Action 1. Final Report (31.12.2013)

LIFE Project Number LIFE09 ENV/FI/000569 FINAL Report Covering the project activities from 1/10/2010 to 30/9/2013

Reporting Date 30/12/2013 Participatory monitoring, forecasting, control and socio- economic impacts of eutrophication and algal blooms in River Basin Districts (GisBloom)

Data Project Project location Helsinki, Finland Project start date: 01/10/2010 Project end date: 30/09/2013 Total Project duration 36 months (in months) Total budget 3 060 856 € EC contribution: 1 503 638 € (%) of total costs 49,12 % (%) of eligible costs 49,25 %

Data Beneficiary Name Beneficiary Suomen ympäristökeskus (SYKE) Contact person Dr Olli Malve Postal address P.O.Box 140, FI-00260 Helsinki Visit address Mechelininkatu 34a, 00260 Helsinki Telephone + 358 295 251 401, direct n° + 358 400 148 826 Fax: + 358 9 5490 2190, direct n° + 358 9 5490 2391 E-mail [email protected] Project Website http://www.syke.fi/en- US/Research__Development/Research_and_development_projects/Projects /Tools_for_evaluation_and_management_of_eutrophication_GisBloom

1. List of content

1. List of content ...... 2 2. Executive Summary ...... 3 3. Introduction ...... 6 4. Administrative part ...... 8 4.1 Description of management system ...... 8 4.2 Evaluation of Management system ...... 14 5. Technical part ...... 28 5.1 Task by task - description ...... 28 Action 2. Collation, analysis and demonstration of algal blooms ...... 28 Action 3 Demonstration of eutrophication and algal bloom responses to management and restoration measures and socio-economic impacts ...... 64 Action 4 Demonstration of tools to river basin districts and local management projects .... 92 5.2 Evaluation ...... 112 5.3 Analysis of long-term benefits ...... 122 5.4 Dissemination issues ...... 128 5.4.1 Dissemination: overview per activity ...... 128 5.4.2 Layman's report ...... 131 5.4.3 After-LIFE Communication plan ...... 131 6. Comments on the financial report ...... Virhe. Kirjanmerkkiä ei ole määritetty. 6.1. Costs incurred ...... Virhe. Kirjanmerkkiä ei ole määritetty. 6.2. Accounting system ...... Virhe. Kirjanmerkkiä ei ole määritetty. 6.3. Partnership arrangements ...... Virhe. Kirjanmerkkiä ei ole määritetty. 6.4. Auditor's report/declaration ...... Virhe. Kirjanmerkkiä ei ole määritetty. 7. Annexes ...... 132

2. Executive Summary

The objective of GisBloom project was to demonstrate new innovative tools - that is data, models and interactive map services designed for the participatory monitoring and management of eutrophication and algal blooms in river basins, lakes and coastal areas. We monitored the efficiency of the tools and compared it to the the efficiency of existing methodologies and tools. Demonstrations showed that nutrient loading to surface waters and the resulting eutrophication and algal blooms will be mitigated and managed using these tools in a more cost efficiently and participitary manner.

While delivering these direct environmental benefits, GISBLOOM project contributed to the achievement of the environmental objectives of EU Water Framework Directive (WFD, 2000/60/EC), Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC) and Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC) by building capacity for river basin management under climate change.

The main delivarables included in the graphical presentation, models and tools to evaluate ecological and economic impacts. The modelling tools included real time prediction of eutrophication and algal blooms, the scenario analysis of management measures and climate change, the estimation of lake or estuary specific Maximum Permissible Nutrient Load (MPNL) and the identification of costs, benefits and the efficient programme of measures in a river basin to achieve MPNL. Web based map services www.jarviwiki.fi and www.vesinetti.fi were implemented to facilitate the participatory monitoring and management and for the demonstration and dissemination of project results. The target audience of demonstrations was river basin managers and stakeholder groups in selected pilot areas. In the end, demonstrated tools were evaluated based on the feedback from pilot areas and the added value compared to the state of the art of river basin management was estimated.

In summary, project management, the data collation, analysis and modeling were completed according to the plans. The demonstration of the tools was realized and the feedback from pilot areas was gathered and analyzed. Results were dissiminated in national and European Scale.

The key outputs of the project were: - Complete analysis of nation wide data on hydrology, land use, nutrient loading, water quality, etrophication and algal blooms. - Implementation of tools and models for the monitoring and management of etrophication and algal blooms in river basins, lakes and estuaries. - Increased public awareness about eutrophication and algal blooming. - Web based map services and interactive portals (www.jarviwiki.fi and www.vesinetti.fi) aimed at the dissemination of information and viewpoints, educational purposes, and participatory river basin management - The integrated WSFS-VEMALA-LAKESTATE model which simulates hydrology, phosphorus and nitrogen and algal blooms in river basins and in about 48 000 Finnish lakes on the daily basis. - Eutrophication and algal bloom scenarios as a function of climate and land use changes. - The cost and benefit evaluations of programme of measures in the eight pilot areas. - The identification of feasible and cost-efficient combinations of measures in the pilot areas. - The demonstration of developed and introduced tools and methods. - Dissemination of project results.

- The monitoring and evaluation of demonstration character of methods and tools demonstrated and the guidance of their use in river basin management. - A seminar for national stakeholders and training courses for stakeholders and experts. - The active exchange of information between the European projects and organizations, which produce information for the implementation of WFD programmes of measures.

The feedback from the pilot areas was mainly affirmative. In particular, the integration of data and models into the interactive web based map services www.vesinetti.fi and www.jarviwiki.fi received a positive response. In addition, the models of cost and benefits and the tools for the identification of cost effective programmes of measures were noticed with pleasure. However, the analysis of feedback from demonstrations revealed some shortcomings in our tools and a short list of shortcomings was compiled to be considered in the fine-tuning to fulfil the special needs of river basin managers and stakeholders.

In the end, it was concluded ● In the planning of river bainmanagement, there is a demand for systematic evaluation of ecological and economic efficiency of mitigation measures of nutrient loads. ● Consultancy services for end users ought to be tailored and provided. ● Models need to be further automated and integrated. ● Uncertainty analysis should be introduced into each model. ● The web based map services www.jarviwiki.fi and www.vesinetti.fi are useful in dissemination, educations and in participatory monitoring and management of river basins. ● Lake or estuary specific Maximum Permissible Nutrient Loads (MPNL) estimated using LLR model were sometimes difficult or impossible to achieve using present measures. ● New management measures are needed or timetables Water Framework Directive must be postponed. ● More emphasis should be placed on the estimation of the economic benefits.

The start-up of a new consultancy service inside SYKE was among the main outcomes of these demonstrations. This service supports local Centres for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment in using the the tools in the planning of river basin management.

In chapter 3 (Introduction), the background, objectives, organization and key themes of demonstrations, outputs and delivarebales of GisBloom project are presented.

In chapter 4 (Adminstrative part), the management system is descriped and evaluated. Management system functioned as planned and no major correctional measures were needed. Reports and deliverables were delivered in time. The demostrations proved that nutrient loading to surface waters, eutrophication and algal blooms can be cost efficiently mitigated and good ecological status will achieved as planned using these tools. The deficiencies were identified and the corrective actions were planned.The newly set-up modelling consultancy service of Finnish Environment Institute for river basin managers will enhance the quality on river basins plans in general. The improved ecological status of waters will be the major long- term environmental benefit which, in turn, will bolster the commitment of stakeholders and public to participate the implementation of management plans

In chapter 5 (Technical part), actions are descriped (5.1) and evaluated (5.2) task by task. The progress of the project is presented subaction by subaction and milestones, deliverables and dissemination outputs are outlined. The implementation of project is in accordance with the established time schedule. Evaluation of project results indicated no major shortcomings. In fact, all the planned tools were demonstrated and major benefits and deficiencies were reported. The project demonstrated new innovative tools for monitoring ecological status of surface waters and for planning, management measures. With these tools eutrophication and algal blooms in lakes and coastal areas can be demonstrated, monitored and controlled more efficiently than before. As a result, nutrient loading to surface waters can be reduced cost efficiently, eutrophication and algal blooms will mitigated and good ecological status will achieved as planned

In capter 5.3 the long-term environmental, economic and social benefits were evaluated. Improved efficiency of monitoring, communication and management is the major long-term environmental benefit that will help participatory monitoring and planning of mitigation measures and bolster the commitment of stakeholders and public to the implementation of management plans. The improved understanding of casual linkages between land uses and ecological status of waters will increase the motivation, preparedness and ability of public to act and to participate the planning and implementation of measures. In addition, a newly set- up modelling consultancy service of Finnish Environment Institute for river basin managers will complement the existing operations model of river basin management. Resulting long- term savings and business opportunities are evident: lower cost of unit nutrient load reduction of migitation measures, improved water quality for recreation, fisheries, household and industrial water uses and the spin-off of new private sector business opportunities using demonstrated tools and information technologies Stregthened commitment of public and stakeholders to the monitoring and management surface waters, new business opportunities and the fair shear of costs benefits between beneficieries and stakeholders will be among the most important lomg-term social impacts. Demonstrated tools proved to be replicable and transferable on national and Euopean scale. Commercialisation potential was clearly demonstrated by Aronaut Ltd (one of the beneficiaries) and by the set-up of consultancy service of Finnish Environment Institute. For stakeholders the web based map tools provide free access to monitoring data, estimation results, plans and reports. Water framework directive is a legistlative driver for transfer of the tools to national and European arenas, whereas fragmentation of environmental administration and beneficiaries is the biggest obstacle. The visibility of project is realized by drawing attention through web services (www.vesinetti.fi and www.jarviwiki.fi) and the successful demonstrations. The web based map services (data, tools and models) proved to be much more democratic, transparent and fluent in that they provide an easy access to monitoring data, computational tools, plans and reports. They facilitated also discussion, information exchange, and dealing with differences between beneficiaries and stakeholders. The usage of tools and services in river basin management, improved efficiency and stakeholder involvement are the major long term indicators of the project success..

The overview of dissemination issues (5.4.1), Layman’s report (5.4.2) and After-LIFE Communication Plan (5.4.3) are presented. The number of dissemination issues is remarkable.

In chapter 6 (Commments on the financial report), Costs incurred (6.1), Accounting system (6.2) and Auditor's report/declaration (6.4) are outlined and described.

3. Introduction Background Despite increasing efforts to reduce nutrient loads from river basins eutrophication problems and algal blooms have continued and climate change has even excaberated the problem. Resulting algal blooms have put in danger the health of humans and animalsand may significantly decrease the ecological status and the usability of the water courses to variety of uses. Thus, the costs of achieving environmental and economic objectives are increasing on and on.

Problem The monitoring and management of nutrient loads and ecological status of receving lakes and estuaries are costly and the major challenge in collating the River Basin Management Plans under the Water Framework Directive (WFD).What is more, they cannot be implemented without public and stakeholder involvement and participitation.

Unfortunately, the tools for the cost efficient, participatory monitoring and management of ecological and economic impacts are lacking and practical cost-benefit analysis has not been systematically implemented in the member states. As a result, the costs and benefits of measures are not well known and the cost efficiency and the fair division of costs between government, private sector and other stakeholders cannot be assured.

What concerns climate change, it was largely perceived in a qualitative way, in the 1st cycle of river basin management process and it needs to be quantitatively analysed in the 2nd river basin management cycle. That, in turn, is not possible with existing tools.

Objectives: To solve the aforementioned problems the GISBLOOM aimed at building capacity for river basin management under WFD by - improving understanding and disseminating knowledge concerning algal blooms and their responses to catchment management and measures in lakes and coastal areas. - improving citizens' and stakeholders' awareness and motivation, and building up their capacity to act in water protection. - employing the model based predictive methods to classify water courses which is often difficult with present, often inadequate monitoring resources. - introducing quantitative ecological and socio-economic analysis into the river basin management plans. - including the quantitative analysis of climate change into the river basin management plans. - demonstrating systematic and holistic approach and participatory process in collating river basin management plans.

In the project, these new innovative tools for participatory monitoring and management of river basins were demonstrated and their ability to facilitate stakeholder involvement and cooperation between different organizations of authorities and citizens were assssed. The management of eutrophication and algal blooms in lakes and coastal areas were particularly targeted.

The monitoring technologies, models and web services were used to quantify current status and the ecological and economic impacts of management scenarios to ensure that measures are flexible and robust enough to be viable under climate variability and change.

The hypothesis to be tested: It was hypothesized that the integration of tools and models (Figure 1) of ecological and economic monitoring, assesment and management using web based map services will improve interaction and involvement of authorities, public and stakeholders and the cost efficiency of river basin management. The operations model was tested in river basin scale together with river basin districts and local management projects.

Figure 1. The hypothesis to be tested: Integrated models, tools and web services will improve the cost efficiency of river basin management and stakeholder involvement.

Technical and methodological solution: To test the aforementioned hypothesis by implementing the an array of innovative monitoring, analysis, modelling, planning, dissemination and decision making tools and activities were implemented and integrated in a Web based interactive map services for authorities, planners, stakeholders and citizens: - Innovative combination of nation wide data and models for hydrology, water quality and algal blooming for the demonstration of data, real time forecasts and cost efficient management measures. - Web based map services and interactive portals (www.jarviwiki.fi & www.vesinetti.fi) aimed at the dissemination of information and viewpoints, educational purposes and at participatory river basin management. - The integrated WSFS-VEMALA-LAKESTATE model which simulates hydrology, phosphorus and nitrogen and algal blooms in river basins and in about 48 000 Finnish lakes on the daily basis. - Algal bloom predictions as a function of nutrient load and land use changes. - Estimation of maximum permissible nutrient load to a lake or estuary. - The cost and benefit evaluations of programme of measures in the eight pilot areas. - The identification of feasible and cost-efficient measures in the pilot areas. - The demonstration of developed and introduced tools and methods. - The monitoring and evaluation of demonstration character of methods and tools demonstrated and the guidance of their use in river basin management. - A seminar for national stakeholders and training courses for stakeholders and experts. - The active exchange of information between the European projects and organizations, which produce information for the implementation of WFD programmes of measures.

Expected results and environmental benefits: The demostrations proved that nutrient loading to surface waters, eutrophication and algal blooms can be cost efficiently mitigated and good ecological status will achieved as planned using these tools. The deficiencies were identified and the corrective actions were planned.

The newly set-up modelling consultancy service of Finnish Environment Institute for river basin managers will enhance the quality on river basins plans.

The improved ecological status of waters will be the major long-term environmental benefit which, in turn, will bolster the commitment of stakeholders and public to participate the implementation of management plans.

Expected longer term results: The stregthened commitment, new business opportunities and the fair shear of costs and benefits between beneficieries and stakeholders will be among the most important long-term social impacts. The long-term savings and business opportunities are evident: lower cost of unit nutrient load reduction of migitation measures, improved water quality for recreation, fisheries, household and industrial water uses and the spin-off of new private sector business opportunities using demonstrated tools and information technologies.

4. Administrative part

4.1 Description of management system

Working method, project phases and activities and tasks per phase: The demostrations of the tools were implemented in three steps (Figure 2): In Step 1, - the data was collated into GIS data bases for internal usage and later on in www.vesinetti.fi, the map based web service designed for river basin managers and stakeholders. - The analyses of loading and algal responses in lakes, estuaries and catchment areas were implemented and results were reported. In step 2, - the functionality of models, map services and assessment tools were defined and implemented. - Ecological and socio-economic impacts were studied and modelled in most of the pilot areas. - As a result, the costs and benefits of management measures and the combination of cost efficient measures were reported. In Step 3, - the feed-back from pilot areas was gathered. - Based on feed-back, the content and functionality of models, map service and assessment methods were re-specified and implemented. - The www.jarviwki.fi was released to collect algal bloom observations of citizens and to facilitate information exchange and stakeholder involvement. - The real time algal bloom model and tools for climate and land use scenarios were implemented in www.vesinetti.fi service and the delivery of real time bloom predictions was launched. - The dissemination material, i.e. www-pages and posters, were published.

1. Data Analyses Collation and Analyses of Data GIS Data Base

2. Management Models and Climate Implementation of Scenarios Web Services Scenarios Models, Tools and Services

Ecological and Socio- Economic Forecasts 3. and Impact Estimates Demonstration in River Basin Management Public Understanding, Motivation and Skills

Cost-Efficient Good Ecological Implementation of Status and Usability Management of Water Body

22.3.2011 Olli Malve, SYKE

Figure 2. The implementation of GisBloom project was implemented in three steps.

In addition to the three main tasks (Data collation - action 2, Modeling - action 3 and Demonstration - action 4), there was Project management action (1) and Synthesis and dissemination action (5) (Figure 3).

Figure 3.The main actions of GisBloom project.

Eight themes (Table 1 and Figure 4) were launched based on the actions and information needs of the pilot areas to reinforce and streamline the co-operation between the actions and the pilot areas. Several workshops were arranged.

Table 1. Themes of demonstrations.

Theme Name Content Pilot areas Actions GIS database and Saving, handling and Hiidenvesi 2.5 A) services analysing data, Vanajavesi 3.1.2

modelling and internet Pien-Saimaa GIS services Understanding and Charts about Hiidenvesi 2.1 communicating causes progression of Vesijärvi 2.4 B) of eutrophication algalblooming Lapuanjoki (3.1.1 & 3.1.2) trough e.g. conceptual Vanajavesi Conceptual models models Temmesjoki Pien-Saimaa Loading effects of Modelling and Hiidenvesi 2.3 land use (agriculture): predicting diffuse Vesijärvi 3.1.1 C) Modelling and loading Lapuanjoki evaluating diffuse Vanajavesi Diffuse loading loading Pyhäjärvi Temmesjoki Pien-Saimaa The effects of internal Measuring, modelling Hiidenvesi 2.1 D) loading: measuring, and evaluating internal Vesijärvi 2.2 modelling and loading Lapuanjoki 3.1.1 Internal loading evaluating Vanajavesi Pien-Saimaa The development of Modelling and Hiidenvesi 2.1 state of lakes and predicting Vesijärvi 2.2 E) coastal waters: eutrophication and Lapuanjoki 3.1.1 modelling and bloomingresponces Vanajavesi 3.1.2 Algae models predicting Pyhäjärvi eutrophication (e.g. Temmesjoki LLR) Pien-Saimaa Evaluating cost- Modelling and Hiidenvesi 3.1.1 efficient measures: predicting costs and Lapuanjoki 3.2 F) Cost-benefit analyses benefit Vanajavesi Temmesjoki Economical evaluation Karvianjoki Pien-Saimaa Paimionjoki Dissemination and Developing Internet Hiidenvesi 2.5 participatory water services for water Vesijärvi 3.1 G) management: Internet management from the Lapuanjoki 3.1.1 services (Lake Wiki products of the project Vanajavesi 3.1.2 www sevices and "Water Network") Temmesjoki 5 Karvianjoki Pien-Saimaa Evaluating the state of Classifying water Hiidenvesi 2.1 lakes and coastal bodies left out side the Vesijärvi 3.1.1 waters without monitoring programmes Lapuanjoki H) monitoring data: Vanajavesi Ecological Karvianjoki Classification classification Pien-Saimaa according to model results

Figure 4. The operation and interaction of themes in the demonstration of GisBloom tools in river basin management.

