m2)
age structure
Water level and
discharge

Hydrological regime
Hydromorphological
elements
Morphological
parameters
Transparency
Thermal conditions
Oxygenation
conditions
Salinity

Physico-chemical
components

Acidifications status
Nutrient conditions

Nutrients

Connectivity to
groundwater bodies
River continuity
River depth and width
variation
Structure and substrate
of the river bed
Structure of the riparian
zone
Suspended solids,
turbidity, color
Temperature
Dissolved oxygen CCO
- Mn and/or CCO - Cr
CBO5 and in some
cases COT and COD
Conductivity/ fixed
residue
pH Alkalinity
Nitrites, Nitrates,
Ammonium Ntotal,
Orthophosphates,
Ptotal, Chlorophyll "a"
Ntotal, Ptotal

Frequency of monitoring
Surveillance
Operational
program
program
2/year
3/year
2/year

3/year

1/3 years

1/3 years

2/ year

3/ year

1/3 years

1/3 years

H = 2 / day *
Q = 20-60 /year*

H = 2 / day *
Q = 2060/year*

1/3 days

1/3 days

1/6 years

1/6 years

1/ year

1/ year

1/6 years

1/6 years

1/6 years

1/6 years

6/ year

6/12/ year **

6/ year
6/ year

6/12/ year **
6/12/ year **

6/ year

6/12/ year **

6/ year
6/ year

6/12/ year **
6/12/ year **

6/ year

6/ year
9

(suspended matter)
Priority substances
- water
Priority substances
(Suspended matter)
Priority substances
(sediments)
Priority substances
(biota)

Microbiological
components

Specific non-priority
pollutants
Specific non-priority
pollutants
(suspended matter)
Specific non-priority
pollutants
(sediments)
Specific non-priority
pollutants
(biota)
Other pollutants
Bacteriologic
parameters***

1)

12/ year

12/ year

Heavy metals: Cd, Ni,

Pb, Hg
Heavy metals and
organic micro pollutants
relevant for sediments
Heavy metals and
organic micro pollutants
relevant for biota
2)

6/ year

6/ year

1/ year

1/ year

6/ year

6/ year

Other heavy metals (list

II)

6/ year

6/ year

Substances in list I and

II relevant to sediments

1/ year

1/ year

1/ year

Substances in list I and

II relevant to biota
3)
total coliforms, fecal
coliforms, fecal
streptococcus,
Salmonella

1/ year
6/ year
4-12/ year

6/ year
4-12/ year

Table 2 Elements, parameters and frequency of monitoring in the surveillance and

operational monitoring program rivers
* in case of floods, the monitoring frequency will increase according to the hydrological regime of the river
** when is at risk due to the nutrients and the organic substances is monitored 12 times / year
** when is at risk due to the morphological alterations and the priority substances is monitoring 6 times / year
*** only for the sections of surface water abstraction for drinking water
1) priority substances (Annex X of WFD - 2455/2001/EC Decision): in case of pollution sources which
release such substances;
2) specific non-priority pollutants (substances from the Annex 8 and 9 of the Water Framework Directive): in
case of pollution sources which release such substances;
3) other pollutants: substances not found in Annexes 8, 9 and 10 of the Water Framework Directive: the case
of pollution sources which release such substances.
Note: The Annex V of WFD, specifies the minimum monitoring frequencies for hydromorphological elements
to every six years. For the operational monitoring program, the monitoring frequency can be established by
each Member State in order to have sufficient data for a proper assessment of the status of the analyzed
element. Therefore, this frequency can be changed according to modification occurred in the hydrological
regime.
The characterization of the ecological status in accordance with the requirements of Water Framework
Directive (transposed into the Romanian legislation by Law 310/2004, which amends the Water Law
107/1996) is relying on a classification system with five classes, namely: high, good, moderate, poor and
bad.
The elaboration of the classification system for water status was lead by the National Research and
Development Environmental Protection - ICIM Bucharest, in collaboration with National Institute of Marine
Research and Development "Grigore Antipa" (NIMRD) - Constanta (for transitional and coastal waters).
The classification and evaluation of water status will be revised as appropriate, at each planning cycle of the
management activity, at basin level and approved by order of the head of the main/national public water
authority.
10

The ecological status (relying on biological and hydromorphological and chemical and physico-chemical
supporting elements) is determined by applying the one-out all-out principle. Within each group of elements
(biological, chemical and physico-chemical - general and specific pollutants and hydromorphological
elements) the most unfavorable situation is to be the one which dictates the class for the water body.
In Romania, according to the methodologies implemented in the National Management Plan based on the
classification system (elaborated by ICIM and collaborators), the hydromorphological elements were taken
into account within the ecological status assessment, only if the water bodies achieve high ecological status
by the biological and physico-chemical elements (as European guidelines recommends). In this case should
be checked, if the hydromorphological status is very good. If all these conditions are met, the water body can
be classified as achieving high ecological status.
In addition, the chemical status must be assessed. The final status is given by the worst situation between
ecological and chemical status.
In the first National Management Plan for the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers),
information about microphytobenthos, aquatic macrophytes was not included. Methodologies for some
physico-chemical elements were developed. For the other quality elements not yet assessed, the
methodologies for the ecological status assessment are under development. In the process of updating the
Article 5 of WFD and other specific reporting requirements, the water bodies status assessment will be
reviewed relying on the elements missing in the first National Management Plan.
X
X

