ENVIRONMENT AGENCY FLYLIFE ACTION PLAN Ian Johnson, Fisheries Policy and Process Manager Dr Graham Lightfoot, Fisheries Senior Technical Specialist
REPORTED DECLINE
Daily Mean Flow (m3/s) AMESBURY HYDROGRAPH 10 15 20 25 0 5 01/02/1965 Amesbury (Avon) 01/02/1967 01/02/1969 01/02/1971 01/02/1973 01/02/1975 01/02/1977 01/02/1979 01/02/1981 01/02/1983 01/02/1985 01/02/1987 01/02/1989 01/02/1991 01/02/1993 01/02/1995 01/02/1997 01/02/1999 01/02/2001 01/02/2003 01/02/2005
AVON LOW FLOWS Amesbury (River Avon) August Mean Monthly Flow August MMF LTA 1965 - 1990 LTA 1965 - 2005 2.5 2 Mean Monthly Flow (m3/s) 1.5 1 0.5 0 5 7 9 1 3 5 7 9 1 3 5 7 9 1 3 5 7 9 1 3 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g g u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u u A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A
AIR TEMPERATURE
AT 2004 CONFERENCE EA also drew attention to evidence in the literature g for flow impacts on riverfly nymph abundance in chalk rivers and the importance of Ranunculus abundance. Ranunculus recovered with better average flows 98- g 2002 We also gave a “national overview” highlighting g sheep dip effects ,pesticide impacts associated with orchards (Kent), climatic effects, siltation and other diffuse pollution
STATUS OF RIVERFLY GROUPS? AN ANNUAL “OVERVIEW” OF RIVERFLIES g Informed by angler and stakeholder reports g Incorporates Agency invertebrate survey g assessments Collated to National scale g Published on Agency Website g Informs our Riverfly Action Planning g
2005 Assessment:- Common patterns were reported across southern g chalk rivers (Lack of BWO ,only classic “Mayfly” and “Pale g Watery” at reasonable or good levels) Sheep dip impacts notable in some areas g A number of human influences implicated in declines g across the country including:- Siltation g Pollution events g Abstraction g Climatic effects also g
KEY FLY GROUPS FOR ANGLERS Evaluated the riverfly groups of most importance to g anglers (by questionnaire survey) Used to guide specific analyses of Agency datasets g for species specific trends
KEY FLIES FOR ANGLERS (Chalk/limestone) Table 3 Monthly ‘top three’ key flies. Month First Second Third April Large dark olive Hawthorn Grannom ( Brachycentrus subnubilis ) May Mayfly Medium olive Hawthorn June Mayfly Pale wateries Blue-winged olive & sedges. July Blue-winged olive Sedges Pale wateries August Blue-winged olive Sedges Pale wateries September Sedges Pale wateries Olives October Large dark olive Sedges Chironomid Midges
KEY FLIES FOR ANGLERS (Mesotrophic) Table 5 M onthly to p three key flies M onth First S econd Third A pril Large dark olive Large B rook D un M arch B rown E cdyonurus R hithrogena torrentis germ anica M ay O live upright M ayfly Yellow M ay D un June M ayfly B lue-winged olive S edges. July B lue-w inged olive S edges S m all dark olive A ugust B lue-w inged olive S edges C hironom id M idges S eptem ber A utum n D un Spurw ing B lue-w inged olive C entroptilum sp O ctober Large dark olive Stoneflies C hironom id M idges P lecoptera
MAKING MORE USE OF EXISTING DATASETS Developed statistical methods to interrogate Agency g Invertebrate data for Riverfly trends:- 3 aims were:- g To provide a graphical representation of data g Assess 5, 10, and 15 year linear trends g Assess how unusual any year is g
MAKING MORE USE OF EXISTING DATASETS Cont…. Currently testing in 5 Areas with a history of riverfly g issues and comparing with outputs from current analytical systems Operates on either Family level or species level data. g Initial results using S Wessex data encouraging. g
OUTPUTS - R. Avon Baetids “Olives” inc. “Pale watery” - Spring Avon Baetid Spring 6 5 Log (Nos/3min) 4 3 2 1 0 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year
R. Avon Baetids - Autumn Avon Baetid Autumn 6 5 in) 4 Log (Nos/3m 3 2 1 0 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year
Ephemerellids “BW Olives” - Spring Avon Ephemerellid Spring 3 2.5 2 Log (Nos/3 min) 1.5 1 0.5 0 -0.5 -1 -1.5 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year
Ephemerellids - Autumn Avon Ephemerellid Autumn 4 3 2 Log (Nos/3min) 1 0 -1 -2 -3 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year
Ephemerids “Classic Mayfly”- Spring Avon Ephemerid Spring 5 4 Log (Nos/3min) 3 2 1 0 -1 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year