Planning: Before the kick-off seminar, each action and beneficiaries made detailed action and budget plans for the condination and monitoring purposes. The plans were presented and discussed in the seminar and approved by the management board and the steering group.

Beneficiaries: The coordinating beneficiery Finnish Environment Institute Institute (SYKE) is the only governmental research and development institute located within the administration of the Finnish Ministry of Environment. Part of the funding at SYKE comes directly from the State budget, part from the Ministry of Environment, and the remainder from various other national and international sources, all as separate R&D contracts. SYKE is responsible for carrying out environmental research, monitoring and assessment, publishing and disseminating the results, and maintaining appropriate information systems. All SYKE's R&D-work is carried out in seven programmes on themes varying from global environmental issues, like climate change and biodiversity, to more national and regional issues, like controlling eutrophication and hazardous substances. There is a strong emphasis at SYKE on providing support to the decision-making process, including scientific and technical advice and through the development of methods to combat harmful environmental changes. SYKE employs nearly 600 people, more than 370 of whom have a university education. Dr. Olli Malve was the coordinator of project (action 1).

Associated Beneficiaries and their leaders were:

Arbonaut Ltd, Beneficiary leader Dr. Tuomo Kauranne who has twenty years of experience in data assimilation, both in weather forecasting and in forest resource assessment, water ecological models and in building GIS databases and internet based GIS systems for a large number of users. Dr. Kauranne coordinated subaction 3.1.2 (Internet GIS platform and data- assimilation).

Lake Vesijärvi Foundation, Beneficiary leader Dr. Heikki Mäkinen. The Foundation participate actively the management of Lake Vesijärvi. Dr. Mäkinen coordinated subaction 4.2.2 (Vesijärvi).

The Association for Water and Environment of Western Uusimaa (LUVY), Beneficiary leader Jaana Lehtonen. LUVY plays an important role in practical water protection work in whole Western Uusimaa area. Jaana Lehtonen coordinated subaction 4.2.1 (Karjaanjoki river basin).

Helsinki University, Tvärminne Zoological Station, Beneficiary leader Prof. Harri Kuosa is a professor in Baltic Sea Research. His interests are phytoplankton taxonomy, carbon cycles and climate change. Prof. Kuosa coordinated subaction 2.2.1 (Data collation).

Centre for Economic Development, Transport and Environment in South Ostrobotnia, Beneficiary leader Liisa-Maria Rautio. She is the coordinator for West Finland River Basin District and responsible for collating the River Basin Management Plan. She has been involved in several working groups and steering groups which have co-ordinated and harmonized the implementation of WFD in national level. Ms. Rautio coordinated subaction 4.1.2 Lapuanjoki river basin.

The progress of the project was followed at the combined meetings of the Management Board and the Steering Group and monitored by checking the lists of deliverables and milestones.

The consortium agreement was made between the coordinating and associated beneficiaries in the beginning of project.

Partners: Partnership with Vanajavesi säätiö (Lake Vanajavesi pilot area), Lappeenranta city (Lake Pien-Saimaa pilot area), WATER PRAXIS project (River Temmesjoki pilot area), VELHO project (river Karvianjoki and river Paimionjoki pilot areas) and Lake Pyhäjärvi Institute (Lake Pyhäjärvi) provided additional pilot areas.

Project organization: The components of the management structure were: 1) Management Board formed by the project leader (Dr. O. Malve, SYKE) and the Associated Beneficiary (partner) leaders (T. Kauranne, J. Lehtonen, H. Kuosa, H. Mäkinen and V. Westberg) ; 2) Core management team at the Coordinating Beneficiary SYKE (O. Malve, P. Rotko, K. Kallio, B. Vehviläinen ans S. Väisänen); 3) Steering Group formed by the Management Board and the Action leaders had representatives also from Ministery of Environment (Hannele Nyroos) and from pilot areas (Teija Kirkkala); 4) Actions and their personnel. The structure of the project management is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Management structure of GISBLOOM-project

Project Manager – tasks to organize project:

The coordinator, Dr. Olli Malve, was (action 1) responsible for - Coordinated implementation of the project - Launching of project - Monitoring and evaluation of results - Formal technical and financial reports and material as required o Intermediate audit reports as requested by the Commission o Inception Report 31/08/2011 o Mid-term Report 30/06/2012 o Final Report 31/12/2013 o Deliverables send in time to commission o Dissemination material o After-LIFE Communication plan - Arrangements of workshops, meetings and conferences - Networking with other projects

Other representatives – tasks to organize project: Maria Koski was financial manager and Pia Rotko assisted in project management and reporting. Dr. Kari Kallio coordinated action 2 (Data collation and analysis), Dr. Bertel Vehviläinen coordinated action 3 (Modelling), Sari Väisänen coordinated action 4 (Demonstration) and Pia Rotko coordinated action 5 (Synthesis and Dissemination). Dr.

Marko Järvinen coordinated subaction 2.1 (Lakes), Dr. Seppo Kaitala coordinated action 2.2 (Estuaries), Sirkka Tattari coordinated subaction 2.3 (Diffuse loading), Dr. Kari Kallio coordinated subaction 2.4 (Remote sensing and automatic measurements), Timo Pyhälahti coordinated subaction 2.5 (Information tools), Markus Huttunen coordinated subaction 3.1 (Ecological models) and Dr. Mika Marttunen coordinated subaction 3.2 (Economic models). Coordinators made detail action and budget plans, monitored progress and demonstration character and participated reporting.

4.2 Evaluation of Management system

The process

The project was launched on 1'st of October as planned. Management Board and Steering Board had the first meeting on 7'th of October. A kick off workshop were arranged on 26'th of November for all project partners in Helsinki and detailed working and budget plans for first operative season were presented and approved. Beneficiaries were gathered up-to-date with practical arrangements concerning the project management structures and procedures. The personnel for each action and the project monitoring protocol were fixed.

After the kick-off meeting the consortium agreement was made between the coordinating and associated beneficiaries and additional pilot areas were fixed: - Lake Vanajavesi pilot area (Vanajavesi säätiö) - Lake Pien-Saimaa pilot area (Lappeenranta city) - River Temmesjoki pilot area (WATER PRAXIS project) - River Karvianjoki and river Paimionjoki pilot areas (VELHO project) - Lake Pyhäjärvi (Lake Pyhäjärvi Institute)

The progress of the project was followed at the combined meetings of the Management Board and the Steering Group and monitored by checking the lists of deliverables and milestones. Following meetings were arranged - 1st meeting 7.10.2012 - 2nd meeting 1.11. 2010 - 3nd meeting 14.12.2010 - 4nd meeting 28.3. 2011 - 5rd meeting 21.6. 2011 - 6th meeting 5.10. 2011 - 7th meeting 14.3. 2012 - 8th meeting 12.12.2012

The number of meetings decreased towards the end of project because beneficiaries met regularly in pilot area demonstrations and biannual progress reports did not indicated any problems in project implementation. Biannual progress reporting helped to monitor the progress and demonstration character of project. No corrective actions were necessary launch.

Partnership functioned awell and provided extreamly valuable feedback from end users of the tools.

The networking action disseminated results and lessons learnt in demonstrating GISBLOOM web services and tools in pilot areas. A symposium on CLIMATE CHANGE CHALLENGES

IN RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT in 17–19 January 2011, Oulu, Finland was arranged together with WATERPRAXIS project (http://www.waterpraxis.net/en/about-the-project.html - "From theory and plans to eco-efficient and sustainable practices to improve the status of the conferences throughout Europe for example in NORDIC WATER 2012, Catchment Restoration and Water Protection, XXVII Nordic Hydrological Conference, 13-15 August, 2012 in Oulu – Finland. The Final all participant meeting was arranged 18.9.2013 together with the network of Finnish planners of programs of measures (PoMs). This gave us on unique opportunity communicate the project results and provide education and training to the key user group of demonstrated tools. As a result, a new consultancy service for the planners of PoMs was launched in SYKE with funding from Ministery of Environment. Results were presented and training was provided in several pilot area demonstrations and in seminar of Finnish river basin restoration network, 14.-16.8.2013, in Lahti, Finland. After the project, the tools and results were presented in CIS Working group on Programmes of Measures Meeting (Linking Pressures and Measures), 12-13.11.2013, Eu commission, DG-Environment, Brussels.

The core management team met approximately once a month.

The progress of the project was monitored by the PL through regular contacting with the persons in charge of project actions. Monitoring report was compiled from the material delivered by action leaders twice a year. Evaluation of the progress and demonstration character of actions based on delivered material was held in biannual all partner meetings after the compilation of monitoring report and the monitoring report was approved in managemend board and steering group meetings. No corrective actions were necessary to implement.

The project was monitored based on the observed successes and failures to submit deliverables and to comply with the action specific criteria of dissemination and demonstration actions. The project progressed well in terms of criteria of demonstration and dissemination character (demonstration implemented in the actual scale of river basin management and evaluation is based on a clearly defined baseline situation). No deficiencies were observed by the end of the project in the progress of project and in the dissemination and demonstration of methodologies. Thus, no corrective action was necessary to launch.

Inception report was prepared and approved by 21th of June and submitted by 1st of July. The Mid term report was submitted by 30th of April and it was approved by commission in June 2012. The next monitoring report was prepared and approved by 15th of February 2013 and submitted by 1st of March. The final report was delivered by the end of year 2013 as approved by EU Life office.

The following deliverables (in annex) were submitted on time (table 2).

Table 2. Deliverables (in annex) submitted. Code of the Name of the Deliverable associated Deadline Submitted action Metadata report on the available 2.1 1.12.2010 1.12.2010 phytoplankton data from lakes Plan for internal and external 5 1.2.2011 1.2.2011 communication

Report of the factors determining 2.1 1.3.2011 1.3.2011 algal bloom occurrence in lakes based on the analysis of visual monitoring of algal blooms Project brochure (1st) 5 1.7.2011 1.7.2011 Inception report 1 1.7.2011 1.7.2011 LakeWiki website (proto) 2.5, 5 1.7.2011 1.7.2011 Mid-term report 1 1.4.2012 1.5.2012 Report on algal blooms and their 2.2 1.4.2012 1.4.2012 controlling factors in coastal waters Report of the socio-economic impact 3.2 1.4.2012 1.4.2012 assessment and models Marketing material (1st) 5 15.6.2012 15.6.2012 Report on nation-wide diffuse load 2.3 1.9.2012 1.9.2012 equations for phosphorus and nitrogen, and comparison of the two modelling approaches for selected catchment Report of the factors determining 2.1 1.11.2012 1.11.2012 algal bloom occurrence in lakes based on the analysis of long-term bloom monitoring results Report on production of water quality 3.1 31.12.2012 31.12.2012 and algae blooming forecasts for the public with WSFS-VEMALA- LakeState model and forecast production system Report of the WSFS-VEMALA- 3.1 31.12.2012 31.12.2012 LakeState model scenarios of the effect of land use change on water quality and algae blooming Numerical demonstrations of 2.2 1.3.2013 28.3.2013 different scenarios of the ecosystem model Video 5 15.6.2013 15.6.2013 LakeWiki website (final) 2.5, 5 1.7.2013 14.6.2013 Project brochure (final) 5 1.7.2013 1.7.2013 Report on algal bloom metric 2.1 1.8.2013 1.8.2013 development in the pilot area After-LIFE Communication Plan 1 31.8.2013 31.8.2013 Guidance document of applying the demonstrated methods in river basin 4 31.8.2013 31.8.2013 management planning Final report on algal blooms and their 2.1 30.9.2013 30.9.2013 controlling factors Report on the load prediction tool, 2.3 30.9.2013 30.9.2013 load predictions for the present. Load estimates for selected future agricultural production and changing

16 climate scenarios. Description of the GISBLOOM 2.5 30.9.2013 30.9.2013 Information tool Marketing material (2nd) 5 30.9.2013 30.9.2013 Synthesis report of project results for 5 30.9.2013 30.9.2013 stakeholders and policy makers (in Finnish and English) Final report 1 31.12.2013 31.12.2013 Layman's report 5 30.9.2013 30.9.2013

There were no major delays of deliverables. Eu commission approved the delayed schedule of Final report (31.12.2013) which was due to extra time needed for preparation and audit of financial statements.

The following milestones were achieved on time (table 3).

Table 3. Milestones achieved. Code of the Name of the Milestone associated Deadline Submitted action Nomination of the project secretary 1 1.11.2010 1.11.2010 Kick-off workshop of the GISBloom 1 15.11.201 15.11.2010 project 0 Website of the project 5 1.12.2010 1.12.2010 Integrated water quality and algae 3.1 31.12.201 31.12.2010 blooming model WSFS-VEMALA- 0 LakeState preliminary version GIS bathymetric model for the 2.2 1.2.2011 1.2.2011 demonstration area and compilation of the historical data Questionnaire and interview forms 3.2 1.2.2011 1.2.2011 completed Complete analysis of data of visual 2.1 1.3.2011 1.3.2011 monitoring of blooms in lakes Daily production of water quality and 3.1. 1.5.2011 1.5.2011 algae blooms forecasts for the public with WSFS-VEMALA-LakeState model started Completion of diffuse load equations 2.3 1.6.2011 First part completed 1.6.2011. Complement ed 1.6.2013. Release of interactive observational 2.5 1.7.2011 1.7.2011 data gathering and modelling result web interface prototype and associated software

Information distribution at 4.2.1 1.9.2011 1.9.2011 Karjaanjoki river basin (Internet, newsletters, newspapers, public information evenings and restoration meeting) Metadata report and data collation 2.3 1.9.2011 1.9.2011 completed Compilation of nutrient load and 2.2 1.10.2011 1.10.2011 ecological data linking study areas Value functions and cost-efficiency 3.2 1.10.2011 1.10.2011 curves defined Complete analysis of data of long- 2.1 1.12.2011 1.12.2011 term bloom monitoring in lakes 1st iterative release of GISBLOOM 2.5 1.12.2011 1.12.2011 Information tools International symposium together 5 1.12.2011 17 -19.1. with the WaterPraxis project 2011 Integrated water quality and algae 3.1. 1.11.2012 1.11.2012 blooming model WSFS-VEMALA- LakeState operational version and forecast production system Ecological model implemented for the 2.2 1.2.2012 1.2.2012 coastal area The extended VIRVA and KUTOVA 3.2 1.2. 2012 1.2. 2012 models First workshop held in all pilot areas 4.1 1.6.2012 8.10.2012 National workshop and training 5 15.6.2012 16.8.2013 course for experts in the River Basin 18.9.2013 Districts Marketing material (1st) completed 5 15.6.2012 15.6.2012 Benefit and cost models applied to the 3.2 1.11.2012 1.11.2012 pilot areas 2nd iterative release of GISBLOOM 2.5 1.12.2012 1.12.2012 Information tools Compilation of different scenarios 2.2 1.2.2013 1.2.2013 varying key ecological parameters and nutrient loads Data gathered and models applied in 4.1 1.3.2013 1.3.2013 pilot areas Second workshop held in all pilot 4.1 1.3. 2013 1.3. 2013 areas Processed satellite and automatic 2.4 1.4.2013 1.4.2013 station data completed (delivery of data during the project as processing proceeds) 3rd workshop with the Lapuanjoki 4.1 1.5.2013 1.5.2013 River Committee Recommendations about the 4.1 1.6.2013 1.6.2013 combination of measures given

Implementation in map service 3.2 1.6.2013 1.6.2013 Recommendations about the 4.1 1.6.2013 1.6.2013 combination of measures given in all pilot areas Development of the bloom metric/new 2.1 1.9.2013 1.9.2013 classification tool completed Information distribution at L. 4.2.2 30.9.2013 30.9.2013 Vesijärvi (Internet, schools, newspapers, Fish market, seminar) Stakeholder analysis and 4.2.1 30.9.2013 30.9.2013 demonstrations at Karjaanjoki completed

Only some minor delays occurred in a few milestones.

No deficiencies were observed by the end of the project in the progress of project and in the dissemination and demonstration of methodologies. Thus, no corrective action was necessary to launch.

All reports were delivered on time by the end of the project.

The output indicators are listed for statistical purposes in Part D of the proposal Technical Application forms has been checked and appended to this report (annex 2). In mid term report, we stared (*) numbers which we considered uncertain or overrated at this point. In the end of project, the nimber of delivered outs reached the planned numers very well. Still, the number of Layman's report (10), Leaflets (5), Brochures (5) in Table 6 (Publications), and the number of students (300 in Kindergardtens/Primary schools and 300 in Secondary schools) in Table 7 (Educational activities) were not fully but quite satisfactorily reached.

The monitoring of the demonstration character of actions confirmed the validity of tools in the river basin scale. Demonstrations proved clearly the technical and commercial reproducibility and feasibility anywhere in Finland or in Europe.

The coordinating beneficiary has tendered the auditing firm, since the previous contract ended 31.12.2011. The decision of the new auditor was made in April 2012. The detailed information regarding the auditor data is given in section 6.4.

After LIFE workshop was held in the Final seminar 18.9.2013. Based on the gained material the After Life communication plan was outlined.

The project management: problems, partnerships and their added value Project management succeded well.The specific target groups of demostrations that is authorative, public and private river basin managers, beneficiaries and stakeholders participated actively the project (Table 4).

Table 4. Pilot area workshops. Date Pilot area Event Participants Attachment 16.3.2011 Rivers 1st 5 local 20110316 Muistio Teeman Temmesjoki, Workshop participants/ F_kokous.docx Paimionjoki 7 GisBloom and participants Karvianjoki 29.- Lake 1st 10 local - 30.8.2011 Pyhäjärvi Workshop participants/ 7 GisBloom participants 1.9.2011 Lake 1st 12 local 20110901 Kutsu Vesijärven Vesijärvi Workshop participants/ kokoukseen.docx 5 GisBloom participants 27.9.2011 River 1st 4 local 20110927 Lapuanjoki 1. Lapuanjoki Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 2 GisBloom participants 04.10.2011 Rivers 2nd 4 local 20111004 GISBLOOM F- Temmesjoki, Workshop participants/ teema.doc Paimionjoki 8 GisBloom and participants Karvianjoki 15.12.2011 Lake Pien- 1st 4 local 20111215 GisBloom Pien- Saimaa Workshop participants/ Saimaa.doc 4 GisBloom participants 10.1.2012 Lake 1st 11 local 20120110_Muistio_vesijaos Vanajavesi Workshop participants/ to.doc 4 GisBloom participants 1.2.2012 Lake 1st 14 local 20120201 Hiidenvesi Workshop participants/ Karttapalvelutyöpaja 12 GisBloom Lohjalla.doc participants 8.10.2012 River 1st 7 local 20121008 Vantaanjoen Vantaanjoki Workshop participants/ GisBloom 1. työpaja.doc 11 GisBloom participants 22.11.2012 River 2nd 15 local 20121122 Lapuanjoki 2. Lapuanjoki Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 6 GisBloom participants 4.2.2013 Lake 2nd 9 local 20130204 Vesijärvi työpaja Vesijärvi Workshop participants/ asiantuntijoille.docx 9 GisBloom participants 11.2.2013 River 2nd 2 local 20130211 Vantaanjoki 2. Vantaanjoki Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx

10 GisBloom participants 14.2.2013 River 3rd 12 local 20130214 Lapuanjoen 3. Lapuanjoki Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 6 GisBloom participants 7.3.2013 Lake 2nd 13 local 20130307 Vanajaveden 2. Vanajavesi Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 9 GisBloom participants 15.3.2013 Lake Pien- 2nd 4 local 20130315 Pien-Saimaa 2. Saimaa Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 6 GisBloom participants 27.3.2013 Lake 2nd 20 local 20130327 Hiidenveden 2. Hiidenvesi Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 8 GisBloom participants 5.4.2013 Lake 2nd 6 local 20130405 GisBloom 2. Pyhäjärvi Workshop participants/ työpaja Pyhäjärvellä.docx 5 GisBloom participants

Networking action was successful in establishing the comprehensive network of actors in the field of river basin management including administration, private enterprises, public organizations and stakeholders in local, river basin, national and European scale. Partnership with Vanajavesi säätiö (http://www.vanajavesi.fi/), Lappeenranta city, WATER PRAXIS project (http://www.waterpraxis.net/en.html), VELHO project (http://www.ymparisto.fi/fi- FI/VELHO) and Lake Pyhäjärvi Institute (http://www.pyhajarvi-instituutti.fi/english/) provided required additional pilot areas and feedback.