In order to achieve the objectives of this deliverable as well as the objectives of the SEE HYDROPOWER
project the National Administration Apele Romane prepared a lot of information (detailed information) about
the Prut river basin.
Some information was provided to BOKU partner as follows:

a document (an excel file) containing five worksheets as follows: general data, physico-chemical
data, stressors, and EFI+ input data and EFI+ output data. The names of the columns for each
worksheet are itemed in Annex 1. Detailed data (minimum, maximum and average values, standard
deviation and annual number of recorded values), for a total of 40 monitoring sections in the Prut
River Basin, for the period 2004-2010, referring to the following physico-chemical parameters:
Oxygen (concentration and saturation), Total Phosphorus-P, ortho-phosphate-P, nitrate-N,
ammonium-N, Total nitrogen-N, Biological Oxygen Demand (5 days), Water temperature, Alkalinity,
pH, Chloride was provided.
a document, prepared in GIS format, containing 7 shape-files regarding the human pressures in the
Prut river basin according to WFD and including also the dikes forecasted to be built. Two of the
shape files, LWBody and RWBody, are done according to the templates required by ICPDR. The
names of the columns within the attribute tables are itemed in The names of the columns for each
worksheet are itemed in Annex 2.

The current report presents the following issues (Romanian approach):

-

a short description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water
bodies (rivers) - phytoplankton communities;
a short description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water
bodies (rivers) - benthic invertebrates communities;
a short description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water
bodies (rivers) fish fauna;
a short description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water
bodies (rivers) - chemical and physico-chemical elements;
a description of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies
(rivers) hydromorphological elements;
application of the methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies
hydromorphological elements on a case study - Romanian pilot basin (the Prut river basin).

11

3. Short description of the methodology regarding

ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers)
phytoplankton
The assessment method complies with the Water Framework Directive and takes into account the impact of
the main pressures on communities of phytoplankton algae in streams.
Phytoplankton is sensitive to the following pressures: input of nutrients, organic pollution and general
degradation.
For every selected indicator, limit values have been proposed for each status (high, good, moderate, poor
and bad) and for each typology. Also, the reference guide values for each typology and for each of the
selected indicators have been set. Assessment was done, at the water body level.
Each monitoring station has a list of monitored species. For each species the following indices are
calculated:
-

Saprobic index
Chlorophyll index
Simpson diversity index
Number of taxa index
Diatom abundance index - Bacillariophyceae.

For each of the indices, Ecological Quality Ratios (EQR) are calculated, based on the obtained value and the
reference guide value for the corresponding ecologic status (in accordance with European guidelines see
figure 4). The ratios shall be sub unitary, between 0 and 1.
Using the above-mentioned indices, the multimetric index (MI) is calculated. Also, for multimetric index,
values for determining the ecological status were established.
For the ecological status assessment of the river water bodies, for the selected indices, it was proposed a
weighting, according to their importance for the communities of algae, as follows:
-

Saprobic index (SI): 20%

Chlorophyll index (CLI): 25%
Simpson diversity index (DI): 30%
Number of taxa index (NTI): 15%
Diatom abundance index Bacillariophyceae (DAI): 10%.

The multimetric index value is given by the following equation:

MI = 0.2 * EQRSI + 0.25 * EQRCLI + 0.3 * EQRDI + 0.15 * EQRNTI + 0.1 * EQRDAI
The multimetric index value gives the ecological status.
The same procedure is applied for heavily modified water bodies. The multimetric index value gives the
ecological potential.

Figure 6 Ecological status assessment scheme for phytoplankton - rivers

12

4. Short description of the methodology regarding the

ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers) benthic invertebrates communities
The assessment method is in compliance with the Water Framework Directive and takes into account the
effects of the main pressures on macro-invertebrates communities in streams: organic pollution and general
degradation.
For every selected index, limit values have been proposed for each status (high, good, moderate, poor and
bad) and for each typology.
Also, reference guide values have been set for each typology and for each selected index. Assessment is
done for each water body.
Each monitoring station has a list of monitored species. For each species, the following indices are
calculated:

Saprobic index
EPT index
Shannon-Wiener diversity index
Number of family index
OCH/O index
Functional groups index
Preference flow index

For each of the indices, Ecological Quality Ratios (EQR) is calculated based on the obtained value and the
reference guide value for corresponding ecologic status. The ratios shall be sub unitary (between 0 and 1).
Using the above-mentioned indices, the multimetric index (MI) is calculated. Also, for the multimetric index,
values for determining the ecological status were established.
For the selected indicators, it was proposed a weighting, according to their importance for the invertebrate
communities, as follows:

Saprobic index (SI): 30%

EPT index (EPT): 10%
Shannon-Wiener diversity index (DI): 20%
Number of family index (NF): 10%
OCH/O index (OCH): 10%
Functional groups index (FG): 10%
Preference flow index (REO/LIM): 10%.

The multimetric index value is given by the following equation:

MI = 0.3 * EQRSI+0.1*EQREPT +0.2*EQRDI +0.1*EQRNF +0.1*EQROCH +0.1 *EQRFG +0.1*EQRREO/LIM
The multimetric index value will give the ecological status.
The same procedure applies for heavily modified water bodies, only the weighting of the indices used to
calculate the multimetric index is different.

Saprobe index (SI): 10%

EPT index (EPT): 20%
Shannon-Wiener diversity index (DI): 20%
Number of family index (NF): 10%
OCH/O index (OCH): 10%
Functional groups index (FG): 10%
Preference flow index (REO/LIM): 20%.