Ephemerids - Autumn 6 Avon Ephemerid Autumn 5 4 Log (Nos/3 min) 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 Year
HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO WHAT ANGLERS ARE REPORTING ? 2005 OVERVIEW:- g “Common patterns occur across southern chalk g rivers (Lack of BWO ,only classic “Mayfly” and “Pale Watery” at reasonable or good levels)” Observations match the analysis closely g
ANGLER INVERTEBRATE MONITORING SCHEME EA Policy approved for Operational support g Approach uses same sampling method and aquatic g invertebrate classification as EA. Hence data compatible with EA data and EA staff g can use historic data to help in setting “trigger” conditions. EA funding development of guidance material and g H+S training of course tutors
ANGLER INVERTEBRATE MONITORING SCHEME Support and liaison with local Agency staff built in. g Means for more rapid detection of abnormal g conditions Increased scrutiny of the environment g To date schemes in 7 EA Areas. g 8 Further Areas in 2007/8 g
MONITORING PROGRAMME Analysis of long term datasets from 70’s and 80’s g This work will be carried out in 2007 g Report on how riverfly abundance has changed since g then. Network of Riverfly Monitoring sites established within g current sampling Long-term data sites flagged for Riverfly purpose g Angler Invertebrate Monitoring Scheme data g
PHYSICAL HABITAT IMPROVEMENT UPPER AVON (CHISENBURY)
CONTROLLING RUNOFF 40 Catchments now have a Catchment Sensitive g Farming Officer (in partnership with Natural England) Working with farmers to reduce diffuse pollution g Sediment g P and N g Organic pollution - slurries etc. g Pesticides g
R.WYLYE
R.PIDDLE
R.PIDDLE
SERIOUS GULLYING
CONTROLLING RUNOFF £24 million to be spent by 2008 g These actions will form part of WFD delivery g Particular focus around soil nutrient and manure g planning Also specialist technical advice g Avoiding soil compaction g Dealing with run-off pathways g
FLOW REQUIREMENTS Case Studies shaping Policy:- g Eg.River Itchen - A significant relationship was found g between invertebrate community variation and summer Q95 flow across all R. Itchen sites. Flow thresholds set, based on multivariate ordination g techniques, to prevent significant community change (Exley 2006) These targets have now been used to develop a g licensing policy option for the Habitats Directive Review of Consents. Methodology disseminated within EA g
SHEEP DIP
SHEEP DIP We raised sheep dip-related effects on riverflies as g a significant issue at the 2004 conference Cypermethrin product marketing suspended by g Defra 21 Feb 2006, following submission of Agency evidence Defra/EA Pollution Reduction Plan g Monitoring - risk based targeted environmental g monitoring in place Significant report in April 2007 g
PESTICIDES Defra Research - Avermectins (ivermectin and g doramectin ) were found in sediments but insufficient data to assess risk to sediment organisms Aquatic impacts study 2004-06 EA Report spring g 2007 - Problems with passive pesticide monitoring devices and detection. National level risk mapping showed crop type as the g major risk to aquatic environment.Orchards carried highest potential risk . More widely grown crops (cereals etc ) an order of magnitude less risk.
ENDOCRINE DISRUPTION Effects on Invertebrates Reviewed 1999 g Latest EA Review published Spring 2007 g Some effects identified earlier as “ED” turning out to g be more generally toxic effects. Still a lot to learn about insect endocrine systems , g how they may be disrupted and the ultimate impacts. Evidence of population level effects still sparse. g
WATER FRAMEWORK DIRECTIVE Standards for morphology, hydrology and chemistry g supporting ecological standards. At least ‘good ecological status’ the objective g Fish, invertebrate and algae/ macrophyte monitoring. g Family level classification of invertebrates g New scoring (ASPT) under development which will g take account of abundance.
NEW ANALYTICAL TOOLS “River Pollution Diagnostic System”(RPDS) g Will assign any aquatic invertebrate sample to the g nearest “stress” group with a probability that the stress is present. Another less developed system - will predict biology g from a known chemistry Still a prototype. g
Recommend
More recommend