GisBloom project networked extra actively with WATERPRAXIS project (www.waterpraxis.net) and co-organized the Symposium on CLIMATE CHANGE CHALLENGES IN RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT 17–19 January 2011, Oulu, Finland. At the symposium, Olli Malve and Pia Rotko presented the first results and lessons learnt (presentation and poster) in demonstrating GisBloom web services and tools in pilot areas. The other organizers of symposium, in addition, to Waterpraxis project, were.  Baltic Sea Programme, Genesis project from 7th FP (http://www.bioforsk.no/ikbViewer/page/prosjekt/hovedtema?p_dimension_id=16858 &p_menu_id=16904&p_sub_id=16859&p_dim2=16860),  Cewic (Cenre of expertise in the water industry cluster, http://www.cewic.fi/english), Academy of Finland (http://www.aka.fi/en-GB/A/),  VALUE doctoral school (http://www.value.oulu.fi), University of Oulu (http://www.oulu.fi/english/),  VACCIA project http://www.ymparisto.fi/default.asp?contentid=376938&lan=FI&clan=en).

As agreed FreshMon project (High Resolution Freshwater Monitoring: GMES Downstream Services) provided GisBloom with high resolution remote sensing data and demonstrate their use for pilot areas.

Olli Malve gave a lecture in a summer course on Sustainability, River Basin Management and Climate Change in the Baltic Sea in Hamburg from 20 – 24 September 2011 (in the frame of the WATERPRAXIS project). In river Temmesjoki, GisBloom and Waterpraxis, there have been joint demonstration activities in 2011.

GisBloom project personnel participated in the development of guidance for the work of 2nd planning period together with Ministry of Environment and regional authorities. It was evident, that the results and experiences of the GisBloom project provided valuable input to guidance development process.

The personnel of GisBloom participated in the following projects, which provide excellent opportunities for information exchange:  WISER project (http://www.wiser.eu/ - Water bodies in Europe: Integrative Systems to assess Ecological status and Recovery)  WATERPRAXIS project (http://www.waterpraxis.net/en/about-the-project.html - "From theory and plans to eco-efficient and sustainable practices to improve the status of the Baltic Sea"). GisBloom arranged a symposium together with WATERPRAXIS.  FreshMon project (High Resolution Freshwater Monitoring: GMES Downstream Services)  Baltic Hazardous and Agricultural Releases Reduction – BALTHAZAR – project 2009-2010 http://www.helcom.fi/projects/en_GB/BALTHAZAR/  SCENES - Water Scenarios for Europe and for Neighbouring States: http://www.ymparisto.fi/default.asp?contentid=355357&lan=EN  REFRESH - Adaptive strategies to mitigate the impacts of climate change on European freshwater ecosystems. Funded under 7th FP (Seventh Framework Programme). http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=FP7_PROJ_EN&ACTION=D&DOC=10&C AT=PROJ&QUERY=01270a8b49af:f33b:049b159c&RCN=93578  TEKES - Finnish national funding agency In Finland, the results of the project will be communicated nationally to for example TEKES project “Järvien vedenlaatupalvelu (JVP) ” (Water Quality Service for Lakes) and other national research projects concerning environmental monitoring technology, automated environmental measurement technology development and earth observation technology and services development.  EU MyOcean consortium for providing marine earth observation and modeling related information  MarCoast consortium providing operational marine and lake earth observation services  Nordic NordAquaRemS consortium for academic education and studies of water optics and related remote sensing / earth observation activities in and around the Baltic Sea area  EU FP7 Marie Curie consortium Water for international academia-industry expert exchange in the same field of science.  CATERMASS Life+ project - Climate Change Adaptation Tools for Environmental Risk Mitigation of Acid Sulphate Soils: http://www.environment.fi/default.asp?contentid=349156&lan=fi&clan=en

 VACCIA Life+ project - Vulnerability Assessment of Ecosystem Services for Climate Change impacts and Adaptation: http://www.environment.fi/default.asp?contentid=355666&lan=EN

Networking with aforementioned projects has been active and provided valuable information and possibilities for dissemination. With WATERPRAXIS project we shared common pilot area and demonstrations of socio-economic assessment tools. Olli Malve gave a lecture on GisBloom project on the course of Sustainability, River Basin Management and Climate Change in the Baltic Sea. In 23-26th of January 2012, Olli Malve presented GisBloom project (poster) and Niina Kotamäki demonstrated LLR lake manager tool in Wiser Final Conference in Tallinn. A new network partner Rapu-hanke / Crayfish – project in Lake Pyhäjärvi was contacted. Collaboration started including the usage of our modelling tools in the management of Crayfish and fisheries.

GisBloom project and LLR- and VEMALA- models were presented in 13-15 August, 2012 in XXVII Nordic Hydrology Conference in Oulu (Finland) and project personel networked with new researchers.

In 2013, results were dissiminated in several European and international conferences and workshops and in the annual conference of Finnish Lake Restoration Network 19.8.2013 including all the key players in the field. The final all particepant meeting was arranged 18.9.2013 together with the professional network of Finnish planners of river basin management measures and with Ministery of Environment.

After the project, results were presented in CIS Working group on Programmes of Measures Meeting 12.11. 2013, Better PoM s in the 2nd cycle, Linking Pressures and Measures (EUROPEAN COMMISSION, DIRECTORATE-GENERAL ENVIRONMENT, Av. Beaulieu 5, 1160 Auderghem, Brussel)

Technical and commercial application: reproducibility, economic feasibility, limiting factors Demonstrated tools are replicable and transferable on national (Table 5) and Euopean scale. Commercialisation potential was clearly demonstrated by Aronaut Ltd (one of the beneficiaries) and by the set-up of consultancy service of Finnish Environment Institute.

Table 5. Feedback on the models from the second workshops. Seen most useful in Model RBMP work Comments from the respondents in the pilot area Total amount of 42 respondents Getting at least some knowledge on all waters, VEMALA 25 (42) even those without surveillance Possibility to evaluate the needs for measures in LLR 25 (42) the watershed and to plan restorations for lakes Provides assistance on prioritizing the measures KUTOVA 22 (34) according to their effectiveness and costs

Practical tool to evaluate the loadings generated VIHMA 19 (42) from the most loading intensive sector in Finland, agriculture. Gives a different perspective on how to allocate Nutrient balance charts 12 (42) measures between basins. The first practical model in Finland for estimating VIRVA 9 (32) water related benefits in a consistent way Remote sensing and 8 (23) Provides a comprehensive way to communicate satellite images up-to-date information also to public Statistical loading 7 (29) Forecasting the effects in changes in land use model Mind maps on A different way to communicate about 6 cyanobacteria euthrophication to the public Obs! The respondents were instructed to choose only 3 most suitable models. All models were not run or presented in all pilot areas. The number of respondents in the workshops where particular model was presented is shown inside the bracket ( ).

During the second cycle of RBMP the ecological status was classified for 3500 new water bodies. For 45 % of lakes and for 30 % of rivers the classification was done utilizing the pressure data produced by e.g. VEMALA and earth observations. The tools presented in this study were used in planning the Programmes of Measures quite extensively (Table 6).

Table 6. The number of scenario runs using the GISBLOOM model ensembles. Model Scenario and/or model runs VEMALA 44 (4 per pilot area) LLR 25 (1-7 per pilot area) KUTOVA 25 (5 per pilot area) VIHMA 45 (6 per pilot area at least) Nutrient balance charts 14 (2 per pilot area at least ) VIRVA 5 (1 per pilot area) Statistical loading model 40 (10 per pilot area) Ecosystem model 10 (10 per pilot area) Coastal LLR 8 (8 per pilot area) Data-assimilation 5 ( Lake Pyhäjärvi)

For stakeholders and private business start-ups the web based map tools provide free access to monitoring data, estimation results, plans and reports.

While water framework directive is a legistlative driver for transfer of the tools to national and European arenas, the fragmentation of environmental administration and beneficiaries is the biggest obstacle.

Comparison against the project-objectives: The extent of project makes comprehensive comparison with project-objectives challenging. Generally speking the demonstration character was excellent due to the extensive testing in several river basin pilot areas and to the remarkable amount of feedback from planners and stakeholders. What is more, tools were adopted by river basin management planners and stakeholders in public and private organizations and right after the project, the ministry on environment funded mobilization of tools and the related consultancy service in SYKE. As a

24 summary, tools were demonstrated, validated and adopted by the intented end users and their usage in collation of programme of measures started during the project.

Demonstrated operations model served as an example for environmental administration how monitoring, modelling and planning of river basins at its best can be cost-efficiently joined up within different admintrative and organizational levels and entities. The joint assessment of ecological and economic impacts contributed to the same purpose. As a result, the pleyrs in river basin management perhaps realized their common benefits and took the new course of action.

Networking and partnership with several local, national and international projects ensured broad dissemination of results.

Effectiveness of dissemination activities: The aim of communication was to improve:  public, authorities' and stakeholders' understanding of factors affecting on the status of waters.  the understanding of algal blooms in lakes and coastal areas and their responses to management measures.  the awareness and motivation of citizens and stakeholders in order to build up their capacity to protect waters.

All of these aims were gained during the project. The visibility of project was realized by drawing attention through web services (www.vesinetti.fi and www.jarviwiki.fi) and the successful demonstrations. The results were presented in several workshops, seminars and conferences throughout Finland and Europe. A video and several publications were published. Notable amount of key stakeholders and players of river basin management participated actively demonstration workshops in pilot areas. In the final meeting, the tools were introduced to the planners of program of measures and they were trained to use these tools. Results were disseminated in several national, European and international conferences and workshops. Detailed account of dissemination activities are given in chapter 5.4.

Reports and other products  Layman’s report (500 Finnish versions printed, English version was published in Internet)  Synthesis report  Report on results achieved in the pilot areas  23 reports produced for the pilot areas in the sub-projects  13 reports produced for the European Commission  5 project progress reports  Project poster,  Project brochure (2300 pieces in Finnish with summary in Swedish, and 200 pieces in English)  Postcard (500 pieces)  Video and trailer  Marketing materials  Towels with text www.vesinetti.fi (300 towels were delivered)  Twelve noticeboards erected in the pilot areas.

 Thermometers with printing of www.jarviwiki.fi and www.vesinetti.fi (750 pieces were delivered)

Seminars and cooperation meetings  18 seminars  50 cooperation meetings  4 internal seminars  Workshops organised  20 workshops in the pilot areas  8 training sessions  7 other workshops

The project in the media:  19 public events  7 articles in papers and newsletters  4 radio presentations  Press release and 5 press conferences  Websites and web services  Vesinetti www.vesinetti.fi  Järviwiki www.jarviwiki.fi Project website:  www.syke.fi/hankkeet/gisbloom (in Finnish)  www.syke.fi/projekt/gisbloom (in Swedish)  www.syke.fi/projects/gisbloom (in English)

The future: continuation of the project + remaining threats Although the tools were found to be useful, many valuable suggestions for future development were identified: - Imrovement of reliability and precision of input data for the tools in order to get more reliable results. - Presentation of results in an easily understandable and visual way would enhance their dissemination. - Evaluation and presentation of uncertainties and assumptions related to the tools. - Maintenance and development of Vesinetti.fi after the project. - Access to other national GIS-databases through www.vesinetti.fi. - The user interfaces and schematic representations also need to be improved to get the main results easily for the use of RBM planners. - Integration of the tools needs to be automated for the selection of cost-efficient mitigation measures. - Consultancy services for end users ought to be tailored and provided. (In fact, this was accomplished right after the project) - Better estimation of internal loading. - Inclusion of additional biological indicators in lake tools. - Application of multicriteria analysis of the effects of the measures is necessary.

Based on the suggestions, the project will continue with following actions:  The consultancy service was organized to help local Environment Centres and stakeholders with the models and the tools in the selection of cost efficient selection of measures.

 www.vesinetti.fi and www.JarviWiki.fi web services will be streamlined and maintained and the usage will be supported by the consultancy service.  Web based map services should be integrated and coordinated well with all the existing and evolving river basin monitoring and management tools to avoid overlaps and to provide managers and stakeholders with common internet interface and tractable search path.  Models and tools will be further developed, automated and integrated.  Uncertainty analysis will be introduced into each model and tool.  Shortcomings in models and tools will be corrected.  New users will be recruited and trained.  The tools will be used to improve the overall efficiency of prevailing monitoring and management practices in Finnish environment administration.

The coordinating beneficiary produced an “After-LIFE Communication Plan” as a separate chapter of the final report. It set out how to continue disseminating and communicating results after the end of the project.

The integrated hydrology, water quality and algae blooming model WSFS-VEMALA- LakeState will be integrated into the hydrological forecasting system in SYKE and forecast production will continue after this project. Forecasts will be provided together with the hydrological forecasts at http://www.environment.fi/waterforecast.

Arbonaut operates a GIS portal called PaikkaOppi for all Finnish high schools and the results of GISBloom find a natural place in curricula for Environmental Studies and Biology, where Arbonaut's GIS portal is used. GISBLOOM will be built to be compatible with this high school portal and pupils will be able to write reports and experiment with it (http://www.vesseli.fi/paikkaoppi/).

The beneficiaries of GISBLOOM project have a very large experience in working with different EU funding instruments. It is well-known that the algal bloom analysis and control is complex and is likely to remain as a main policy topic for decades to come. It is thus highly likely that continued work is needed to resolve remaining questions. The GISBLOOM project would make a significant input to the development of new methodology and tools in this field, and would form an excellent platform for any further work needed.

SYKE has a long experience in real time hydrological forecasting and water quality and algae blooming forecasts will continue as a part of hydrological forecasting.

The beneficiaries of GISBLOOM project are closely involved in continuous national and international activities and networks. These channels will be used for dissemination of the project results also after the formal end of the project.

The persons responsible for the implementation of Water Framework, Marine Strategy, Nitrogen and Bathing Water directives in Finland and in Europe will be informed about the cost and benefit models and the models will also be available to the public.

Available products of the integrated hydrological, water quality and algae blooming model will be demonstrated to authorities from national environment centres in annual meetings.

5. Technical part

5.1 Task by task - description

Action 2. Collation, analysis and demonstration of algal blooms

Subaction 2.1 Lakes

This sub-action collated and described available databases and information that were used to increase understanding on the harmful algal bloom occurrence in Finnish lakes and to help the development of bloom forecasting tools. The tasks included 1) metadata description work, 2) analysis of visual algal bloom monitoring data, 3) analysis of phytoplankton observations from surveillance monitoring to demonstrate relationships between the bloom occurrence and external and internal environmental variables such as water chemistry, nutrient loads, lake morphometry (e.g. lake area and catchment area) and weather conditions (e.g. air temperature, precipitation), and 4) bloom metric/classification tool development (Figure 6). The results are thus far (situation on August 2013) presented in four submitted deliverables and the remaining deliverable will be delivered in autumn 2013 according to the original schedule (Table 7; see also Appendices), incl. a synthesis of the key results of algal bloom control.

Table 7. Scheduled and actual dates of milestones and deliverables in Task 2.1.

Code of the Original Actual completion Name of the Milestone associated action deadline date Complete analysis of data of visual monitoring of 2.1 1.3.2011 1.3.2011 * blooms in lakes Complete analysis of data of long-term bloom 2.1 1.12.2011 31.10.2012 monitoring in lakes Development of the bloom metric/new 2.1 1.9.2013 1.9.2013 classification tool completed

Code of the Due date of Actual submission Name of the Deliverable associated action deliverable date Metadata report on the available phytoplankton 2.1 1.12.2010 1.12.2010 data from lakes Report of the factors determining algal bloom occurrence in lakes based on the analysis of visual 2.1 1.3.2011 1.3.2011 monitoring of algal blooms Report of the factors determining algal bloom occurrence in lakes based on the analysis of long- 2.1 1.11.2012 28.11.2012 term bloom monitoring results Report on algal bloom metric development in the 2.1 1.8.2013 1.8.2013 pilot area Final report on algal blooms and their controlling 30.9.2013 30.9.2013 factors 2.1

* = a more detailed analysis has still continued after the end of the milestone and deliverable

As shown in Table 7, the milestones of sub-action 2.1 have been achieved. The sub-action 2.1 started in 2010 with a description of available phytoplankton and supporting data from lakes that were used to analyse relationships between cyanobacterial blooms and environmental variables in lakes. Based on this task 2.1.1 the report "Metadata description of available data from Finnish lakes was delivered. Most members of Task 2.1 contributed to metadata report preparation (Järvinen, Mitikka, Porvari, Malve and Kotamäki) In the project the metadata description was considered as an iterative/additive process, and new additional metadata information was gathered also later during the course of the project.

Figure 6. Schematic presentation of activities in sub-action 2.1.

Photo: Reija Jokipii/SYKE

Figure 7. Filamentous cyanobacteria of the genus Aphanizomenon are typical bloom forming phytoplankton in Finnish lakes.

The milestone "Complete analysis of data of visual monitoring of blooms in lakes" was largely achieved during the planned time scale (March 1st, 2011), but the more detailed analysis of the data continued also after the original milestone date. The deliverable of this task 2.1.2, "Report of the factors determining algal bloom occurrence in lakes based on the analysis of visual monitoring of algal blooms", was submitted in time (Table 7). All members of sub-action 2.1 participated in the task (Järvinen, Mitikka, Porvari, Vuorio, Malve, Kotamäki and Paquet). This task included statistical analyses of collected data, and it presented causal relationships and conceptual model charts that demonstrated relationships between the blooms of cyanobacteria and explanatory variables (Figure 8). The analysis of causal relationships against environmental variables, including the climate, nutrient loading and land-use data, and averaged for different months, season and other time periods, took longer than originally anticipated because the definition of catchment areas for >200 lakes and their land-use, as well as the management and quality checking of the large datasets took clearly more time than originally estimated. Thus delays in the comprehensive data analysis occurred, but they did not delay the delivery of other deliverables or the progress in other tasks of sub-action 2.1 or elsewhere. The analysis of bloom results showed that the cyanobacterial bloom situation may vary considerable between the years depending on the availability of nutrients for algal growth, in particular phosphorus (P). Nutrient availability in lakes is controlled both by external and internal processes, e.g. nutrient loading which in turn is linked to the previous year's weather and prevailing weather conditions (Figure 8). The log- tranformed data from 111 lakes with weekly results without any missing values used in the analyses demonstrated that cyanobacterial bloom occurrence was best explained by: tot-P >

30 pH > water colour > conductivity > tot-N. These main causal relationships are presented in Figure 8.