For heavily modified water bodies, the multimetric index value is given by the following equation:

13

MI=0.1*EQRSI+0.2*EQREPT+0.2*EQRDI+0.1*EQRNF+0.1*EQROCH+0.1*EQRFG+0.2*EQRREO/LIM
In this case, the multimetric index value will give the ecological potential.

Figure 7 Ecological status assessment scheme for macroinvertebrates rivers

5. Short description of the methodology regarding the

ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers)
fish fauna
The evaluation and classification of water bodies on fish fauna was done using the method EFI +.
The EFI + selected metrics are:

salmonid water bodies:

- relative density of intolerant individuals with size below 150 mm;
- relative density of intolerant species to the reduction of dissolved oxygen.

cyprinid water bodies:

- relative abundance of species-generative (requiring lothyic habitat type for reproduction);
- relative density of lithophyle species.

Data are recorded in excel sheets provided by <http://efi-plus.boku.ac.at/software/insert_data.php> EFI on

the website and sent in this form, or can be entered manually, as indicated on the same page.
Site.name
Vama cu tabla

River.name
Bahlui

Sample.code
Bahlui_132550

Day
5

Month
9

Year
2004

FishIndex
0.953

FishIndex.Class
1

Table 3 Output example (only few columns from the report)

14

For the same monitoring sections and the same period, the following data for fish fauna was transmitted:
Input EFI+

Output EFI+

River Basin

Site.name

SampleCode
Longitude

River.name
SampleCode

Latitude

Day

Day

Month

Month

Year

Year

Comments.date

Country

Longitude

River Name

Latitude

Site Name

Obs.dens.HINTOL.inf.150

Altitude

Obs.dens.O2INTOL

Ecoregion

Obs.ric.RH.PAR

Mediterranean Type

Obs.dens.LITH

River Region

Exp.dens.HINTOL.inf150

Method

Exp.dens.O2INTOL

Fished Area

Exp.ric.RH.PAR

River Width

Exp.dens.LITH

Flow Regime

Ids.dens.HINTOL.inf.150

Natural Lake Upstream

Ids.dens.O2INTOL

Geomorphology

Ids.ric.RH.PAR

Former Flood Plain

Ids.dens.LITH

Water Source

Method

Upstream Drainage Area

Comments.method

Distance from Source

Sampling.location

River Slope

Comments.sampling.location

Air temperature Mean Annual

Richness

Air temperature January

Comments.richness

Air temperature July

Captures

Former Sediment Size

Comments.sampling.effort

Sampling Location

Ecoregion

Species Name

ST-Species

Total number run1

River.zone

Number Length Below 150

Comments.river.zone

Number Length Over 150

Aggregated.score.Salmonid.zone

Table 4 Data used for fish fauna

15

6. Short description of the methodology regarding the

ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers)
chemical and physico chemical elements
The physico-chemical elements, supporting elements for the ecological status assessment according to
WFD, are itemed below:
General physico-chemical elements:

thermal conditions
oxygenation conditions
salinity
nutrient conditions
acidification status

Pollutants specific - other substances identified as being discharged in significant quantities in water bodies.
In Romania, for rivers, limits were set for high/good and good/moderate status for the following quality
elements:

General physico-chemical elements:

thermal condition (temperature)

oxygen condition (dissolved oxygen in terms of concentration) (Figure 8)
nutrients status (N-NH4, N-NO2, N-NO3, P-PO4, total P) (Figure 9)
acidification status (pH) (Figure 10)

Specific pollutants: Cu, Zn, As, Cr, acenaphthen, PCB (sum of 7), phenol, xilen, toluene.

For chemical and physico-chemical elements, for which limits have been set, the ecological status is
established as follows:

high status (H)

good status (G)
moderate status (M)

General schemes for the evaluation of general physico-chemical elements are shown in Figure 8, 9 and 10.
For specific pollutants, the evaluation of the ecological status considers average annual data, for both
specific non-synthetic pollutants (Cu, Zn, As, Cr), as for synthetic pollutants (acenaphthen, PCB (sum of 7),
phenol, xilen, toluene). If the recorded values are below the limit of quantification, the statistical size used for
the evaluation is the average one. Also, for non-synthetic specific pollutants, natural background is
considered.

16

Figure 8 General scheme for establishing the ecological status for Dissolved Oxygen
Regarding the General scheme for establishing of ecological status for nutrients (N-NH4, N-NO2, N-NO3, PPO4, total P) shown in Fig. 9, compliance scheme is applied to each indicator of nutrient group (for which
limits were set), and the final status is established on the principle of "status is given by the worst placed
indicator".

17

Figure 9 General scheme for establishing of ecological status for nutrients (N-NH4, N-NO2,
N-NO3, P-PO4, total P)

18

Figure 10 General scheme for establishing the ecological status for pH

7. Description of the methodology regarding the

ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers)
hydromorphological elements
Any change in the flow regime causes an imbalance in the structure and function of aquatic ecosystems
which depends on it. Knowing the parameters of the flow regime provide information on the availability of
habitat, biodiversity, resilience (ability to restore the ecosystem), capacity of responsiveness for the biota and
synchronizing the evolutional stages of the aquatic organisms with these parameters.
In order to analyze the modifications of the hydrological regime and riverbed morphology, one must analyze
parameters corresponding to the natural hydrological regime and to the modified hydrological regime and
parameters corresponding to the natural and modified riverbed morphology. With these parameters,
indicators reflecting the modification of the hydrological regime and the degree of alteration of the riverbed
morphology can be calculated. The final purpose is to integrate these indicators into a single overall indicator
of hydromorphological alterations to assess the ecological water body status (and enroll the water bodies in
one of the five quality classes as required by the Water Framework Directive).
The hydromorphological quality elements for rivers listed in Annex V of WFD, are considered only when
assessing the high ecological status, being specific to each water body category (rivers).

