Water Framework Directive Marine Plants Task Team Tools Paper ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Case Study – Milford Haven Five intertidal rocky shore sites within the water body of Milford Haven were sampled in 2004 for the application of both the full species list tool and the reduced species list tool. The results from this survey are given in table 11 for the FSL and in table 12 for the RSL. The confidence of class was evaluated by looking at the standard deviation and standard error (tables 9 and 10). The results show slight deviation between individual components of the metric system although very minor. These results are also seen in figures 13 and 14, which show the EQR value with error bars representing the standard error as calculated for each site. Figures 15 and 16 show the minimum and maximum EQR values for each individual component of the metric at each site. Table 9: Final quality status and EQR for Milford Haven including the maximum, minimum EQR values for the individual components, Standard deviation and standard error using the full species list. Full Species list Site Name EQR Quality Class Min Max St Dev St Error West Angle 0.87 HIGH 0.83 1.00 0.072 0.032 Angle Bay 0.66 GOOD 0.43 1.00 0.215 0.096 Sawdern Point 0.85 HIGH 0.78 1.00 0.086 0.038 Fort Hubberston 0.78 GOOD 0.51 1.00 0.175 0.078 Pembroke Ferry 0.69 GOOD 0.56 1.00 0.191 0.086 Average 0.77 GOOD 0.148 0.066
Table 10: Final quality status and EQR for Milford Haven including the maximum, minimum EQR values for the individual components, Standard deviation and standard error using the reduced species list. Reduced species list for Wales Site Name EQR Quality Class Min Max St Dev St Error West Angle 0.82 HIGH 0.67 0.91 0.101 0.045 Angle Bay 0.57 MODERATE 0.39 0.72 0.143 0.064 Sawdern Point 0.78 GOOD 0.67 0.82 0.062 0.028 Fort Hubberston 0.73 GOOD 0.56 0.84 0.114 0.051 Pembroke Ferry 0.73 GOOD 0.48 1.00 0.188 0.084 Average 0.72 GOOD 0.122 0.054 The final classification for the water body of Milford is based on the assumption that for this individual metric the final EQR is an average of the EQR for each site. The average EQR for the FSL is and with a standard error of 0.066 this results in a range of 0.67 – 0.8. Although this is still within the Good class it is quite a broad range. This range reflects the localised problems on isolated sites and places limited confidence in the overall classification of the water body. However, this still enables localised impacts to be targeted for future improvement, rather than tackling the whole water body. As the deshoring factor has not yet been calculated for the reduced species list the results at this stage are not completely accurate but show the final outcome without taking account of the shore description.
Page 1 and 2: Water Framework Directive Marine Pl
Page 3 and 4: dates will result in a larger speci
Page 5 and 6: Figure 2: Sites included within the
Page 7 and 8: fauna and flora and exposed shores
Page 9 and 10: Table 1: Field sampling sheet to re
Page 11 and 12: These different community factors c
Page 13 and 14: All datasets were tested for normal
Page 15 and 16: Table 3: Calculation of ‘deshor
Page 17 and 18: Development of a Reduced Species Li
Page 19 and 20: certain species are only present on
Page 21 and 22: Figure 11: Map of the UK and Republ
Page 23 and 24: Table 4: Species lists for each of
Page 25 and 26: Table 6: Boundaries values for RSL,
Page 27: The final metric system works on a
Page 31 and 32: EQR Value EQR Value 1.00 0.80 0.60
Page 33 and 34: EQR Value 1.00 0.80 0.60 0.40 0.20

Water Framework Directive Marine Plants Task Team Tools Paper ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?