Figure 8. Conceptual presentation of factors/conditions affecting the onset of algal blooms in summer in Finnish lakes.

Task 2.1.3 of sub-action 2.1 used long-term (July-August 1975-2010) phytoplankton and environmental data, obtained from surveillance and operational monitoring, to demonstrate by using statistical analyses (correlations, multiple regressions and classification trees) how internal and external lake properties influence the abundance and occurrence of cyanobacteria in lakes. The results are reported in deliverable 2.1.3. submitted in November 2012 (Table 7). This task was mainly done by Vuorio, Järvinen and Kotamäki with the assistance by Mitikka, Porvari and Malve. The data was compiled from the phytoplankton and water quality databases of SYKE described in deliverable 2.1.1. The results provided nutrient concentration criteria for the occurrence of algal blooms and bloom taxa in lakes that can be used by the demonstration and forecasting tools (Action 3.1). This task also supported the development of the bloom metric tool (Lake Load Response model (LLR)) for the purposes of Water Framework Directive (see below).

The analyses were carried out for the whole set of lakes and also separately for clear-water (water colour <50 mg L-1 Pt) and humic brown-water lakes (≥50 mg L-1 Pt). A large set of potential internal and external explanatory variables (water quality, nutrient loading, meteorological variables and land-use properties), calculated for different time periods and with different time lags in relation to phytoplankton sampling dates, was first preliminarily analyzed. Based on this and expert judgement total nitrogen (TN), inorganic nitrogen (DIN, ammonium+nitrite+nitrate-N), total phosphorus (TP), water colour, water temperature, water column stability, mean depth, lake area, lake volume and retention time were selected for the final statistical analysis. The respective external variables were the land-use properties

(percentage of agricultural area in the catchment and percentage of clay soils in the catchment), and run-off.

The results showed that cyanobacterial biomass varies considerably seasonally and between the years in lakes. The relationships between cyanobacteria and environmental variables were not always linear (Figure 9). Total phosphorus was the internal variable best explaining cyanobacterial total biomass in all lake types. Total P, percentage of agricultural land, mean depth and water temperature at one meter depth explained together 32-37% of the cyanobacterial biomass in the lake data (a multiple regression model).

Figure 9. Biomass of the planktonic cyanobacterial orders Chroococcales, Nostocales and Oscillatoriales in relation to total phosphorus (TP) and total nitrogen (TN) concentrations. TP and TN concentrations are represented on x-axis on log10-scale. Thresholds were derived from descriptive plots, and using classification trees. For the whole lake data set including all lake types, a TP threshold value for the total biomass of cyanobacteria was 40 µg L-1 (Table 8). For clear-water and humic brown-coloured lakes the respective values were 33 and 49 µg L-1 TP. For individual cyanobacterial genera the TP threshold was highest (65 µg L-1) for Microcystis, and lowest for Aphanizomenon and Woronichinia (20 µg L-1). The threshold values for the ratio of total nutrients (TN:TP; by mass) varied between 25-50, whereas the inorganic N to TP (DIN:TP) mass ratio was <10 (5- 7) for the orders Chroococcales and Oscillatoriales, and the genera Microcystis, Dolichospermum (Anabaena) and Planktothrix. According to our data, cyanobacterial biomass variables had low relationship to water temperature.

Table 8. Threshold values for total nutrients, nutrient ratios and other selected environmental variables. Threshold value is a concentration or a value, where biomass of cyanobacteria starts clearly and sharply to increase. Threshold values are derived by classification trees and obtained from correlation plots between cyanobacteria variable and environmental variable. Abbreviations: TP = total phosphorus, TN = total nitrogen, TN:TP = TN:TP mass ratio, DIN:TP = dissolved inorganic nitrogen:TP mass ratio, Zmean = mean depth, Agric = percentage of agricultural land and Temp = water temperature at one meter depth.

Threshold values

Data-set Group/taxon Systematic level Method TP TN TN:TP DIN:TP Zmean Agric Temp µg L-1 µg L-1 m % °C all lakes total cyanobacterial biomass classification tree 40 clear lakes total cyanobacterial biomass classification tree 33 humic lakes total cyanobacterial biomass classification tree 49 all lakes Chroococcales order plots 60 900 25 5 3 13 14 all lakes Nostocales order plots 30 1100 40 16 3 2 13 all lakes Oscillatoriales order plots 50 800 29 7 6 14 14 all lakes Microcystis genus plots 65 600 25 5 3 14 15 all lakes Woronichinia genus plots 20 300 50 18 4 12 14 all lakes Dolichospermum genus plots 35 800 36 5 3 2 13 all lakes Aphanizomenon genus plots 20 400 40 16 3 13 13 all lakes Planktothrix genus plots 40 500 28 7 6 5 16

In order to develop a frequency and volume based metric of algal blooms for the needs of the ecological classification of lakes, information from remote sensing, monitoring networks, up- to-date databases, and lake and land use models were combined. The new metric/classification tool was first tested in the selected pilot.

The GisBloom classification tool (Task 2.1.4) is based on the models which was demonstrated in Action 3 i.e. LLR, LAKESTATE and WSFS-VEMALA models. These models were used to predict the frequency and the volume of algal blooms (possibly later also species composition) and concentrations of nutrients which are necessary for the ecological classification of unmonitored lakes. These models cover already the most important lakes in Finland presenting a good starting point for the testing and demonstrating the usage of these models in lake classification.

A meeting on ecological classification of Finnish lakes using mathematical models was held in February 2012. Model based ecological classification of pilot area lakes were compared to classification based on the available information on water quality and biological elements.

During the project, the members of the sub-action 2.1 have participated in the internal GisBloom project meetings, held sub-action meetings, and contributed to general discussions related to pilot areas, themes and dissemination. GisBloom forecasts for cyanobacterial bloom situation in lakes for the selected lakes in 2012 were presented by SA 2.1 coordinator during the press conference for media at SYKE on June 7, 2012 which launced the Algal cyanobacterial bloom monitoring for the summer 2012. Forecasts for bloom situation were also provided in Järviwiki during algal bloom monitoring in summer 2013. The results of subaction 2.1 were also presented in SIL 2013 international limnology conference in August 2013 in Hungary by Marko Järvinen.

Subaction 2.2 Coastal areas

Water mixing between stratified water layers (caused by salinity gradient), inputs from the coast and exchange with the open sea regulate nutrient balances in coastal marine ecosystems. Key sources of nutrient inputs are revealed using numerical and statistical models, which gives practical tools to estimate cost efficient nutrient reduction and thereby to mitigate eutrophication problem. The chosen case study area of Pohjanpitäjänlahti Bay with its adjunct coastal areas of Tvärminne is especially appropriate for modeling purposes for many reasons. First, these coastal areas have long historical data both on algal blooms as well as nutrients and hydrography. Moreover, the data sets also include information on rarely measured parameters such as primary production, bacterial activity and sedimentation, which are important in describing marine ecosystems. Also River Vantaa estuary area has been investigated to evaluate the eutrophicaition status of the area.

The task of subaction 2.2 was divided both into an application of a dynamical ecological model to the coastal areas of Pohjanpitäjänlahti and analyzes of statistical models in the above mentioned coastal areas as well as in coastal areas off Helsinki. The task has been carried out according to the project schedule. The milestone "Compilation of historical data" (February 2011) included hydrographical and phytoplankton data in the coastal stations of Pohjanpitäjänlahti (Tvärminne, Uusimaa, SYKE and Aranda data) and off Helsinki Sea areas (Uusimaa, SYKE). The monitoring data as river run-off, nutrients, salinity, temperature were extracted from the databases of HERTTA and SUMPPU with graphical interface. "Metadata description of historical data" was delivered by February 2011.

In Tvärminne area the following actions were taken: 1) Phytoplankton for the 2011 was sampled 3 times from 12 stations along the open sea – River Mustionjoki gradient. The 2010 sampling was already done and the samples were donated by the Länsi-Uudenmaan Vesi- ja Ympäristö for our project. 2) The analysis of phytoplankton samples 2010: 12 and 2011: 36 samples. All data is available. The algal groups are divided to nitrogen-fixing cyanobacteria, other cyanobacteria and other phytoplankton. The biomasses have been converted to chlorophyll units for the use of ecosystem model.

The compilation of full Pojo-Bay inorganic nutrient and phytoplankton abundance/biomass tables data from 1982 to 2011 (1982, 1985, 1989, 1993, 1997, 2001, 2005, 2009, 2010 and 2011) with diazatrophic cyanobacteria separated from other algae. The earlier years (1988-

2009) had to be picked up from old reports. The data is now unified in its nomenclature and biomass calculations, quality checked and can be used by all members of the project. The compilation of full chlorophyll/phytoplankton biomass data tables, their quality checking and new analysis of correlations between phytoplankton biomass and chlorophyll, which is used as indication of algal bloom intensity in the model.

Figure 10. Sampling stations for nutrient and phytoplankton analysis

Figure 11. Nutrient ratios on the stations

Figure 12. Different phytoplankton blooms from stations 10, 12a, 12c and 14.

Figure 13. Ratio of inorganic and total phosphorus (left ) and ratio of inorganic and total nitrogen (right) along salinity in the shallow areas ( depth<16 m) of the Pojo Bay in July August (Pojo South 11 & Dragsvik= Ls_010)

The watar circulation was modeled using Karjaajoki river load and water exchange through Tammisaari straits. Mareogarph data recorded by the city of Hanko was used to model water level fluctuation. Equatios are taken from Malve 2000.

Qlow=11.68*Z-0.48*Qk+7.32*Z Qup=7.32*Z-0.752*Qk-7.32*Z where Qlow stands for lower layer, Qup for upper layer, Qk for Karjaa river load and Z for water level records from Hanko mareograph.

Karjaajoki Mareograph

Dragsfjär Pohjanpitäjänlahti Out d

Figure 14. Schema for water circulation modeling in Pohjanpitäjänlahti

Figure 15. Preliminary calculations showing the water flow though Tammisaari Sounds. Positive values mark water inflow to Pohjanpitäjänlahti from Dragsfjärden.

In milestone and deliverable "GIS bathymetry model for the demonstration area" (February 2010), GIS bathymetry for the Pohjanpitäjänlahti was obtained with water body areas determined as basic units for the box-model subunits.

Pohjanpitäjänlahti water body areas Bathymetry for Pohjanpitäjänlahti Coastal area Figure 16. GIS bathymetry for the Pohjanpitäjänlahti

Additionally, preliminary statistical trend analyses were carried out and preliminary concepts for dynamical ecological model drafted by the summer 2011.

Modelling River Mustio load to the Pojo Bay

Modelling the nutrient load, the ratio of inorganic nutrient s to the total amout is important for the ecosystem model, because the nutrient uptake in biological processes depends on the compound, thatis are they in dissolved form or included in the particles. The nutrient load and ratios was analysed with the data from SYKE/Hertta databases for the years 1990- 2012 (Table 9 and Figure 17)

Nutrien ratio or content Regression R2 % PO4/P-total y= 0.1732*cos((day/365)*2*3.14) + 48 0.00833*sin((day/365)*2*3.14) + 0.3450 NH4/N-total y= -0.0270*cos((day/365)*2*3.14) – 22 0.0293*sin((day/365)*2*3.14) + 0.0767 NOx/N-total y= 0.1465*cos((day/365)*2*3.14) + 38 0.1434*sin((day/365)*2*3.14) + 0.4379 SiO2 content y= 1.1645*cos((day/365)*2*3.14) + 43 0.8738*sin((day/365)*2*3.14) + 2.6095 Tabel 9. Nutrient ratio models used for nutrient load from Mustio River

Gis bathymetry 1.2.2011 Box-model subunits.

Concepts and implementation of dynamical ecological Meta data model analysis Compilation of 1.6.2011 data 1.10.2011 Statistical trend analysis, 1.4. 2012

Figure 17. Shematic presentation of activities in subaction 2.2.

For milestone "Identification of key ecological processes for the study area"(October 2011), the Pohjanpitäjänlahti Coastal area was divided in GIS database in water body areas according to the Water Framework Directive. The volumes of each water body were calculated and the temperature and salinity profiles were determined for Hankoniemi and Storfjärden water bodies to calculate the mixing and exchange of the water.

Figure 18. Pohjanpitäjänlahti Coastal area water body areas according to the Water Framework Directive

For milestone "Ecological model implemented for the Coastal area"" (February 2012), the preliminary ecosystem water and exchange model description were drafted.

Figure 19. Determination of the mixez layer depth in Pohjanpitäjänlahti and temperature change in the mixed layer.

Figure 20. Ecosystem model concept for the coastal area

Figure 21. Community development as closed system in Pojo Bay.

Figure 22. Nutrient and community development with river load but no water exchange through the Tammisaari Sounds

Figure 23. Nutrient and community development with river load and water exchange throutg the Tammisaari Sounds in four years simulation. The Deliverable “Numerical demonstrations of different scenarios of the ecosystem model” was submitted by 28 March 2013.

In milestone "Compilation of nutrient load and ecological data linking study areas" (October 2011), loading and nutrient data were linked with phytoplankton data both in Pohjanpitäjänlahti coastal area and in River Vantaa estuary. Statistical analyses on the relationships between phytoplankton biomass and environmental data were started to carry out in Vantaa estuary under different weather conditions.

Figure 24. River Vantaa estuary and the study sites of Helsinki in the Gulf of Finland, the Baltic Sea. The sites are (1) Vanhankaupunginlahti, (2) Tullisaarenselkä, (3) Katajanokka and (4) Vasikkasaari.

The deliverable of Task 2.2-1 "Report on algal blooms and their controlling factors in coastal waters" was submitted in time on the 5th of February 2012. The report handles phytoplankton dynamics and nutrient limitation in Pojo Bay. Additionally, it presents predictions of algal blooms using an application of LLR model developed to be used for coastal management, and discusses the controlling factors of algal blooms in River Vantaa estuary. Compiling phytoplankton, hydrographical and loading data of other Finnish estuaries has been started.

The comparison of Pojo-Bay water mass nutrient and phytoplankton data to find correlations and residuals in these. This is required to evaluate how the model can reproduce natural conditions. Cyanobacteria are analysed separately. The description of Pojo-Bay ecosystem as a platform for algal blooms and their controlling factors is completed.

Compilation of phytoplankton, hydrographical and loading data of Finnish estuaries to be used for management purposes (coastal application of LLR model).

The results form modeling and data analysis will be demonstrated in pilot areas.

The LLR tool proved to be applicable in estimating the target nutrient reduction in coastal environment for chlorophyll a. In River Vantaa estuary, the tool was first applied using the whole data of the inner estuary of River Vantaa from the 1970s but the model overestimated the reductions of loading and concentrations of chlorophyll a. To get realistic predictions we used only the data gathered subsequent the closure of the LMTPs. Both the fit of the models and accuracy of the predictions were better for TN than TP (Figure 25). The curve was fitted to estimate median concentrations of TP with 50% confidence. Good ecological status could then be achieved with the limit value of 12 µg l-1 of TP and with the target P load of 1.6 g m2 a-1. Consequently, the average areal P load of 3.9 g m2 a-1 should be reduced by 60% to get good ecological status.

Regarding N, the target load was estimated as 33 g m2 a-1 with 50% confidence, corresponding to about half of the average areal load of N (72 g m2 a-1). However, if coastal managers would like to be more certain of the effects of the reduction, they could choose tighter confidence levels. For instance, using 80% confidence, the target N load should be set as 18 g m2 a-1. Considering the monitoring data, requirements for good ecological status have fulfilled so far only a couple of times when estimating chlorophyll a as a function of areal loads of both TN and TP with 50% confidence (Figure 25). Nutrient concentrations seemed realistic in regard that they are at the same level as the G/M boundaries of summertime TN and TP in the oligosaline waters (4-5 psu) of the outer Bothnian Sea and Askö archipelago (NFS 2008).

TotP model fit TotP estimate, different prediction probabilities

200

150

30 100 Poor/Bad 20 Mod/Poor

50 Good/Mod 50 % High/Good

Observ ation 10 75 % TotP concentration [ug/l] TotP concentration [ug/l] Prediction 80 %

95 % CI Mean load

0 0

0 20 40 60 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

TotP surface load [g/m2/a] TotP surface load [g/m2/a]

TotN model fit TotN estimate, different prediction probabilities

800 2500

Poor/Bad 600

1500 Mod/Poor 400 Good/Mod

High/Good

200 50 %

500 Observ ation 75 % TotN TotN concentration [ug/l] TotN TotN concentration [ug/l] Prediction 80 %

95 % CI Mean load

0 0

100 200 300 400 500 0 20 40 60 80

TotN surface load [g/m2/a] TotN surface load [g/m2/a]

Figure 25. Models predicting concentrations of total phosphorus (TP) as a function of the areal TP load and concentrations of total nitrogen (TN) as a function of areal TN load. Figures in the right side show the confidences of 50, 75 and 80% to reach the status classes between high and good (H/G) status, good and moderate (G/M) status, moderate and poor (M/P) status and poor and bad (P/B) status. The upright lines show the average areal loads of nutrients in the period of 1988-2010.

Chl-a estimate as a function of incoming load Figure 26. The LLR result on the concentrations of chlorophyll a Observed surface loads Class boundaries for mean chl-a estimated as a function of the areal 500 loads of TP and TN (g m-2 a-1) in River Vantaa estuary. The red curve 400 shows the G/M boundary of chlorophyll a with 50% confidence 300 in the combinations of TP and TN.

The other boundaries of the 200

TotN surface load [g/m2/a] surface load TotN ecological classification are also

shown. 100

Poor/Bad 26

Mod/Poor 13

0 Good/Mod 4.7 High/Good 3.2

0 20 40 60 80

TotP surface load [g/m2/a]

Addition to phytoplankton biomass (here chlorophyll a), the WFD also requires other phytoplankton metrics in status assessments. In this study, cyanobacterial biomass was used to describe phytoplankton blooms, of which boundary was here defined based on chlorophyll a. In the inner River Vantaa estuary, chlorophyll a explained 63% of the variation in the biomass of cyanobacteria (Figure 27). The boundary value of cyanobacteria was set as 185 µg L-1 using the G/M boundary of chlorophyll a (4.7µg l-1). Based on logistic regression, probabilities for cyanobacterial blooms increased along with the increase in phosphorus and the decrease in nitrogen concentrations (Figure 28).