19

These elements are: the hydrological regime (water level and flow), the connectivity with groundwater
bodies, the river continuity, the morphological parameters (the river depth and width variation, the bed
structure substrate of the river bed, the structure of the riparian zone);
In order to evaluate the water bodies status based on hydro-morphological elements, a situation
corresponding to a natural state of reference for the water body needs to be taken into consideration, i.e. the
situation before the impact created by the hydro-technical works (built in the years 1950 - 1960) and the
current situation - monitoring data until 2007.
The data available before building the hydraulic works (including tables and maps from the years 1950 1960) will be used as reference data for very good status.
In the same way, the monitoring data available after the construction of hydraulic works to 2007, will be used
in order to assess the current ecological status of the water body.

7.1. Hydrological parameters

The average flow modification (IH1) shall be calculated by the ratio Qm nat/Qm mod, where:

Qm nat the average flow in natural conditions (m3/s) the multiannual average flow measured from
the first year of operation of the gauging station up to the execution of the water works on the water
course;

Qm mod the average flow in modified conditions due to the antropic pressures (m3/s) the
multiannual average flow measured at the gauging station after the execution on the water works on
the water course up to the current year (2007).

Modification of maximum amplitude of water level variations (IH2) (Hnat/ Hmod)

Modification of maximum amplitude of water level variations in natural conditions (m) expressed by
the level variation corresponding to the reference status:
Hnat= (H max in year I + Hmin in year I)/2, where:

H max in year I = the maximum level averaged for the first years of operation of the gauging station
before the execution of water works on the water body (m)

Hmin in year I = the minimum level averaged for the first years of operation of the gauging station before
the execution of water works on the water body(m)

Modification of maximum amplitude of water level variations due to the anthropogenic pressures (m)
expressed by the level variation corresponding to the current status:
Hmod= (H max mod in current year + Hmin mod in current year)/2 where:

Hmax mod in current year = the maximum level registered after carrying on the water works, up to the current
year (2007) (m)

Hmin mod in current year = the minimum level registered after carrying on the water works, up to the current
year (2007) (m)

River continuity (IH3)

It is considered that in the reference year there were no transversal (cross-sections) barriers on the river.
Data from the current year (2007) shall be checked. It shall be mentioned if there are transversal barriers on
the river (thresholds, dams) and if there are any functional structures for migratory fishes (table 5). In this
case, it is considered that, the water body is in good ecological status.

20

Ordinal

Acipenseriformes

Species

Englishname

Eudontomyzon danfordi
Acipenser gueldenstaedti
Acipenser nudiventris

Carpathian lamprey
Danube sturgeon
ship sturgeon /
fringebarbel sturgeon
starlet
stellate sturgeon / starry
sturgeon
beluga / European
sturgeon
Pontic shad / Caspian
shad
Black Sea sprat
Danube salmon / huchen
lake trout
Black Sea trout
European eel
Nase
Ide
Bream
Asp
barbell
vimba bream
Common carp
big bleak
Danubian longbarbel
gudgeon / gudgeon

Acipenser ruthenus
Acipenser stellatus
Huso huso

Clupeiformes
Salmoniformes
Anguiliformes

Cypriniformes

Alosa immaculata / Caspialosa

pontica
Clupeonella cultriventris
Hucho hucho
Salmo trutta lacustris
Salmo trutta labrax
Anguilla anguilla
Chondrostoma nasus
Leuciscus idus
Abramis brama
Aspius aspius
Barbus barbus
Vimba vimba
Cyprinus carpio
Chalcalburnus chalcoides
Romanogobio uranoscopus (Tisa
superior) / Gobio Uranoscopus /
Rheogobio frici
Pelecus cultratus
Lota lota

Sichel
Burbot

Migratory
Species
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

Table 5 List of the migratory fish species on medium and long distances from the Romanian
rivers
Connectivity with groundwater bodies (IH4) is expressed by:
1. level variations recorded in the drillings for the reference status: the piezometric level in the observation
wells near the water course shall be checked and compared with the piezometric level corresponding to the
current status;
2. percentage out of the surface runoff.
For reference status, connectivity with groundwater body shall be checked, using the map no. 1, in order to
estimate the contribution of underground supply, as a percentage of multiannual average flow corresponding
to the related analyzed surface water body.
For current status, underground supply is estimated, as percentage of the multiannual average flow related
to the analyzed water body, for the years after execution of water works (map no. 2 - keeping the same
percentage of surface runoff as on Map no.1). Appropriate annual average flow shall be considered.
In absence of water balance data, one can estimate very good or good connectivity, if the ratio of
groundwater levels, corresponding to the natural regime, compared current levels varies in the range of + / 15%.
Following this analysis, estimates shall be made, if there is any change in the connectivity with groundwater,
or not.
If no observation wells near the watercourse, connectivity with groundwater bodies can be estimated only in
percentage of surface runoff.

21

Figure 11 Map - Underground water supply conditions

22

Figure 12 Lithological map

7.2. Morphological parameters

Modification of the cross section - depth Hm nat/Hm mod (IM1)
H m nat = the average depth of the river bed in natural regime shall be calculated as the
average depth for multiannual average flow, from the cross section profiles of the first years
of operation of the gauging station, recorded before the execution of water works (m);
Hm mod = the average depth under a modified regime (m) - shall be calculated as the average
depth for the multiannual average flow, from the cross section profiles, recorded after the
execution of water works, up to 2007 (considered as current situation).
Modification of the cross section - width Bm nat/Bm mod (IM2)
B m nat = the average low-flow channel width of the river bed in natural regime - shall be
calculated as the average channel width of the cross section profiles of the first year of operation
of the gauging station (m);
B m mod = the average low-flow channel width under a modified regime (m) - shall be calculated
as the average channel width of the cross section profiles of the current year (2007).
Dredging coefficient (IM3) (the channel maintenance and cleaning work) - Kd for rivers where navigation is
performed.
23

Kd=Ld/Lr - dredging ratio (dredged length / river sector length)

Modification of flood channel (major river bed) reduction coefficient (IM4)
Ki=Lmaj nat / Lmaj dammed
Ki = the flood channel reduction coefficient (the average width of the natural flood channel / the
average cross section distance between dikes on the water body);
Lmaj nat = the average width of flood channel shall be calculated from the cross section profiles from
the first year of operation of the gauging station;
Lmaj dammed = the average cross section distance between dikes on the water body.
Damming coefficient (dammed river length / water body length) in current situation (IM5)
Kdammed=Ldammed/Lwb; Ldammed = dammed river length; Lwb = water body length;
Banks consolidation coefficient (IM6) Kbanks=L cons bank/L nat current bank (length of consolidated bank by
stabilization works / length of non-consolidated bank, in current situation)
Stabilization of the river bed (IM7) (not applicable to the Danube river, only for inland rivers). The ratio of
H/h threshold shall be calculated, where, H is the (actual) water level and h threshold = height of the threshold
above the bottom level (m)
Riparian zone structure (IM8)- refers to how the land coverage is solved and its ratio.
X
X
X
After analyzing all the hydro-morphological parameters, the final ecological status of water body on
hydromorphological quality elements is represented by the most unfavorable situation (e.g. If we have the
situation where the parameter modification of average flow leads to good ecological status; the parameter
modification of major river bed reduction factor leads to moderate ecological status and the parameter
modification of the maximum amplitude of level variations leads to high ecological status , etc, then, the
water body is framed in moderate ecological status).
Qm nat

Average flow in natural conditions (m3/s)

Qm mod

Average flow in modified conditions due to entropic pressures (m3/s)

Hnat

Hm nat

Modification of the maximum amplitude of level variations in natural

conditions (m)
Modification of the maximum amplitude of level variations due to entropic
pressures (m)
Average depth in natural conditions (m)

Hm mod

Average depth in modified conditions (m)

Bm nat

Average width in natural conditions (m)

Bm mod

Average width in modified conditions (m)

Kd*=Ld/Lr

Dredging coefficient (dredging length /river sector length)

Ki=Lmaj nat/Lmaj dammed

Kdammed=Ldammed/Lwb

Major river bed reduction factor (major natural river bed average width /
average cross distance between dikes)
Damming coefficient (dammed river length / water body length)

Kbanks=Lcons. banks/Lnat current banks

Banks consolidation coefficient

Water depth (m)

Hthreshold

Threshold height above the bottom level of the river bed (m)

Hmod

Table 6 Top of Form - Synthesis of hydro-morphological parameters

After computing each parameter detailed above, one should check to which class the value derived is
belonging. The boundaries among classes are shown in the table no.7.

24

Hydro-morphological parameters for

ecological assessment - rivers
description
evaluation
2
3
Modification of average
Qm nat/Qm mod
flow (IH1)

High ecological
status

Good ecological status

4
0.96 1.04

5
increase 0.85 0.96
decrease 1.04 1.15

0.90 1.10

increase 0.80 0.90

decrease 1.10 1.20

River continuity (IH3)

permanent

Groundwater
connectivity (IH4)

yes

ensure fish stock

movement from
downstream to upstream
and vice versa
yes

Modification of
maximum amplitude of
level variation (m) (IH2)

Hnat/Hmod

Moderate
ecological status
6
increase 0.70
0.85
decrease 1.15
1.30
increase 0.70
0.80
decrease 1.20
1.30
periodical

Bad ecological
status

Poor ecological status

7
increase 0.40 0.70
decrease 1.30- 1.60

8
increase <0.40
decrease >1.60

increase 0.60 -0.70

decrease 1.30 -1.50

increase <0.60
decrease >1.50

disrupted

disrupted

no

no

increase 0.55 0.70

decrease 1.35 1.60

increase <0.55
decrease >1.60

Reduced
compared to the
natural condition
increase 0.70
0.80
decrease 1.20
1.35
increase 0.60
0.80
decrease 1.20
1.40
0.20 0.40

increase 0.35 0.60

decrease 1.40 1.65

increase <0.35
decrease >1.65

0.40 0.75

075 1.00

2.00
very reduced
connectivity
0.40 0.70

>2.00
disrupted connectivity

0.40 0.75

0.75 1.00

Modification of cross
section depth (IM1)

Hm nat/Hm mod

0.95 1.05

increase 0.80 0.95

decrease 1.05 1.20

Modification of cross
section width (IM2)

Bm nat/Bm mod

0.95 1.05

increase 0.80 0.95

decrease 1.05 1.20

Dredging coefficient
(IM3)*
Modification of major
river bed reduction
coefficient (IM4)
Modification of
damming coefficient
(IM5)
Banks consolidation
coefficient (IM6)