180000

- 160000 h 1.0 y = 0,8663x2 + 5,9992x + 138,49 1.0 140000

R² = 0,6336 h 0.8 120000 0.8 h h h h 100000 h

h 0.6

80000 0.6 probability

60000 probability

0.4 0.4 40000

Biomassof cyanobacteria µg L 20000

0.2 0.2 0

0 100 200 300 400

0.0 0.0 -1 Chlorophyll a µg L 5 10 20 50 200 50 100 500 2000 TP (ug/l) TN (ug/l) Figure 27. The biomass of cyanobacteria Figure 28. Probabilities for cyanobacterial estimated as a function of chlorophyll a in the blooms estimated as a function of TP and inner estuary of River Vantaa. TN in the inner estuary of River Vantaa.

Algal blooms and controlling factors River Vantaa estuary is an good example of coastal areas where algal blooms have decreased as a result of effective measures of water pollution control but where eutrophic conditions still are high due to internal processes of the marine ecosystem. Considerable nutrient reserves in

45 the bottom sediment are a reason for accelerated benthic release of nutrients, i.e. internal loading, which can be proved by an atypical seasonal distribution of phosphorus and high amounts of chlorophyll a in summer (Fig. 3.6 and 3.7). In the 1970s and mid'1980s, the levels of total and inorganic phosphorus in the whole water column were on an average 30% and in some years up to ca 70% higher in summer than in spring. On the contrary, the contribution of resuspension was most probably small based on the small amounts of inorganic P and substantial amounts of organic phosphorus measured as chlorophyll a in summer. However, the high percentages of inorganic P of total phosphorus in the 1970s and inorganic N of total nitrogen in the late 1980s could be explained by the peaks of the above-mentioned nutrients in municipal waste waters.

200 450 180 400 160 350 140 300 120 1980-1986250 1970-1986 100 1987-1999200 1987-1999 80 2000-2009150 2000-2009 60 40 100 20 50 0 0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 1 3 5 7 9 11

Subaction 2.3 Land use and nutrient loads in river basins

The aims of this sub-action were to  estimate losses of total nitrogen and total phosphorus from the Finnish catchments.  divide the load into the original sources.  calculate the nutrient fluxes for each measuring site where there are enough observations (e.g. water quality data).  delineate catchments and calculate a set of relevant catchment characteristics for each site by using relevant GIS methods.  formulate statistical relationships.  validate existing national loading models (e.g. VEPS, WSFS-VEMALA).  create scenarios for different future developments in diffuse loading.  demonstrate in pilot areas.  use scenarios in the river basin management planning.

The sub-action was initiated by examining national data bases and selecting the water quality sites that were sampled frequently enough for total nitrogen and total phosphorus, and where water quantity was also measured. In the end, 71 applicable sites were found and the catchments were delineated using a test version of the flow direction grid prepared by a project VALUE (based on the DEM (25 × 25) m, excluding the northernmost Finland). The borders of small catchments were gathered elsewhere, as the DEM 25 x 25 m is too inaccurate to use in smaller areas.

Figure 29. One of the measuring sites within the statistical analysis, the Halinen dam in the river Aurajoki, during the spring flood 2011. Photo by Elina Jaakkola.

Next, the availability of GIS data was checked. The slope calculations were also based on the DEM (25 × 25) m, as more precise DEM was not available nationwide. Getting a license from Evira (the Finnish Food Safety Authority) and Mavi (Agency for Rural Affairs) for using animal data took more time than anticipated and a delay in the milestones “Completion of diffuse load equation (6/2011)” and “Data collation completed (9/2011)” was foreseen. Some of the GIS data was ready to use as such (e.g. Corine Land Cover, soil, lakes and rivers). However, information on animal farms, point loading and scattered settlements, which were available in Excel or text files had to be processed into a format suitable for the ArcGIS program. The milestone "Metadata report on the available databases and observation systems to provide enough information to build up a database for statistical analysis" was delivered in time (1.9.2011).

Our sub action has collaborated with another EU project BERAS, and there are plans to utilize the same statistical approach there, the focus being on the effect of organic farming on water quality. In addition, we have worked closely with the national project "Monitoring of the Efficiency of Finnish Agri-Environmental Programme" (MYTVAS3).

The listing of monitoring sites and variables Preparation of GIS tools Data analysis The availability of GIS data Diffuse pollution load model Predictions and scenarios

Figure 30.Schematic presentation of activities in subaction 2.3.

The quality checking of the data that was gathered so far was finalized and the nutrient fluxes were calculated for altogether 68 sites. After that, the statistical analysis for the diffuse load equations was started. The deliverable 'Report on nation-wide diffuse load equations for phosphorus and nitrogen, and comparison of the two modelling approaches for selected catchment' was delivered in time (deadline 1.9.2012). The equations were tested against both a validation set of many catchments and the VEMALA modelling results for Aurajoki. For Aurajoki, the equations gave results that were close to those of VEMALA, but for the bigger validation set the results were not that reasonable due to a different distribution of catchment data between the two data sets (i.e. the set for the equation formation and the set for validation).

In order to avoid nested catchments and to be able to use the best possible set of catchments in equation deriving, the already gathered catchment data was partitioned using simple subtraction. In this stage inaccuracies considering the spatial dataset were noticed. It seemed that ArcMap’s hydrology tools did not delineate every catchment border similarly since there were numerous gaps and slivers in the spatial data. This caused a problem because nested areas were not comparable and some minor areas were delineated into more than one catchment.

To remove inaccuracies within the nested catchments, the data was partitioned again into the sub catchments that were first subtracted from the original catchments. This did not, however, remove the inaccuracies relating to catchments situated side by side, which brought certain uncertainty to the resulting catchment data. Also, Savijoki catchment was delineated using laser scanned digital elevation data (DEM (10 x 10) m) when all other larger catchments were mainly delineated using a test version of a flow direction grid that was prepared in the VALUE project. This grid data is based on (25 x 25) m DEM. Savijoki is nested in Aurajoki catchment, and different type of source data in delineating these catchments created outlier polygons for Aurajoki catchment since borders of Savijoki catchments do not integrate with Aurajoki catchment. The outlier polygons had to be kept in the model which brought more uncertainties that have to be taken into account on making conclusions of the data and results. Only the results from nutrient losses calculations were partitioned using simple subtraction by reducing the calculated nutrient losses of the catchment situated upstream (L2 in Figure 31) from the calculated nutrient losses of the catchments situated downstream (L1 in Figure 31). This method resulted nutrient losses for the newly partitioned independent catchments situated downstream and between the upper and lower measuring sites. Other variables were calculated for catchments using the same model that was created for the non-partitioned catchments in ArcMap.

The use of thus calculated, partitioned catchments for equation-forming was, however, abandoned because the dependence of specific loading on even the best explanatory factors remained low. For example, the coefficient of determination (R2) of field-% was only 16% and 14%, for P and N loading, respectively. As for lake-%, the R2:s were close to zero. Moreover, there were some exceptional, very much larger-than-the-average specific loading values in the dataset. The most likely reason for this, as well as for the weak R2:s, was the fact that a partitioned catchment area (the darker grey area in Figure 31) was in many cases very small in relation to the loading figure obtained by subtraction, which inevitably includes a degree of uncertainty.

Figure 31. Partitioned catchments in loading calculations. L1 = nutrient loading from the whole catchment depicted in dark grey, L2 = nutrient loading from the upper catchment (light grey).

In Kemijoki catchment seven sub catchments were originally delineated, but since the water flows in either way between the artificial lakes Lokka and Porttipahta, four of these sub catchments were left out from the model as independent units. They were, however, united into a larger catchment which was used in the equation deriving. In partitioned data five of the sub catchments were left out of the model in the similar manner. When the partitioned catchment data was analyzed in statistical program no dependencies were found and therefore no results related to them are further discussed.

The gathered catchment characteristics were further calculated to suitable units and grouped into thematic classes for systematic choice of equations. In the end, following classes of variables were utilized in this work: (1) field-% of the total land area, (2) field- and lake-% of the total land area, other land uses (percentages of forest, natural wetlands and urban areas of the total land area), field use (percentages of different field management practices of the total field area), other agricultural practices and texture of fields (P and N in manure (kg km-2 a-1), percentage of clay in uppermost soil layer) and (4) other variables that showed statistically significant and logically reasonable effect on loading (precipitation (mm) for P and point- source N loading for N).

From these classes, following equations were chosen as the final models (Models 1–4) explaining specific TP and TN loading. Moreover, the outputs of stepwise regression procedure were included as Models 5.

Models explaining specific TP loading:

Models explaining specific TN loading:

Of the different catchment characteristics, field-% explained best the specific loading of both TP and TN, of which 70% and 77% were explained by this variable alone, respectively (Models 1). When the lake-% was taken along, the rates of explanation increased up to 79% for TP and 85% for TN (Models 2). At the same time, however, the slopes of field-% decreased for TP 1.44→1.35 and for TN 21.9→20.0. This was due to the fact that in the catchments field- and lake-%:s correlated inversely with each other. When the sole explaining variable in the model was field-%, the nutrient loading capacity of the fields was overestimated because as field-% increases, the lake-% decreases, which increases the loading due to the decreased retention (lakes effectively retain nutrients). Inclusion of other land use variables increased the R2:s by 2–3%. However, only the share of natural wetlands showed statistically significant, surprisingly increasing, effect on specific TP loading. In terms of TN, inclusion of neither forest, natural wetlands nor urban areas increased the R2:

When the share of spring cereals (and cereals in general) of arable land increased, TP loading decreased. However, this equation was not reliable because of the interdependence between the explaining variables (high VIF value). Instead, increased share of grass increased TP loading statistically significantly, although the inclusion of this variable increased the R2 by only 2% (up to 81%). Also with TN, taking the cultivation practices into account increased the R2 at best by only 2%. In terms of winter cereals, their increased proportion significantly reduced TN loading.

Both soil type (clay-% of topsoil) and the P that comes with manure had increasing effect on TP loading and together they increased the R2 up to 84%. Still a little higher R2 for TP loading was shown by the equation 3l, into which shares of grass, beet and vegetable cultivation of total field area were added, but regression models with this many variables should be looked at critically. The same caution holds true with model equations created by stepwise regression, of which the R2:s rose up to even 90% and more (Models 5 in the above list). A relatively good R2 (83%) was achieved by equation 4, which was found by testing numerous combinations of variables. In this model P loading is explained, in addition to field-% and lake-%:s, by forest-%, topsoil clay-% and annual precipitation.

The N that comes with manure surprisingly seemed to decrease N loading both as the only additional explanatory variable with field- and lake-%:s, as well as together with spring cereal and grass areas. Although the R2:s of these equations rose quite high (86–88%), the reliability of at least the latter ones is weak due to the mutual dependence (VIF). Fairly high R2 (87%) was also achieved by the model, which included forest-% and point source N as the explanatory variables in addition to field- and lake-%:s.

Validation of the models, as well as their testing in pilot areas, showed that the equations do not fully work in all areas: for example, the loads ended up being negative for the catchments that had large lake percentage. When exploring the data, we found out that the coefficients of determination were significantly improved, if all the catchments with more than 10% covered with lakes and all the catchments with an area less than 10 km2 were erased from the dataset. An ideal would be to have big enough dataset to be able to separate the catchments to different groups based on different characteristics, i.e., geographical location, soil type, lake percentage, catchment size or else like. Then it would be possible to make more specified equations for differing areas, which could raise the reliability of the equations. In addition, new explanatory variables, such as the soil test P and more precise soil data could be added to the statistical analysis to obtain more information on the effect of agricultural areas and the texture of top soil on the nutrient losses.

The demonstration of the tool in pilot areas was done during this period, (Vesijärvi, Vanajavesi, Vantaanjoki, Lapuanjoki). Further, the results were presented in three workshops/seminars: (1) Monitoring and reducing nutrient loads to the Black Sea, EU Baltic2Black 3rd Expert Workshop, 31 January – 1 February, 2013, Istanbul, Turkey (2) University of Jyväskylä, "Weekly research seminar": Nutrient loading models, results from Baltic Compass and GisBloom projects and (3) Nutrients to be used in the fields instead of leaking to the sea! Phosphorus is needed for food production – not to increase algal blooms , Seminar by the Rotarians and the Baltic Sea Challenge , Raseborg, 10 April 2013. The results were also discussed at the Finnish Water Framework coordinator’s meeting on 23th April, 2013.

The deliverable “Report on nation-wide diffuse load equations for phosphorus and nitrogen, and comparison of the two modelling approaches for selected catchment” was finalised in May 2013 In this study, the statistical models reported in the above mention deliverable were also used for the assessment of the future nutrient loading scenarios by changing field area, construction of wetlands, manure application and precipitation. The results are reported in the Report on the load prediction tool, load predictions for the present, and load estimates for selected future agricultural production and changing climate scenarios. The scenario results are incorporated in the deliverable report (May, 2013) in order to avoid overlap in the description of the nation- wide diffuse load equations which were thoroughly represented in the former report. .During the final period, also fine tuning of all reporting was completed by 30.9.2013. Scenarios of increasing and decreasing the present field area by 20% in the pilot areas suggested 14–28% increase and decrease of P loading. As for N, the effect of similar change in field percentage led to somewhat lesser change in loading (11–25% increase and decrease). The smallest effects of field area changes were found in the Karvianjoki pilot area and the strongest in Vesijärvi. Effect of constructed wetlands was simulated by making small changes in lake percentages. Thus “added” lakes were regarded as pond-type wetlands established in the area. Increasing the existing lake area by 1%, which particularly in lake-rich areas would simulate rather extensive construction of wetlands, yielded to 2–21% retention of P loading. As expected, the lowest reduction was found in the lake-poor Paimionjoki area and the highest in lake-rich Pien-Saimaa. In terms of N, the range of results was narrower (2–5% retention) due to the different set of models (those producing negative results were omitted) accepted for simulations. The effect of manure P was simulated with the only model (Model 5) with this explaining factor included. Although the effect of manure P change in specific P loading was generally low, the results suggested that the areas with initially low specific P loading are more sensitive to the changes in manure P content than those with high P loading. For

51 example in Karvianjoki 20% increase in manure P led to 4% increase in specific P loading while in Vanajavesi similar change yielded only 0.3% increase. Similar tendency was found with the changes made for annual precipitation; an increase of 140 mm would rise annual specific P loading by 15% in Vanajavesi but even more than double it in Pien-Saimaa. As for specific N loading, the effect of similar change in precipitation was not as drastic (increase of 11% in Vantaa and 22% in Säkylän Pyhäjärvi.

Subaction 2.4 Satellite remote sensing and automatic station measurements

Satellite images provide spatially accurate information of water quality and temperature in lakes and coastal waters in cloudless conditions. Moored automatic stations generate continuous water quality information at one point. Both methods yield additional new information for the needs of monitoring, reporting and water protection. The use of satellite images were demonstrated at six pilot areas, and automatic station measurements were available in three lakes and in one coastal pilot area. The activities of this subaction are summarized in Figure 32.

Processing of MERIS images - Thematic maps VesiNetti - Turbidity - Time series Web service - Chlorophyll a - Histogrammes - Secchi depth - Statistics - WFD products Comparison with in situ measurements

Automatic Quality check Re-corrected measurements of data automatic data

Figure 32. Schematic presentation of activities in subaction 2.4.

Methods Water quality maps were based on the MERIS satellite images, from which chlorophyll-a, turbidity and Secchi disk transparency were interpreted. Secchi disc transparency is usually more useful than turbidity, partly because it is an easily understandable variable, which can also be measured by citizens. MERIS does not provide useful data for small lakes and straits, because its spatial resolution is 300 m.

Chlorophyll and turbidity were interpreted from the MERIS images of 2010 and 2011 using the Boreal lake processor (part of the BEAM software package), which is based on concentration ranges and optical properties of Finnish lakes and which was developed in the ESA funded MERIS Lakes project in 2007-2008. In GisBloom we have developed a new method for Secchi transparency estimation by combining the output of Boreal processor and a

52 bio-optical model. The water quality maps for coastal waters from MERIS images were made with the FUB processor, which is also part of the BEAM software and which in operational use for coastal waters in SYKE. The chlorophyll time series for lake water bodied (as part of the FreshMon EU-project) were also made with the FUB-processor. The processors and their validation results are described in: Schroeder et al. (2007), Doerffer & Schiller (2008), Koponen et al. (2008) ja Kallio (2012).

Surface temperature was obtained from operational remote sensing products of SYKE. Estimation are based on NOAA/AVHRR images with a spatial resolution of 1000 m at best. Lake Pyhäjärvi was only lake pilot area large enough for temperature mapping with AVHRR. Temperatures are presented as time series of average values calculate from each temperature map. Good images, where the whole lake pilot area is cloudless, are usually obtained 4-8 times for water quality and 10-20 times for temperature in May-September.

Automatic measurements included chlorophyll-a and phycocyanin fluorescence, turbidity, nitrate, oxygen water temperature and salinity, but variables varied between pilot areas. In addition, a weather station was installed in Lake Pyhäjärvi. Lake Pyhäjärvi station was funded and maintained by TEKES, CatchLake and ReFresh-projects and SYKE. In Lake Pien-Saimaa the automatic station belonged to Lappeenranta Region’s Environmental Office and in Lake Vanajavesi to University of Helsinki. The coastal station of Helsinki was in 2012 funded by SYKE. In GisBloom the automatic data were re-corrected using available control samples at two station, which yielded clearly more realistic estimations than the standard corrections. The technique, quality control and accuracy of automatic measurements for the Pyhäjärvi case have been described in Kallio et al. (2010).

Satellite images

Water quality maps provide information of spatial and temporal variation in water quality in surface layer. Single maps are useful as such but condiderable additional value is obtained, when combined products directly useful for endusers are provided Table 10). The MERIS images were not available from the summer of 2012, because contact was lost to the satellite in April. The original plan of GisBloom was to utilize MERIS images also from 2012.

Table 10. Satellite images based products and their utilization. Chl = chlorophyll a.

Product Use User group Vesinetti

Chl-maps Spatial variation Classifiers, Lake pilot areas (2010-2011), lakes researches, citizens Secchi disk maps (2010- Spatial variation (e.g. Researches, Lake pilot areas 2011) river plumes) classifiers citizens Chl, surface algal Spatial variation (WFD Classifiers, No, but available in blooms, turbidity for classification, algal researchers, citizens SYKE’s internet pages coastal waters bloom reporting) (operational products of SYKE)

Chl time series for water WFD classification Classifiers Whole Finnish coast, bodies 2006-11 lakes* in southern Finland (figures) Chl-a distributions for WFD classification Classifiers Whole Finnish coast, water bodies (histograms) lakes* in southern Finland 2006-2011 (figures) Chl-a statistics for water WFD classification Classifiers No, available by request bodies e.g. average values 2006 Time series of surface Real time monitoring, Researchers, citizens In Lake Pyhäjärvi (figure), temperature variation between years other lakes in SYKE’s internet pages *All pilot areas, all coastal waters, and major lakes in Uusimaa, Pirkanmaa and Etelä- Pohjanmaa 2006. In addition for lake pilot areas in 2009 and 2011.

Water quality maps are valuable for experts and ecological classifiers in estimating e.g. the extension of river plumes (Figure 33), spatial distribution of phytoplankton and blooms and the representativeness of monitoring stations. Maps can also be utilized in the assessment of the impacts of water protection measures. For example, in the water quality maps of Lake Pien-Saimaa the diluting effect of additional wáter led from the near-by clear water Lake Suur-Saimaa. In Lake Vanajavesi, the spatial variation of water quality is large, the publication of water quality maps in the Internet was considered very informative both for experts and public. Citizens are often most interested in Secchi transparency maps.

Secchi 8.5.2011 Secchi 11.5.2011 Secchi 8.6.2011 Secchi 27.8.2011

Figure 33. Secchi transparency (m) in four days in Lake Säkylän Pyhäjärvi in 2011. Land, shore zone and clouds are indicated with grey colour.

Following water body based products were made from the chlorophyll maps for the needs of WFD ecological classification: - timeseries - concentration distributions (historams) - tables of statistical characteristics All these products were made for the classification period.

In the coastal timeseries the satellite based and routine results are presented as weekly averages and stardard deviations (Figure 35). The correspondence between satellite based products and routine sampling results in the coastal water bodies is usually good. However, the results are not directly comparable, because they usually represent different day and area within a water body Some water bodies in the inner acchipelago behave differently, because they are shallow or have exceptional optical properties.

From the satellite images of the classification period 2006-2011 also statistics were calculated: mean, median, minimum, maximum, percentiles and node. The histograms (Figure 34) also include boundary values of ecological classes of the water body type in question. This information is also available in excel files from which the enduser gets the exact chorophyll concentrations.

The use of satellite based products improves the accuracy of claasification, because the number of observations is much higher than in case of conventional monitoring. In Lake Pyhäjärvi, for example, over 20 000 satellite based observations in the classification period are typically obtained annually while routine samples at the lake deep are taken only five times. Allthough the 300 m resolution of MERIS limit its use in archipelago, the estimations could be made for about 67% of the coastal water bodies.

Figure 34. Chlorophyll time series of the Helsinki-Porkkala water body (coastal) based on satellite images (EO) and routine measurements at monitoring stations (MS) in 2006. Results are presented as weekly means together with standard deviations (std).

Figure 35. Distribution of all satellite based chlorophyll concentration in the Helsinki- Porkkala water body (coastal) in the WFD classification period (weeks 26-36) in 2006. N is the number of pixels. Mean and median of satellite (EO) estimation, concentrations at monitoring stations (black filled circles) and class boundaries are also presented. Hy/T is boundary between Good and Moderate classes in this water body type.

Surface temperature is monitored by satellites in 12 large lakes in Finland including Lake Pyhäjärvi (Figure 36). These observations are obtained more often than in case of water quality. They represent the central parts of a lake and are available since 2002. The end-users in Lake Pyhäjärvi considered that this type of time series of water temperature can be valuable in climate change studies.

56 b)

Figure 36. a) Surface temperature maps of Lake Säkylän Pyhäjärven 2.6.2010 (left) and 2.8.2010 (right) and b) time series of surface water temperature in 2010 based on satellite observations. Time series from three additional large lakes in southern Finland are also presented.

Automatic stations

The utilization of automatic stations is based on 1) the availability of real time data and 2) data is temporally intensive. This means that reliable estimation of water quality of the whole measurement period can be obtained and dynamic short time phenomena can be detected (Table 11). In addition, through combining measurements with other information sources and models bring additional benefits.

Taulukko 11. GisBloom products based on automatic measurements and their utilization. Chl = chlorophyll a.

Product Use User group Vesinetti Real time results Informing public, Citizens, Data directly timing of sampling, monitoring available or experts internet link Time series Explaining algal Researchers, Figures blooms WFD classifiers Time series Validation of satellite Researchers Report products Chl mean for WFD ecological Classifiers In some pilot classification period classification areas

Automatic station measurements are available in the GisBloom web service Vesinetti. Data from Lake Pien-Saimaa are copied daily from the data server of the company providing automatic station service. In addition, Vesinetti was linked to the internet site of Lake Pyhäjärvi and Helsinki sea area stations.

Automatic measurements are typically transferred twice a day to a server and to Internet, where they are freely available. This kind of real time information interest both citizens (free time, living in near shore houses) and professionals (fishermen, Search And Rescue). Real time data was considered most useful in Lake Pyhäjärvi. Real time results can also be used to direct routine sampling to the occurrence of critical and interesting phenomena, such as sudden increase or decrease in chlorophyll concentration, and stratification events of polymictic lakes, which can lead to nutrient release from the sediment.

Automatic measurements can help in finding out explanations for algal blooms, particularly if temperature and oxygen sensors are available in addition to sensor measuring phytoplankton. This was demonstrated in Lake Pien-Saimaa, where break-up of stratification led to an algal bloom in late July 2011, most likely to the nutrient flux from deeper layers to the surface. Without continuous measurements the reasons for the bloom would have been difficult to find out and could have led to wrong conclusions.

Temporally intensive measurements provide reliable estimation of chlorophyll for the whole period of interest. In Helsinki additional product were calculated for the needs of WFD ecological classification Figure 37). Data from Helsinki also effectively shows short time algal peaks.

Helsinki, älyviitta 2012 25 Kontrolli Viitta 08-18 20 R2 = 0.95 Viittamittaukset: 15 SYKE ja Luode Consulting Kontrollit: Helsingin kaupunki ja SYKE

Chl-aug/l 10

0 1.7. 1.8. 1.9. 1.10. 2012 Helsinki älyviitta, Chl-a, 2012 20 Viikkokeskiarvo VPD periodin keskiarvo = 6.0 µg/l 15 Data: SYKE ja Luode Consulting OY

10 Chl-aug/l

0 1.7. 1.8. 1.9. 2012

Figure 37. Chlorophyll concentration measured at the Helsinki automatic station and results of the control samples (left pane). Weekly average and average of the whole WFD classification period (July 1 – Sept. 7) calculated from the daily data (right pane).

Joint use of methods The satellite estimates were validated using in situ water quality and temperature measurements of routine monitoring and automatic stations. In the lakes with an automatic station the thorough test of the satellite products is possible, because in situ data is available for every cloudless satellite overpass. Similar comparison using conventional methods is very demanding. This comparison was made in Lakes Pyhäjärvi (Figure 38), Vanajavesi and Pien- Saimaa. The results showed that was turbidity and Secchi transparency were estimated with good accuracy as well as chlorophyll with exception of Lake Vanajavesi, where high values (> 15 µg/l) were underestimated.

Pyhäjärvi

MERIS 15 Lautta Lab

10 Chl-aug/l 5

0 1.4. 1.5. 1.6. 1.7. 1.8. 1.9. 1.10. 1.11. 2010 Figure 38. Chlorophyll concentration interpreted with satellite images (MERIS) and measured at the automatic station (Lautta) in Lake Pyhäjärvi in 2010. Control sample results of the automatic station are also shown (Lab). Automatic station data: CatchLake and ReFresh projects.

Satellite images, automatic measurements and routine monitoring results differ in spatial, temporal and vertical accuracy as well as in estimation accuracy. All these measurements can be combined by various assimilation techniques, where the strengths of each method are utilized to get complete view of the water area of interest. Data assimilation is described in work package 3.12, which is based on Lake Pyhäjärvi measurements in 2009.

Comparison with planned output

The subaction has proceeded as planned in the revised proposal. The original plan in GisBloom was to utilize MERIS images from 2010-2012. However, the MERIS images were not available fo the summer of 2012, because of instrument failure.Instead MERIS images from 2006-2011 were utilized. The automatic station of Lake Pien-Saimaa encountered technical problems with sensors in 2012, and therefore usable data was not obtained for the whole measurement period. The technical problem in the automation station of Pien-Saimaa in 2012 meant that no data was recorded between June 7 and July 12. This meant that mean values of water quality for the whole WFD classification period could not be calculated for this year. However, the measurements still covered the most likely period (mid-July to end of September) for the occurrence of algal blooms and they provided intensive information of the phytoplankton dynamics. The automatic station measurements in other years (2010 and 2011) in Pien-Saimaa covered the whole classification period (June-September). Considering all three measurement years in Pien-Saimaa the main goals of the automatic measurements were still achieved.

Subaction 2.5 Information tools

In subaction 2.5, information tools were created to facilitate exchange of information in between scientists and system developers, different kind of experts on water management, official and other professional users and general public. The main results of the activities resulted in Vesinetti web service for information exchange and modelling activities, as well as development of internal working practices within SYKE and within consortium.

Users of the information tools were identified and general outline of the development process was commonly agreed. Concepts and ideas to be implemented have been introduced to the users (project management, system end users, modellers, internal satellite data service providers and geographic and other information system developers as well as the developers within the project both in SYKE and in Arbonaut).

Architectural planning of the system was finished in 2011. The technology for implementation for demonstrating the simulation results is selected and the base functionality for showing the forecasts/analysis results on a map is implemented. The external systems requiring interfacing are identified. Closer evaluation of different user and service provider group requirements was carried out in the end of June 2011 to iterate appropriate tools and services for each one of them.

General roles and functional outline of sub-systems within SYKE and within Arbonaut as well as interfaces in between the system were agreed upon, and details were clarified in the iterative process cycles. Iteration of functionalities and properties of user interfaces (UI) and information systems controlled by these UIs were completed, resulting to final release of the system..

Implemented partially in a separate project, first versions of Järviwiki web service for general gathering and dissemination of lake related data to wide general public was released in March 2011. Data web exchange systems and protocols associated with Järviwiki, EnviObserver system by VTT (associated with 'Levävahti' data gathering service) and other systems associated with GISBLOOM were tested as first release in May/June 2011. Further development and wider utilization of the methods were active throughout the project. GISBLOOM will utilize and interface with the "Levävahti" service and the associated mobile information gathering technology, developed in a separate process involving SYKE, VTT and IBM.

The web map interface work was conducted in Arbonaut, and the design of software tools and information content for service provider side was completed in SYKE/TK/GEO. A Confluence wiki work space set up in Arbonaut was used to facilitate closer co-operation in between and among partners.

Identification Introduction of concepts of users and objectives to the users

Feedbac from users Functionality of map services Architectural planning

Data exchange Implementation of with LakeWiki map server

Figure 39. Schematic presentation of activities in subaction 2.5.

The web user interface prototype services were set up for SA 2.5, in order to be first tested and prepared for the first internal release in Dec 2011, and subsequent further releases. OGC WPS (OpenGIS consortium Web Processing Service) interfaces were planned for model execution service control in SYKE to be utilized in Arbonaut operated web map service interfaces. LLR model was set up for utilization over WPS interface. WPS interface in between SYKE and Arbonaut was eventually not implemented. Instead, WPS interface is used internally in Arbonaut for better maintenance of the whole system in the long run. The interface technology is now available to be used for model execution services from the SYKE permanently maintained interface services based on their availability. Currently WPS LLR services for Vesinetti are not acquired from SYKE; they are accessing the Arbonaut WPS service interface internally. The GIS services, most importantly WMS (web map services) in SYKE web interfaces are utilized by Vesinetti: It is possible to include different maps provided by SYKE to the map user interface.

In multiple meetings the user requirements for information system tools have been refined. Features for the first iterative release to the project group were planned and implemented. Release was made in Dec 2011. A lake based information dialog window was designed for GISBLOOM map services for all related tasks, including setting up model parameters, executing the selected model, viewing results and attaching documents to lake geographic objects using categorized tabs in window. Connection to LakeWiki was established to show content like basic lake information and comments section inside map service.

The structure of the information dialog window is relatively simple for normal geographical targets, such as user added observations: In addition to basic GIS information automatically generated by the system, there is a possibility to attach files and comments in a simple dialog window with a single row of tab names to separate different “sheets” of information or activity. The information dialog window specially designed for lakes, rivers and coastal areas in far more complex, typically consisting of several levels of selection tabs and their sub-tabs. These are designed to guide and organize both storing and finding of information in a straightforward way for an user of water ecosystem related data. The information content is created based on target specific XML data, generated by SYKE for the Vesinetti system. Use

61 potential of these lake/river/coastal sea area specific XML datasets as input for data processing tasks should not be overlooked.

In general, the tab sheets in the information dialog window are either text derived directly from the XML or JärviWiki, attachment file sheets or sheets containing some activity. Models which essentially consist of Excel files etc can be stored to Vesinetti as attachments to the target lakes etc which they describe. If the results are represented in web pages or other web services referable by an URL, they can be described as “scenarios” which in this context refers to a combination of a link to a web reference, descriptive name for the linked content and a brief explanation of it. In principle, the models may actually consist of several inter- linked scenarios describing different pre-calculated aspects of the same phenomenon, but simplicity is currently preferred in describing and creating scenarios for display.

Executing models and viewing the execution results is an activity performed in a dedicated set of dialog window tabs. Running LLR model and viewing associated results can be accessed in map service via these information dialog windows. Based on testing and feedback, cross browser compatibility has been improved. Also opening of two lake based information dialog windows for comparison is made possible.

Domain www.vesinetti.fi, “waternet”, (also .com/.net/.org) has been registered and is used for latest release of GISBLOOM map service. Dedicated Vesinetti feedback wiki has been opened to gather feedback of latest releases of map service. Multiple meetings and presentations of Vesinetti have been carried out. Based on collected feedback and ideas, planning work of next iterations were defined.

Updated version of WPS server (52North) was taken into use. 52North version 3 contains better connection and control to R environment that is used by many models. Now deploying new R based models behind WPS interface is made easier. LLR model was migrated into new WPS interface. WPS messaging logic was also refactored in Vesinetti UI. LLR model available at 23rd Jan, 2013 was released as LLR_2013 model in the Vesinetti

Vemala model was integrated into Vesinetti. Data is retrieved automatically based on selected lake from Vemala system and shown in lake info window in Vesinetti. Unnecessary traffic to Vemala system is avoided by keeping daily server side cache of retrieved data. Automatic measurements stations (Pien-Saimaa, Pyhäjärvi) and other observations / facilities can be shown shown as a clickable icons on a map. The associated information windows can contain links to various resources associated to these, for example near real time measurement databases.

Tool to import shape / raster datasets was included in Vesinetti. Now it’s possible through user interface to add new map layers and define category and styling. Implementation of user management and access control matrix was completed successfully to facilitate creation and maintenance of user accounts as well as management of viewing, edit access and removal rights to objects.

Figure 40. Map layers management window in Vesinetti.fi.

For the back-office activities, the work practices in between the scientific modellers/algorithm developers vs the personnel responsible of operative service provision control have been redesigned. This includes version control and model code, test data and testing setup exchange systems in between the scientists, 'modelers' and the 'operators', people responsible of setting up the executable code of operative model services for the WPS interfaces etc. This is the first step in iterative design of a new operative production chain system, which has been nominated as 'Saukko' (Finnish for otter, Lutra Lutra). Key features of the anticipated functionality of the associated software and vesion control tools of Saukko were introduced, but the Saukko system itself remains to be work in progress. For creating the XML files for each target, a production software ‘CreateVesinettiXML.py’ was developed based on Saukko principles and current practices. The maintenance software remains to be used mainly for internal back-office update tasks of Vesinetti information content.

Basic parts of the Saukko system have been designed and implemented. Due to loss of Envisat satellite, systems design resources had to be re-allocated to facilitate production of information content, thus the processing system development was rescaled to meet the basic and fundamental requirements of the project. The decisions enabled the users of system to access more readily processed information during project demonstrations. The trade-off was less advanced back-office systems to mass-produce information in the future. This is to a certain degree expected to be compensated due to developments associated with Sentinel satellite utilisation preparations and the associated data processing facilities.

Figure 41. The User interface of Vesinetti map service, with attached data and two simultaneously opened information windows.

The Vesinetti system is essentially a storage of information, appended by both the users and service providers (SYKE and Arbonaut). Satellite and in situ observation time series images of coastal areas and lakes are being included and uploaded to the system until the end of project and beyond it. For example, time series images of MERIS satellite observation statistics as compared to in situ measurement statistics of coastal Water Framework Directive water bodies are appended to the system.

Action 3 Demonstration of eutrophication and algal bloom responses to management and restoration measures and socio-economic impacts

Subaction 3.1 Algal bloom predictions and responses to nutrient load and land use changes

Subaction 3.1.1 Modelling and prediction

The objective of this action was to demonstrate algal bloom models and predicted responses to nutrient loads, land use and climate changes for the public and for the design of cost efficient river basin management measures. Responses were estimated using the data base, analysis and models provided by action 2 and models implemented in this action. Deterministic models and statistical (Bayesian) inference methods and hierarchical/multilevel modelling strategies were combined to pool information from multiple environmental data sets and to analyze the cost efficiency of river basin management measures together with socio-economic models.

The WSFS-VEMALA model simulates hydrology and water quality for all river basins in Finland (Huttunen et al., submitted 2013). The simulated water quality parameters are total phosphorus, total nitrogen and suspended solids. The model simulates on daily time step nutrient leaching from land areas, incoming load of each one hectar and larger lake, nutrient transport in rivers and finally loading into the sea. Each field plot was simulated separately taking into account slope, soil type and plant of the field. The model was used for real time simulation and forecasting of water quality. The daily updated forecasts were provided for the public by www pages. The WSFS-VEMALA model and LakeState algae blooming model were integrated. The resulting integrated model run daily for providing algae blooming forecasts for about 58 000 lakes. A set of important and well observed lakes has been selected among all lakes and forecast for these are provided on a public web interface. Implementation of the integrated WSFS-VEMALA-LakeState model included integration of the model descriptions, calibration of the model with both water quality and algae blooming observations and checking the results of the integrated model in all well observed lakes.

The tasks concerning WSFS-VEMALA modelling were 1) to develop further nutrient diffuse loading model (WSFS-VEMALA), 2) to include lake algal blooming model LakeState into WSFS-VEMALA 3) to provide algal bloom forecasts for biggest lakes in Finland 4) to run different scenarios of land use change and also climate change 5) to evaluate their effect on algal blooming

Table 12. Sub-action 3.1.1 tasks and products Task Product To whom, for what purpose to develop further Lake external and to public, pilot area nutrient diffuse internal loading experts loading model estimates by WSFS- VEMALA to include lake algal WSFS-VEMALA- model is run on blooming model LakeState model operational bases LakeState into WSFS- VEMALA to provide algal bloom algal blooming at the moment for forecasts for biggest foreacasts Gisbloom expert use, lakes in Finland later for public to run different nutrient loadings at for sub-action 3.2 for scenarious of land use different scenarious cost-efficiency change and also modelling climate change to evaluate their effect algal blooming for sub-action 3.2 for on algal blooming changes in different cost-efficiency scenario conditions modelling

Development of diffuse loading model has been done with the purpose of having more processes to reduce uncertainty in diffuse loading estimation. Reliable present loading situation simulation was required to be able to simulate any kind of scenarios – climate change or land use change scenarios. The field scale ICECREAM model has been applied to

65 simulate phosphorus leaching form agriculture, and a similar process based description has been developed by us to simulate catchment scale nitrogen leaching.