Kd*

0.00

0.00 0.20

Ki

1.20
natural connectivity

Kdammed

1.00
natural
connectivity
0.00

0.00 0.20

1.50
reduced
connectivity
0.20 0.40

Kbanks

0.00

0.00 0.15

0.15 0.40

0.70 1.00

25

River bed stabilization

(IM7)
Riparian zone structure
(IM8)

hthreshold

0.00 0.10 m
and H/hthreshold >
2.00
fallow land,
natural
coverage

0.10 0.20 m and

H/hthreshold > 2.00

0.20 0.30 m and

H/hthreshold > 2.00

0.30 0.50 m and

H/hthreshold > 1.50

>0.50 m

land used for agriculture

<40%

land used for

agriculture >40%

water uses with

significant
anthropogenic impact

water uses with major

anthropogenic impact
(localities, industries)

* Kd shall be calculated only for rivers where navigation is performed

(Study on the development of classification and comprehensive assessment of the status of surface waters (rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal
waters) as required by the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC on the basis of biological, chemical and hydromorphological elements, ICIM
Bucharest and collaborators and NIMRD, 2009)
Table 7 Hydro-morphological parameters for ecological assessment rivers

26

8. Application of the methodology regarding the

ecological status assessment of water bodies
hydromorphological elements on a case study - Romanian
pilot basin (the Prut river basin)
A detailed description of the Prut River Basin (physical-geographical characterization, hydrographic network,
surface water resources and groundwater) was done in the D.6.3. Report outlining the findings of the
Ialomita and Prut Basin pilot studies.
The methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies using hydro-morphological
elements was applied for two water bodies, in Prut river highlighted within the figure 13.

Figure 13 The location of the water bodies analyzed within the Prut River basin
27

Each hydromorphological parameter has been computed/derived using the methodology presented in
chapter 7 and the results are itemed below:
WB1 the river Prut sector between the confluence with Solonet and the confluence with Jijia

IH1 Modification of average flow: Since Qm nat = 85 m3/s and Qm mod = 92.3 m3/s, then Qm
nat/Qm mod = 0.92, resulting in good ecological status taking into account only IH1;
IH2 Modification of maximum amplitude of level variation (m): Since Hnat = 465 m and Hmod =
310 m, then Hnat/Hmod = 1.50, resulting in poor ecological status considering only IH2;
IH3 River continuity: permanent, resulting in high ecological status;
IH4 Groundwater connectivity not assessed;
IM1 Modification of cross section depth: Since Hm nat = 2.5 m and Hm mod = 2.75 m, then Hm
nat/Hm mod = 0.91, resulting in good ecological status;
IM2 Modification of cross section width: Since Bm nat = 60 m and Bm mod = 60.5 m, then Bm
nat/Bm mod = 0.99, resulting in good ecological status;
IM3 Dredging coefficient not assessed because there is no navigation on the Prut River
IM4 Modification of major river bed reduction coefficient: Since Bm nat = 714 km and Bm mod = 129
km, then Bm nat/Bm mod = 5.53, resulting in bad ecological status;
IM5 Modification of damming coefficient (Kdammed): Since Ldammed = 105.7 km and LWB = 118.7 km,
then Ldammed/Lwb = 0.89, resulting in bad ecological status;
IM6 Banks consolidation coefficient not assessed;
IM7 River bad stabilisation not assessed;
IM8 Structure of riparian area not assessed.

WB2 - the river Prut sector between the confluence with the Jijia River and the confluence with the
Danube River

IH1 Modification of average flow: Since Qm nat = 94 m3/s and Qm mod = 109 m3/s, then Qm
nat/Qm mod = 0.86, resulting in good ecological status;
IH2 Modification of maximum amplitude of level variation (m): Since Hnat = 436 m and Hmod =
420 m, then Hnat/Hmod = 1.04, resulting in very good ecological status;
IH3 River continuity: permanent, resulting in high ecological status
IH4 Groundwater connectivity not assessed;
IM1 Modification of cross section depth: Since Hm nat = 2.5 m and Hm mod = 2.75 m, then Hm
nat/Hm mod = 0.91, resulting in good ecological status;
IM2 Modification of cross section width: Since Bm nat = 61 m and Bm mod = 61.5 m, then Bm
nat/Bm mod = 0.99, resulting in high ecological status;
IM 3 Dredging coefficient - not assessed because there is no navigation on the Prut River
IM 4 Modification of major river bed reduction coefficient: Since Bm nat = 4170 km and Bm mod =
470 km, then Bm nat/Bm mod = 8.87, resulting in bad ecological status;
IM 5 Modification of damming coefficient (Kdammed): Since Ldammed = 234.83 km and LWB = 387 km,
then Ldammed/Lwb = 0.61, resulting in poor ecological status;
IM 6 Banks consolidation coefficient - not assessed;
IM7 River bad stabilisation not assessed;
IM 8 Structure of riparian area not assessed

Some parameters have not been assessed because there was not enough information. It was not possible to
draw a conclusion on the hydro-morphological status of the WB1 and WB2 using the methodology. In
addition, the parameters computed have a high degree of uncertainty because of the lack of information
before construction of water works.

9. Conclusions
The National Administration Apele Romane made efforts in order to achieve the objectives of this
deliverable as well as the objectives of the SEE HYDROPOWER project, preparing a lot of information
(detailed information) related to the Prut river basin (including information provided to BOKU partner).