Phosphorus model development ICECREAM simulates nutrient leaching from arable land in a daily time step. It has been coupled with WSFS-VEMALA model. Coupled modelling system has been applied to all the ca 1,100,000 field plots of Finland to simulate phosphorus load from agriculture. Input data for each field has been gathered from Viljavuuspalvelu (Soil Analysis Service), the digital elevation model 1:25 000 and Tike (Information Centre of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry). Required data included soil type, size and average slope of the field plot, type of vegetation, application rate and type (mineral fertilizer / manure / sludge) of fertilizer and the farming practices applied. Estimated or average data has been used where accurate data was not available.

ICECREAM was based on CREAMS (Knisel 1980) and GLEAMS (Knisel 1993) models, applied to Finnish conditions by Rekolainen and Posch (1993), and further developed for simulation of phosphorus leaching by Tattari et al. (2001), Yli-Halla et al. (2005), Bärlund et al. (2009) and Jaakkola et al. (2012). A schematic presentation of the phosphorus processesin the model is shown in figure 42.

Figure 42. Simulation of phosphorus flows in the ICECREAM model.

In order to better simulate leaching of phosphorus from the 1,100,000 field plots in Finland, some equations in ICECREAM have been modified to statistical equations representing Finnish fields. The initial inorganic P content of the soil is calculated according to the following equation:

(1) where soil inorganic P is in mg kg-1, Plab is labile phosphorus in mg kg-1 and clay% is the percentage of clay in the soil. The change in the soil P-test value over a year, which was used for calculating the balance between different P pools is calculated as follow:

(2)

-1 where STP is the soil P-test value (mg kg ) at the end of the year, STP0 is the soil P-test value at the beginning of the year and Pbal is the change in the total P content of the soil during the

66 year (kg ha-1). The dissolved P concentration in surface runoff is calculated according to equation 3 and depends on the soil P-test value.

{ (3)

where Pw is the phosphorus concentration in surface runoff (mg L-1). The materials for deriving equations 1, 2 and 3 are shown in table 13.

Table 13. Data for deriving equations 1-3. Use of the data Data References Equation 1: Initial inorganic Total inorganic phosphorus, acid Peltovuori 2002, Saarela phosphorus content in the soil ammonium acetate extractable et al. 2003 phosphorus, and clay content of 23 mineral soils in Finland Equation 2: Change in the Change in soil P-test values Saarela et al. 2003, soil P-test value over a year during 8-14 years lasting field Saarela et al. 2004 trials including 18 non-fertilized fields, removal of P in crop yield Equation 3: Dissolved P Acid ammonium acetate Uusitalo and Aura 2005 concentration in surface extractable P from 15 Finnish runoff mineral soils, dissolved P concentration in runoff from rainfall simulations of the soils

For coupling ICECREAM with WSFS-VEMALA the hydrological simulation needed to give similar results in both models. For this purpose, the total evapotranspiration for ICECREAM is now partly calculated by WSFS-VEMALA. During the growing season transpiration and evaporation are calculated by ICECREAM but corrected with a correction factor in order to reach the same yearly total evapotranspiration as in WSFS-VEMALA. Also snow water equivalent and precipitation / snow melt are inputs from WSFS-VEMALA. The SCS curve number, which determines the amount of surface runoff, has been divided into two parameters, which are calibrated independently for frozen soil and frost-free soil.

Further minor changes have been made to the model. The frost simulation has been modified so that the soil frost does not melt before the snow has melted. The amount of particulate phosphorus leached through macropores is now linearly related to the volume of the water flowing through macropores. The macropores are also activated every time the soil is frozen, in addition to them being activated when a certain threshold of soil moisture is exceeded. The grass growth has been modified so that the growth after winter starts from zero. Also the growth of winter wheat has been slowed down in the spring. The erosion of grass covered soil has been increased.

For calibration and development of the ICECREAM model, experimental data from four Finnish agricultural fields has been used. These experiments have been published by Turtola and Kemppainen (1998), Koskiaho et al. (2002), Puustinen et al. (2005), Uusitalo et al. (2007)

67 and Turtola et al. (2007). Most of the parameters used are adopted from the previous versions of ICECREAM (Tattari et al. 2001, Bärlund et al. 2009). The model performance has been tested in catchment scale. Figure 43 shows the simulated and measured P concentrations in 2009-2011 for the Vantaanjoki catchment, where 25 % of the land area is arable land. The corresponding output from the old version of WSFS-VEMALA is shown in figure 43 for comparison.

Figure 43. Phosphorus concentrations in river Vantaanjoki in 2009-2011. The black dots are measured values and the red line shows the values simulated with WSFS-VEMALA- ICECREAM model.

Figure 44. Phosphorus concentrations in river Vantaanjoki in 2009-2011. The black dots are measured values and the red line shows the values simulated with the old version of the WSFS-VEMALA model.

The ICECREAM model is originally designed for simulating mineral soils only. However, in some pilot areas peat is a common soil type of agricultural fields. For example, in Lapuanjoki and Karvianjoki areas, a fourth of the arable land is peat. For this reason, it is necessary to be able to simulate phosphorus loading also from organic fields. In this project, an ICECREAM extension for simulating peat soils has been developed. The hydrology of the model has been improved by adding the physical Richards equation to simulate the water movement in the soil profile. Also a routine for calculating organic matter degradation based on the C:N ratio has been added to the model. The field experiment of Huhta and Jaakkola (1993) and measurements from TASO project have been used for developing the peat soil simulation. Modelling the leaching of phosphorus bound to suspended solids still needs improvement. Future work also includes testing the peat soil simulation in catchment scale.

Nitrogen model development In this project, a new version of the nitrogen model, VEMALA-N, was developed (Huttunen - et al., submitted 2013). In the new model, nitrate (NO3 ) and organic nitrogen are described + separately. Ammonium (NH4 ) leaching is neglected in the VEMALA-N model at the moment. Ammonium loading represents a small fraction (around 6%) of total nitrogen (TN) + loading on average from Finnish river catchments. Although, NH4 leaching is neglected, the + NH4 storage in the soil is modelled and linked to organic nitrogen and nitrate in the soil. Nitrate is simulated using a semi-process based model. In the VEMALA-N model, six land uses / crop classes are defined: spring cereals, winter cereals, grassland, root crops, green fallow and forest. The nitrogen processes included in the soil model are mineralization, nitrification, denitrification, immobilization, plant uptake, fertilizer input and decay and nitrogen leaching. The schematic presentation of the VEMALA-N and conceptual hydrological model is presented in the Figure 45.

Most of the nitrogen processes in the soil are simulated as first order kinetic processes that depend on the mass of the nitrogen fractions in the soil, soil temperature and soil moisture. The most appropriate function relating mineralization and soil temperature is a logistic function, which has an S-shape. According to this function, mineralization is low at low soil temperatures around 0 °C, mineralization rises rapidly between 5 and 15 °C to finally reach a plateau around 20 °C. A parabolic function is used to describe the effect of soil moisture on mineralization. The maximum rate of mineralization is found around field capacity.

- In VEMALA-N, denitrification depends on the NO3 availability and soil moisture in the soil. Soil temperature is not included yet in this version, mainly to be able to reach high denitrification values during low temperature periods. According to them, emissions of N2O (originating from nitrification and denitrification) during winter can be on average 57 % of the annual flux. Both mineral and organic soils have substantial N2O production close to zero temperatures.

- The immobilization process in the model varies with inorganic N storages in the soil (NO3 + and NH4 ), soil moisture and soil temperature. However, immobilization responded weakly to soil temperature changes between +0.5°C and +15°C.

The growth of the plants biomass is related to air temperature sums over the vegetative season. Nitrogen uptakes by plants are simulated using a daily nitrogen demand taking into - account daily plant biomass growth and soil moisture stress. Mass balances in the soil of NO3 + - and NH4 are simulated for each time step by the equations found in Table 13. NO3 - concentration in the soil solution is simulated by assuming that all the NO3 storage is - dissolved in the soil water of the simulated soil layer. The NO3 concentration in the groundwater is assumed to be constant in time, but different for agricultural and non- agricultural areas. Further developments of the VEMALA-N model include the simulation of ammonium leaching from agricultural and non-agricultural areas. The organic nitrogen model was modified from the concentration-runoff relationship model to a model better linked to the conceptual hydrological model. Indeed, in the new version, subsurface and base flow are characterised by different organic nitrogen concentrations.

VEMALA-N model simulates total nitrogen (TN) concentrations and loads on a daily basis for all Finnish catchments including Gisbloom pilot areas Example of the simulated and observed TN concentrations for Vantaanjoki are presented in Figure 46.

Figure 45. Schematic presentation of VEMALA-N and hydrological model

Figure 46. Example of simulated and observed TN concentrations in Vantaanjoki (2009- 2011)

Chlorophyll-a forecasting Integrated WSFS-VEMALA-LakeState model was implemented and it was applied for simulation of total phosphorus, total nitrogen and chlorophyll-a concentration for about 2000 lakes. Lake nutrient balance model should be improved to better simulate the internal loading

processes, because internal loading is the main source of the summer algal blooms. Development work has been done by including LakeState (daily version) into VEMALA, adding different internal loading processes: resuspension, release of P from sedimentation bottom and resuspension caused by fish.

Chlorophyll-a forecasts were produced for about 2000 lakes for the summer 2011. System for producing 6 months ensemble forecasts for phosphorus, nitrogen and chlorophyll-a was implemented. Chlorophyll-a forecasts for about 2000 lakes was produced daily. Starting the summer 2012 forecasts were produced for about 58 000 lakes, which includes all 1 ha and larger lakes in Finland. Forecasts were available for experts in the internal user interface and a seleceted set of forecasts are provided on the public www pages. Chlorophyll-a forecasts are valuable tool in predicting water body conditions during the next summer already now during the spring. Based on the external loading conditions during the autumn and winter model can reproduce the nutrient concentrations in the lake into comparison with long- term average conditions. If the autumn and winter has had high external loading values (like during the December 2011) then most probably there will be higher internal loading during the next summer and subsequently possible algal blooming. We can see in the Figure 47 that due to the high external loading during the late autumn 2011 there are elevated nutrient concentrations in the Lake Tuusulanjärvi and Chlorophyll-a concentrations during the next summer will be higher than long-term average.

Figure 47. An example of the chlorophyll-a forecasts. Phosphorus and chlorophyll-a forecast for lake Tuusulanjärvi for the summer 2012. Since there was high runoff and loading of phosphorus in December 2011 the forecasted phosphorus concentration is above average, which causes that also chlorophyll-a forecast for summer 2012 is above average. However, variation for summer 2012 forecast is still high (forecast made on March 5'th).

The forest ecosystem model FEMMA

The forest ecosystem model FEMMA is a field scale, nutrient leaching model for forested ecosystems. It includes sub-models that describe water and snow in canopy, soil water, ground water and runoff, net primary production and nutrient uptake of trees and ground vegetation, decomposition and accumulation of litter and soil organic matter, and export, advection and sorption of elements in soil. By changing the object characteristics in FEMMA, it is possible to simulate the effects of climate change and forest management practices, such as clear-cutting and ditch network maintenance. The aim of applying the detailed field scale model FEMMA is to compare its results to the catchment scale model VEMALA for forested catchments. In this work, the FEMMA model is applied only on a well-studied test forest (Hyytiälä, SMEAR II station). Work with FEMMA will continue after the GISBloom project to use and compare FEMMA’s and VEMALA’s climate change scenarios.

Table 14 Comparison of the annual export loads of total nitrogen, nitrate and organic nitrogen simulated by FEMMA and VEMALA over the period 1998-2008. Both models were run to simulate the forest research station SMEAR II in Hyytiälä (61°51’N, 24°17’E). Total nitrogen (kg ha- Organic nitrogen (kg Nitrate (kg ha-1) 1) ha-1) FEMMA VEMALA FEMMA VEMALA FEMMA VEMALA 73

1998 0.40 2.47 0.12 0.50 0.26 1.98 1999 0.33 1.97 0.16 0.47 0.13 1.50 2000 0.43 2.72 0.18 0.73 0.18 1.99 2001 0.40 2.32 0.14 0.55 0.22 1.76 2002 0.24 1.26 0.12 0.35 0.09 0.92 2003 0.29 1.53 0.12 0.33 0.14 1.20 2004 0.31 1.81 0.11 0.30 0.18 1.52 2005 0.27 1.63 0.12 0.36 0.14 1.27 2006 0.40 2.29 0.17 0.58 0.18 1.71 2007 0.30 1.95 0.14 0.47 0.14 1.49 2008 0.53 3.15 0.16 0.68 0.33 2.47 Average (1998- 0.35 2.10 0.14 0.48 0.18 1.62 2008)

On one hand, the mean annual export simulated by FEMMA for total nitrogen is 0.35 kg TN -1 -1 ha yr , with an almost equal division between organic N and NO3, for the Hyytiälä forest. On the other hand, the VEMALA model simulated a TN export from forested areas located in subcatchment 35.754 of 2.10 kgN ha-1 yr-1, with 77% (1.62 kg ha-1 yr-1) of TN as organic N -1 -1 and 23 % (0.48 kg ha yr ) as NO3. If we compare our results to measurements made at the SMEAR II station, FEMMA slightly and VEMALA greatly overestimate the annual total nitrogen export measured between 0.04 and 0.23 kgN ha-1 yr-1 (Korhonen et al., 2013). However, the proportion of organic nitrogen and mineral nitrogen is better simulated in VEMALA as organic nitrogen constitutes 77% of the TN export, compared to the 92% measured in the field. In FEMMA, organic nitrogen accounts on average for about 50% of the total nitrogen export. Hyytiälä is a small catchment (≈1200m2), in the lower range of nitrogen loads. Indeed, other studies on nitrogen exports from forested catchments present a TN export from 0.6-2.2 kgN ha-1 yr-1 (e.g. Lepistö, 1996; Sarkkola et al., 2012). FEMMA can model a low TN export corresponding to the measurements, unlike the catchment scale model VEMALA that is calibrated for wider areas characterized by higher loads. We can conclude that the TN leaching on the catchment scale is quite difficult to describe by one forest measurement site, because of highly variable soil texture, forest fertility, forest type classes and forest management practices on the catchment scale. Therefore, the work with FEMMA will continue to model better the division between organic and mineral nitrogen and to represent bigger catchment areas formed by different types of forested lands.

LLR

The Lake Load Response (LLR) model tool is created to predict the effect of the phosphorus and nitrogen loading on the phosphorus, nitrogen and chlorophyll a concentration in a lake basin. LLR estimates lake specific target nutrient load given the quality standards of good ecological status of a specific lake type. LLR tool is based on simple empirical models: the nutrient retention model and the linear mixed effects model for chlorophyll a. Using Bayesian inference with Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) simulation methods, the predictions of both water quality and the model error can be made on a statistical basis. This kind of approach is useful for experts in river basin management, since uncertainties in the predictions can be taken into account and scaling of the appropriate treatments performed.

As input data the LLR model tool requires the time series of total phosphorus and nitrogen loadings together with the in-lake total phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations and outflow. If there are concentration values from different parts of the lake, those from the main basin are used, and if samples are taken from different depths of the basin, the volume weighted average should be calculated. Further, loading values and outflow values need to be averaged over the lake’s retention time (rounded up to whole years, so minimum retention is one year). Besides input data, LLR needs basic information about the lake: volume, mean depth and lake type.

The target loading levels are based on the target nutrient and chlorophyll a class limits. The class limits are defined for all lake types and for total phosphorus, total nitrogen and chlorophyll a separately. In the Finnish lake typology lakes are divided into 12 groups according to their surface area, mean depth and natural water colour. The lake types used in the LLR model tool differ slightly from the current Finnish typology, as in LLR the type RrRk, nutrient-rich and calcium-rich lakes, is further divided into two subgroups.

In this project the LLR model tool was implemented to the user interface (Vesinetti) and the model was further developed. The tasks concerning LLR modelling are: 1) to develop the retention model (internal loading) 2) to provide target nutrient loads for all pilot areas 3) to provide total phosphorus, total nitrogen and chlorophyll a estimates for all pilot areas 4) to transfer input and output data of the LLR model into the GIS based web service 5) to provide chlorophyll a estimates for WSFS-VEMALA-LakeState model

LLR’s nutrient retention model is based on the well-known Vollenweider’s steady-state mass-balance model modified by Chapra. The model assumes that the in-lake nutrient (TP or TN) concentration is equal to the amount of the external nutrient loading minus the outflow and the loss of a substance by sedimentation. Therefore the in-lake nutrient concentration (C, mg m-3) can be expressed with incoming nutrient loading (W, mg d-1), water outflow (Q, m3 -1 -1 2 d ), settling velocity (vs, m d ) and the surface area of the lake (A, m ). W C  Q  vsA In order to get probabilistic assessments of the in-lake nutrient concentrations, the inference was done in the Bayesian modelling framework. In the Bayesian framework, the unknown parameters are first assigned a prior distribution, and with the help of the input data, the prior knowledge is then updated to calculate posterior distribution. In the LLR tool Chapra's retention model is used to calculate the expected value of nutrient concentration, and the estimated nutrient concentration C is thought to be normally distributed as follows: where µ is the expected value for in-lake nutrient concentration and τ2 is the model error variance. It can also be denoted with the observed values xi and the unknown parameter vs:

Furthermore, the settling velocity vs and its variance are thought to be normally distributed:

2 where µs is the expectation for settling velocity and σs is the model error variance. For the error variance a non-informative uniform prior distribution (0,100) was the variance for the settling velocity.

In this project the LLR model development has progressed as planned. Especially for highly eutrophied lakes with considerable internal loading the retention model performance has been improved and the model error reduced by adding an internal load term to the model. In the project the LLR’s phosphorus retention model has been re-parameterized to include the effect of internal phosphorus loading (IL, mg d-1): W  IL C  . Q  vsA

The internal loading component is considered as a random variable. It can be thought as normally distributed and estimated in the same way as the settling velocity.

LLR’s hierarchical chlorophyll a model uses the estimated phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations to predict the in-lake chlorophyll a concentration. The hierarchy of the model means that both the data from the study lake and that from the lakes of the same type will be used to make the predictions. The main reason for use of the hierarchical model is that lakes within the same type are assumed to have similar chlorophyll a response to changing nutrient concentrations. It is also assumed that data from one lake type covers a wider range of observation values than that from a single lake.

The chlorophyll a model was fit the observational data from the HERTTA database of the Finnish Environmental Administration. The dataset consists of 2246 Finnish lakes with a total of 36942 in-lake observations of July-August chlorophyll a, total nitrogen and total phosphorus concentrations, from the years 1990 to 2007. The dataset covers a large range of trophic states and different sizes of water bodies.