28

This report presents short descriptions of the Romanian methodologies regarding the ecological status
assessment of water bodies (rivers) using different quality elements (phytoplankton communities; benthic
invertebrates communities; fish fauna; chemical and physico-chemical elements) and the description of the
Romanian methodology regarding the ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers)

hydromorphological elements. In addition, the parameters, which express the hydro-morphological elements,
are applied on a case study - the Prut river.
The methodology is in line with WFD requirements. Unfortunately, it is difficult to be applied mainly due to
detailed information required before the construction of water works (e.g. the average depth of the river bed
in natural regime should be calculated as the average depth (corresponding to the multiannual average
flow) from the cross section profiles of the first years of operation of the gauging station, recorded before the
execution of water works).
The results were contradictory for example, for WB1: IH1 showed good ecological status and IM5 showed
bad ecological status (possible due to the lack of information before the construction of water works).
Therefore, no conclusion regarding the overall assessment from the point of view of hydro-morphological
elements could be drawn.
The methodology regarding parameters, which should express hydro-morphological elements, for the
ecological status assessment of water bodies (rivers), should be improved and a relationship with biological
elements should be derived.

10. References
*** Water Framework Directive 60/2000 EC
*** Water Law 107/1996 with subsequent amendments
Study on the development of classification and comprehensive assessment of the status of surface waters
(rivers, lakes, transitional and coastal waters) as required by the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC on
the basis of biological, chemical and hydromorphological elements ICIM Bucharest and collaborators and
the National Institute of Marine Research and Development "Grigore Antipa" (NIMRD) - Constanta, 2009.

29

Annexes
Annex 1
Agricultural sources
Locality
County
LAT_
LONG_
Activity
No. of animals
ZV
GWB
Y_DD
X_DD
Y_D_D
X_D_D
km
Latitude
Longitude
Nr

existing_dike_Prut
NUME
ID_CADASTR
BH
CURS_APA
L_MAL_DR
D_DIG_M_DR
L_MAL_ST
D_DIG_M_ST
Length
MAX_L_km
maluri
Shape_Leng

Industrial_Sources
UNIT_INDUS
BH
WB
EUCD_WB
LOCALITATE
JUDET
LAT_
LONG_
SECT_IND
DIRECTIVE
Nr

L_Body_Prut
OBJECTID
DANUBEID
META_ID
COUNTRY
NAME
EUCD_LWB
EUCD_TLWB
EUCD_LWTYP
ECOREG_CD
SYSTEM
INS_WHEN
INS_BY
EUCD_RB
STATUS_YR
MODIFIED
MOD_TEST
MOD_APP
MOD_BETTEO
MOD_GEPACH
EXEMPT_4
EXEMPT_5
ARTIFICIAL
ALT_CAT
GEOL_CAT
SIZE_CAT
DEPTH_CAT
LONGITUDE
LATITUDE
SWSTAT_DAT
CHEM_STAT
CONF_CHEM

proposed_dike_Prut
NUME
ID_CADASTR
BH
CURS_APA
L_MAL_DR
D_DIG_M_DR
L_MAL_ST
D_DIG_M_ST
Length
MAX_L_km
maluri

RB_Prut
OBJECTID
AREA_METER
PERIMETER_
BAZINES7_
BAZINES7_I
BAZIN
OR1
OR2
OR3
OR4
OR5
OR6
COD
DENUMIRE
ordin
Shape_Leng
Shape_Area

RW_Body_Prut
OBJECTID
DANUBEID
META_ID
COUNTRY
NAME
EUCD_RWB
MSCD_RWB
EUCD_RWTYP
EUCD_TRWB
ECOREG_CD
SYSTEM
INS_WHEN
INS_BY
EUCD_RB
STATUS_YR
MODIFIED
MOD_TEST
MOD_APP
MOD_BETTEO
MOD_GEPACH
EXEMPT_4
EXEMPT_5
ARTIFICIAL
ALT_CAT
GEOL_CAT
SIZE_CAT
LONGITUDE
LATITUDE
SWSTAT_DAT
CHEM_STAT
CONF_CHEM
30

ECO_STAT
CONF_ECOST
ECO_POT
CONF_ECOPO
RISK_DATE
RISK_TOTAL
RISK_CHEM
RISK_ECO
RISK_O_POL
RISK_HAZ_S
RISK_N_POL
RISK_HYDMO
GWB_ASSOC
PA_ASSOC
RSN_P_POL
RSN_D_POL
RSN_ABSTR
RSN_FLOWR
RSN_MORPH
PHYTO
MAC_PHYTO
BEN_INV
FISH
HYDRO_REG
MORPH_COND
GEN_COND
NON_COMP
O_PART_B
EUCD_SUNIT
EUCD_RBD
SPEC_POLL
SYNT_SPEC
NSYNT_SPEC
PRIO_SUBS
SYNT_PRIO
NSYNT_PRIO

ECO_STAT
CONF_ECOST
ECO_POT
CONF_ECOPO
RISK_DATE
RISK_TOTAL
RISK_CHEM
RISK_ECO
RISK_O_POL
RISK_HAZ_S
RISK_N_POL
RISK_HYDMO
GWB_ASSOC
PA_ASSOC
RSN_P_POL
RSN_D_POL
RSN_ABSTR
RSN_FLOWR
RSN_MORPH
PHYTO
MAC_PHYTO
BEN_INV
FISH
HYMO
HYDRO_REG
RIV_CONT
MORPH_COND
GEN_COND
SPEC_POLL
SYNT_SPEC
NSYNT_SPEC
PRIO_SUBS
SYNT_PRIO
NSYNT_PRIO
NON_COMP
O_PART_B
31

HYMO
MSCD_LWB
Nume_lac
EXEMPT_7
Nr_am_av
Suprafata
Area_LAEA
Area_Balti
EU_CD_LW
X_DD
Y_DD
Shape_Leng
Shape_Area

EUCD_SUNIT
EUCD_RBD
cod_aranja
EXEMPT_7
extemp_7
Pesti_migr
Nr_am_av
Length
X_ETRS89
Y_ETRS89
Shape_Leng

32

Annex 2
General Data
Country,
River,
Site.name,
National_wb_code
Ecoregion
Typology
Fish-region
Catchment (km2)
Length (km)
Distance (km)
Sub-strate
Side-arms
Impoundment
Water-way
Assessment Method/Data
Aliens (yes/no)
HMWB (yes/no)

Phisico-chemical Data
National_wb_code
Site.name
Longitude
Latitude
Discharge (m3/s)
Oxygen concentration O2_mg/l
(average, minimum, maximum,
standard deviation, No of values,
year)
Oxygen saturation O2_% (average,
minimum, maximum, standard
deviation, No of values, year)
Total Phosphorus-P TP_P_mg/l_
(average, minimum, maximum,
standard deviation, No of values,
year)
ortho-phosphate-P PO4_P_mg/l_
(average, minimum, maximum,
standard deviation, No of values,
year)
nitrate-N NO3_N_mg/L_ (average,
minimum, maximum, standard
deviation, No of values, year)
ammonium-N NH4_N_mg/l_
(average, minimum, maximum,
standard deviation, No of values,
year)
Total nitrogen-N TN_N_mg/L
(average, minimum, maximum,
standard deviation, No of values,
year)
Biological Oxygen Demand (5
days) BOD5_mg/l (average,

Stressor
National_wb_code
Site.name
% near natural area (i.e.
"natural" forests, wetlands,
moors, meadows, pasture)
% intensive agriculture in
catchment, e.g. fields,
vinyards
% extensive agriculture in
catchment, e.g. pastures,
orchards
% urbanised and artificial
land cover in catchment
assessment of
embankments, cross
section alterations and flow
velocity increase 4 classes
(no, slight, significant,
strong)
influence of damming on
the water body (yes/no)
effects of impoundments:
water velocity decrease: 4
classes (no, slight,
significant, strong)
effects of hydropeaking:
alteration of hydrograph: 4
classes (no, slight,
significant, strong)
assessment of water
abstraction 4 classes (no,
slight, significant, strong)
influence of dam located

Input EFI+
River Basin
SampleCode
Longitude
Latitude
Day
Month
Year
Country
River Name
Site Name
Altitude
Ecoregion
Mediterranean Type
River Region
Method
Fished Area
River Width
Flow Regime
Natural Lake Upstream
Geomorphology
Former Flood Plain
Water Source
Upstream Drainage Area
Distance from Source
River Slope
Air temperature Mean
Annual Air temperature
January
Air temperature July
Former Sediment Size
Sampling Location
Species Name
Total number run1

Output EFI+
Site.name
River.name
SampleCode
Day
Month
Year
Comments.date
Longitude
Latitude
Obs.dens.HINTOL.inf.150
Obs.dens.O2INTOL
Obs.ric.RH.PAR
Obs.dens.LITH
Exp.dens.HINTOL.inf150
Exp.dens.O2INTOL
Exp.ric.RH.PAR
Exp.dens.LITH
Ids.dens.HINTOL.inf.150
Ids.dens.O2INTOL
Ids.ric.RH.PAR
Ids.dens.LITH
Method
Comments.method
Sampling.location
Comments.sampling.location
Richness
Comments.richness
Captures
Comments.sampling.effort
Ecoregion
ST-Species
River.zone
Comments.river.zone
33

minimum, maximum, standard

deviation, No of values, year)
Water temperature Temp_ C
(average, minimum, maximum,
standard deviation, No of values,
year)
Alkalinity [mvall] (optional: relevant
for crystalline geology)
alkalinity_mval/l_ meq/l (average,
minimum, maximum, standard
deviation, No of values, year)
pH value pH_mg/l (average,
minimum, maximum, standard
deviation, No of values, year)
Chloride Cl_mg/l_ (average,
minimum, maximum, standard
deviation, No of values, year)

upstream on the site itself

(flow regulation,
temperature,
sedimentation, reservoir
flushing) classes (no,
slight, strong)
Water temperature
increase (yes/no)
direct alteration of the
riparian vegetation (i.e.
adjacent natural vegetation
appropriate to the type and
geographical location of the
river) 4 classes (no, slight,
strong, complete)
Toxic Risk. Priority
substances list
(yes/no/unknown)
present acidification
(yes/no)
navigation intensity
(commercial transport,
large ship) (yes/no/high)
significant fisheries
(yes/no)
dominant pressure acting
at the water body
(main_pressure) classes
(organic, bank morphology,
impoundments, other
morphology, hydrology,
navigation, toxic, acidity,
specify)

Number Length Below 150

Number Length Over 150

Aggregated.score.Salmonid.zone
Aggregated.score.Cyprinid.zone
FishIndex
FishIndex.class

34

Authors Contact

www.seehydropower.eu
Project Contact
Ing. Maximo Peviani
maximo.peviani@rse-web.it
Telephone: +39 035 55771 (switchboard)
Fax: +39 035 5577999

Andreea-Cristina Galie
e-mail andreea.galie@hidro.ro
Telephone: +4021.31.81.115 / 109
Fax: +4021.31.81.116
Constanta Moldovan
e-mail constanta.moldovan@rowater.ro
Telephone:+ 40 21 311 03 96
Fax: +40 21 312 21 74