The LLR’s chlorophyll a model is based on the study of Malve & Qian and it is summarized as follows: y  β   log(C )  β log(C )  β log(C )log(C ) ijk0 1 P 2 N 3 P N fixed effects  u +u log(C )  u2 log(C ) + v +v log(C )  v log(C )  ε 0,ij|k 1ij|kP ij|kN 0,i| j 1,i|jP 2,i|j N ijk random effects of type random effects of lakes error term yijk chlorophyll a concentration of sample i from lake j of lake type k β 0 global intercept for chlorophyll a concentration (fixed intercept) β1 global effect of total phosphorus concentration CP (fixed effect of CP) β2 global effect of total nitrogen concentration CN (fixed effect of CN) β3 global effect of interaction of CP and CN u0,ij|k random intercept of type k, allows for variation between the lake types u1,ij|k type specific random slope for CP u2i j|k type specific random slope for CN vj random intercept of lake j of type k, allows for variation between the lakes v1,i|j lake specific random slope for CP

As the inference is done in the Bayesian modelling framework, the chlorophyll a predictions are in probabilistic form and determined by probability distributions. From the relation between nutrient and chlorophyll a concentrations it is possible to determine the relation between loading and chlorophyll a concentration. This enables predictions about the target load required for a good water quality in terms of chlorophyll a concentration. The use of lake type specific data increases the reliability of the predictions, especially when the target loads are extrapolated outside the range of observational values from the study lake.

LLR model simulations and components have been provided to other participants of the project. LLR chlorophyll a model parameter estimates for all major Finnish lakes were provided to WSFS-VEMALA-LakeState model. In addition collaboration between subaction 3.1.1 and other actions has been noteworthy. In action 2.1 LLR model results have been used for ecological classification of lakes and coastal waters. LLR has also been applied for estimating target nutrient loading reductions in estuaries (sub action 2.2).

Target nutrient loadings and chlorophyll a estimates have been provided for pilot areas. The LLR model tool results are demonstrated with figures and tables. Figure 48 shows the concentration distributions in Lake Kuortaneenjärvi. With the current loadings, the lake is most probably in poor condition according to total phosphorus and in moderate condition according to total nitrogen and chlorophyll a. The input data was achieved from the WSFS- VEMALA model. As the model produces probability distributions of the indicator variables, it is possible to get the realistic assessment of the uncertainty in the modelled estimates.

Probability distribution of total phosphorus Kuortaneenjärvi Bad

0.030 Poor Moderate

Good y

High

0.015 0.000 0 50 100 150

P tot ug/l

Probability distribution of total nitrogen Kuortaneenjärvi Bad Poor Moderate

0.0010 Good y

High 0.0000 0 500 1000 1500 2000

N tot ug/l

Probability distribution of total chlorophyll a Kuortaneenjärvi Bad Poor Moderate

Good y

0.10 High 0.00 0 20 40 60 80 100 Chl-a ug/l Figure 48. The probability distributions of total phosphorus, total nitrogen and chlorophyll a with current loadings. Different colors denote different status classes and the proportion of the color denotes the probability with which the status is achieved.

Current loadings, target nutrient loadings and loading reductions are shown in the figures where the nutrient concentration estimates are shown as a function of the nutrient loadings (figure 49, totP).

TotP estimate as a function of P loading Kuortaneenjärvi Poor/Bad

120 Median estimate 90% CI

Present load

100 80

Mod/Poor 60

Good/Mod 40

High/Good

TotP concentration [ug/l] concentration TotP

20 0

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5

TotP surface load [g/m2/a]

Figure 49. Total phosphorus concentration as a function of incoming loading in Lake Kuortaneenjärvi. Current/present loading is shown as broken vertical line and status class limits as horizontal lines. The 90 % confidence interval (grey area) shows the uncertainty in the model estimate.

Besides the nutrient estimates, the LLR model tool calculates the chlorophyll a concentrations with different nutrient loadings. The nutrient loadings are extrapolated for larger range than has been observed in the study lake. This extrapolation is statistically justified in case of hierarchical regression model, where the lake type observations cover larger range than in a single lake. The extrapolated nutrient loadings are then transformed to nutrient concentrations and these concentrations are then substituted to chlorophyll a model.

E.g. Lake Kuortaneenjärvi’s chlorophyll a contours as a function of nutrient loadings shows the median chlorophyll a estimate with different P and N loadings (Figure 50). The contour lines denote the status class boundaries for nutrient-rich lakes (type 13) and the red contour line is the target chlorophyll a level (good/moderate limit). According to LLR results, reducing P loading about 30 % and N loading 10 %, the good chlorophyll a level could be achieved (in average).

Chl-a estimate as a function of incoming load Kuortaneenjärvi observed surfaceobserved loads surface loads

60 class boundariesclass boundaries for chl-a for chl-a

Chla estimateChla-ennuste with current nykytilassa= loadings= 22.6 ug/l

50 40

Mod/Poor 40

20 TotN TotN surface [g/m2/a]load

Good/Mod 20 10

High/Good 12 0

0 1 2 3 4

TotP surface load [g/m2/a]

Figure 50. An example of LLR model result. An estimate for chlorophyll a concentration in Lake Kuortaneenjärvi as a function of phosphorus and nitrogen loading (g/m2/a) to the lake. The red curve shows P/N loading combinations with which the chla concentration will stay at good water quality (Good/Moderate, chla 20 /ug l-1) with 0.5 probability. The High/Good and Moderate/Poor - limits are also shown. The blue mark shows the median chla estimate with current average loadings and the loadings from different periods are shown as black dots.

Transferring input and output data of the LLR model into the GIS based web-service has been completed as planned. LLR input data from all pilot lakes have been loaded to the user interface. For the lakes in the pilot areas for which there were not sufficient (measured) data available, the needed input has been collected from the WSFS-VEMALA output that is now in suitable form for the LLR model input. In Vesinetti the required input data comes either automatically from the WSFS-VEMALA model or the user can input the data manually.

Collaboration between other projects has been intensive. LLR model has been applied and developed widely in two large scale integrated project funded under the European Union Seventh Framework Programme, Theme 6 (Environment including Climate Change). In REFRESH project LLR model has been coupled with INCA-P and INCA-N catchment models for modeling ecological responses in Lake Pyhäjärvi. On the other hand during WISER project LLR internet tool was further developed to answer the problems caused by the climate warming. Linear mixed models were tested with a large European database (WISER data) and water temperature was found to have an effect on chlorophyll-a concentration within some lake types. Thus, in warmer climatic conditions, a bigger reduction of nutrients is needed to achieve a good ecological condition in a lake. In GISBLOOM project the same linear mixed model for chlorophyll-a has been fitted to a large Finnish data set in order to get algae estimates for Finnish lakes and lake types in changing climate. The water temperature component has not been integrated into the LLR model tool in Vesinetti as the model’s performance will first be carefully evaluated. The same applies to the biomass model component of LLR tool as well.

The LLR model has been represented in numerous conferences and meetings to both scientific and authorative audience.

Mass balance diagrams

Mass balance diagrams were not included in the original plan but they were developed during the project when a need for providing an easy-to-use tool for handling VEMALA simulation results for planners and decision makers became obvious. This tool, called the mass balance diagrams, is based on the average annual mass balances of total phosphorus, total nitrogen and suspended solids obtained from the daily VEMALA simulations. The loads originating from field, other land area, residential area, point sources or fallout of a specific sub- catchment can be represented and their effect on areas and sub-basins downstream assessed. They can be used in combination with the LLR, KUTOVA and VIRVA models to simulate the relationship between the reduction in nutrient loads and lake water quality using cost- effective measures and to evaluate the value for recreational use. The user can simulate either the present situation by using the mass balance from the years 1991-2012 or the future situation utilizing the VEMALA scenarios of 2013-2050. Practically, the mass balance diagram is a Microsoft Excel file, the structure of which is described next.

Mass balance table. The first sheet is constructed from the average annual mass balance obtained from the VEMALA simulation. The columns are 1) name or code of the sub- catchment or sub-basin, 2) point or fallout load, 3) field load, 4) load from other land-use, 5) scattered settlement load and 6) retention factor of the sub-catchment or sub-basin. The units of the loads are kg / year for total phosphorus and tn / year for total nitrogen and suspended solids. The user of the mass balance diagrams should modify only the values of this sheet, thereafter the results are automatically updated in the following sheets. The essential principle of diagrams is that the retention coefficients are fixed for the third level catchments and sub-basins but the loads can be modified and the retention coefficients of the second level catchments are updated to maintain the each mass balances.

General diagram. The second sheet shows the structure of catchments consisting of sub- catchments and sub-basins. The symbols are represented in figure 51.

sub-catchment internal incoming retention retention % outgoing

lake internal incoming retention % outgoing retention

Figure 51. Sub-catchments and lakes in mass balance diagrams.

The red color in boxes and nodes stands for the second level sub-catchment and the blue color for the third level sub-catchment. Lakes and sub-basins are represented by black ellipse.

Their sizes are not proportional to their real dimensions nor the length or width of the arrows to the amount of load. Also the locations are indicative, only the order and the direction of the transport are important. Possible small sub-basins in sub-catchments are included in the calculations but not shown in diagrams unless they are target lakes. The representation of the lakes slightly varies depending on the pilot area but in each case the balance components are clearly indicated.

Detailed diagrams. Most pilot areas have also a more detailed description, in which the second level sub-catchment of the previous sheet is described on third level sub-catchment precision. The symbols of the diagrams are the same. In addition, pie charts are drawn to illustrate the proportions of different load sources.

Other sheets. The last sheets are auxiliary sheets for actions in the other sheets.

The mass balance diagrams can be loaded from the vesinetti.fi by opening the information window of the lake in question and choosing: Vesistökuormitukset -> Ulkoinen kuormitus -> Ulkoisen kuormituksen yhteenvetotiedot.

The mass balance diagrams were built for the following pilot areas: Lake Vanajavesi, Lake Hiidenvesi, Vantaanjoki River, Lake Kuortaneenjärvi, Lake Pyhäjärvi, Lake Vesijärvi and Pien-Saimaa watershed. To demonstrate the diagrams, the phosphorus balance diagram for Lake Hiidenvesi is represented next. The lake has been divided into seven sub-basins and balances have been calculated for each of them (see figures 52 and 53). Loads from the direct catchment area of Lake Hiidenvesi are distributed into the seven sub-basins according to the land use proportions.

The phosphorus load generated internally in the land area of the Lake Hiidenvesi catchment is about 29 800 kg / year. The amount of retention is 3 000 kg so on average 26 800 kg / year ends up to the lake. The biggest source of load is fields accounting for 70 % of the total amount, the second biggest being the other land use category (virtually forests) by 14 % portion. The sub-catchment with the greatest amount of internal load (9 700 kg / year) is 23.09 but also the direct catchment area 23.03 contributes significantly (7 000 kg / year). However, the biggest load sources are the areas 23.08, 23.05 and 23.04 together contributing the Kiihkelyksenselkä sub-basin.

Figure 52. Phosphorus balance diagram of the Lake Hiidenvesi catchment area.

The proportions of the load sources in the direct catchment area are similar to the ones in the total area (see figure 52) yet the proportion of fields is even more emphasized (74 %). Because of fields, the biggest contributor is 23.031 accounting for 74 % of the total amount of 3 300 kg / year. The retention per cent of a sub-basin in principle is proportional to its theoretical retention time. The retention time of the Retlahti sub-basin is almost five years, as the ones of the other sub-basins are less than a year. Therefore, the retention per cent of Retlahti (86 %) clearly is the greatest, the second biggest being the one of Kiihkelyksenselkä (44 %) likely due to the biggest load received (21 100 kg / year).

Figure 53. Phosphorus balance diagram of the Lake Hiidenvesi direct catchment area.

Kirkkojärvi has the worst ecological status of the sub-basins. To improve its condition, measures should be carried out in the sub-catchment 23.09. There, the most critical third level sub-catchments are 23.091 and particularly 23.092 due to the high load from the fields (1 900 kg / year). Another key area would be 23.042 for the sake of the Kiihkelyksenselkä sub-basin since it accounts for 22 % of the total load generated in 23.04 (6 800 kg / year). For instance, if the field load in sub-catchments 23.091 and 23.092 could be reduced by a third, would Kirkkojärvi sub-basin receive phosphorus load 7 850 kg / year instead of the present amount

of 8 690 kg / year. The reduction would have effect on through the whole lake; outgoing load in Sirkkoonselkä sub-basin would decrease from 11 940 to 11 650 kg / year.

The planners and decisions makers in pilot areas found the mass balance diagrams having potential for becoming a helpful tool for their work. Particularly, identifying the areas for measures can be easier by utilizing the diagrams. Therefore, a more accurate spatial resolution was often wished for leading practically to more detailed sub-basin division. The biggest difficulties met in developing the mass balance diagrams were related to this division; existing information did not always support the extension of the division needed.

Subaction 3.1.2 A general Internet based GIS platform and data assimilation modules

The principal scenario for data assimilation for forecasting algal blooms was identified. It comprises chlorophyll-a forecast, MERIS satellite imagery, data from automatic measuring stations and field observations by the public. The main pilot area was Säkylän Pyhäjärvi, with data from 2009.

Currently method development for data assimilation with the Sparse Bayesian approach as well a data gathering to facilitate calibration and verification of the approach has been completed.

The real-time or near-real-time availability of data for data assimilation was a bit open question. Therefore two different approached were piloted. The first one was based on using MERIS images to provide higher spatial accuracy to the single average number that is obtainable from either automatic measuring stations, or the VEMALA model. This required near/real/time capture and processing of MERIS images.

The first option in this situation was to replace MERIS images with more readily available optical satellite images. The latter typically possess only four channels and may not contain enough data to reliable obtain Chl-a estimates. But a verification exercise against MERIS based modelling could be carried out.

The second option is to use MERIS images as a database of spatial Chl-a patterns that are used to generalize a three-component model based on a VEMALA forecast, date and an automatic measuring station value. This configuration was analysed for its statistical viability.

Despite the uncertainty in the future availability of real-time satellite imagery after the discontinuation of the MERIS data stream, a toolbox for building a pilot demonstration with historical MERIS data and corresponding in situ –measurements were completed. The technology that was piloted here will be a useful demonstrator for the use of data from future Sentinel satellites, due for launch in 2014 and 2015.

WSFS- Implementation in the VEMALA- map server LAKESTATE Chlorophyll- model a forecast

Updated MERIS chlorophyll-a satellite Data forecast with imagery assmilation higher spatial using Sparse accuracy Bayesian Data from method automatic measuring stations Field observations

Figure 54. Schematic presentation of activities in subaction 3.1.2.

The content and functionality of the map service Vesinetti have been defined, including the remote sensing, map and measurement modalities supported. The Application programming Interfaces (APIs) for these have been designed. The service has been presented to the pilot areas and feedback collected. The Web Processing Service (WPS) interface has been implemented for running external simulations when requested by a user. The LLR model has been integrated into this WPS service through the R programming interface.

Data assimilation of satellite images with algal bloom forecasts has been complemented with the following tools:  A tool for creating an assimilation project with a given project geometry  A tool for adding chlorophyll and turbidity images  A tool for adding automatic measurements  A tool for data assimilation for a lake with the observations above  A project framework for data assimilation

From October 2011 on till February 2012, data assimilation activities have been put on hold after the first results had been obtained, in order to free more staff resources to the development of Vesinetti that was seen to be of higher urgency.

Time dependent novel data assimilation methods, mainly advanced Kalman filters, were presented at a Data Assimilation workshop at SYKE on 4th of September in 2012.

A pilot of data assimilation was assembled with the Säkylän Pyhäjärvi dataset from 2009 that served as a model for possible future data assimilation functions with Sentinel data. VesiNetti was provided with new functionalities as was agreed in meetings with SYKE and end-users.

The data assimilation development continued in the end of October 2012. The cell-based Sparse Bayes data assimilation model was tested more and some shortcomings were found. Hence a new alternative prediction model was developed and demonstrated.

When generalizing a single forecast value into an image profile, the hourly time series data measured from one location and the satellite image profiles covering the lake (or most of it) are coupled using the image capture times. The dependencies between the captured satellite image profiles and the time series histories at the image capture times were used to prepare a forecast model, which was used to predict new image profiles from a given time series history.

Modeling – images and time series histories coupled into forecast model M .. Forecasting – applying M produces a new . image profile from time series history H

Aug 23 12:00? H

Forecast Aug 23 12:00

The cell-based Sparse Bayes regression forecasting developed before February 2012 may fail to operate if there is too much missing data. There can be too few satellite images per season, too many missing pixels in a prediction cell, or time series history data may be missing from a satellite image capture time. Nothing can be done for a missing time series history. Missing pixels in a cell can sometimes be worked around by increasing the cell size. However, there can be too few degrees of freedom in general, for example, if there are too few satellite images. Every cell needs valid pixel observations in at least 4 images in order to predict new cell value the Sparse Bayes regression method. We wanted to work around this limitation. In the cell-based Sparse Bayes forecasting regression model, the time series history at image capture time is the variable explaining the image profile. The forecasting can be, however, formulated as the inverse problem. Let us explain time series history with image profile, and find the image profile which best approximates a given time series history.

In the cell-based Sparse Bayes forecasting regression model, the time series history at image capture time is the variable explaining the image profile. The forecasting can be, however, formulated as the inverse problem, wherewe explain the time series history with image profile, and find the image profile which best approximates a given time series history.

The inverse problem technique requires that the image space is represented by a small image basis. A variant of iterative principal component analysis (PCA) called imputation was used to create an orthonormal image basis in presence of missing data. Actually, the same imputation technique was also used to create a basis of the time series history in order to allow some missing observations in the time series data. Eventually, the forecast model is a 85

representation of the dependencies between the image PCA basis and some time series history basis, e.g. the PCA basis of the time series history space. During forecasting, the best image basis coefficients were determined in order to best explain the given time series history.

Two variants of the inverse problem technique were implemented. The first one predicted the new image profile as inverse distance weighted interpolation from k nearest neighbors (k-NN IDW interpolation) in the time series history space. The second variant represented the time series histories as coefficients of linear basis. A linear forecast model was built between the satellite images and time series histories, both represented as matrices of their corresponding PCA basis coefficients. During forecasting, the given time series history was represented as the coefficients of the least squares approximation in the time series PCA basis, and was applied to the linear forecast model on these coefficients produces the coefficients of the corresponding forecast in the aforementioned image basis, i.e. the forecast image profile. Tikhonov regularization was used during the solution of both solved equation systems (representation of the given time series history in PCA basis).

The implementation of the Sparse Bayes –based forecasting was just a fixed version of the tools which were developed before February 2012. The inverse problem technique was implemented as Matlab/Octave m-files, and additionally incorporated with a correction of the time-series and satellite image input data using laboratory measurements of manually collected calibration samples. The Sparse Bayes forward prediction could only use chlorophyll to predict chlorophyll or turbidity to predict turbidity. The inverse problem technique, however, allowed more explaining variables to be used, i.e. chlorophyll image profile could be explained with multiple time series factors together, for example, with chlorophyll, turbidity, water temperature and wind speed. However, using more explaining variables was not tested yet.

In summary, two new methods have been developed in order to generalize the one dimensional measurement or model prediction of chlorophyll and turbidity. Including the previously existing method, we now have three methods:  cell-based Sparse Bayes forecast where time series history explains image profile  inverse problem with k-NN IDW interpolation  inverse problem with regularized linear regression model The performance of the generalization was tested using leave-one-out validation, i.e. each existing satellite image at a time is left out from the prediction model training data predicted using the other images and their corresponding time series histories.

Table 15. Leave-one-out validation errors for generalized chlorophyll and turbidity forecasts Generalization method standard deviation of error chlorophyll turbidity cell-based Sparse Bayes regression 1.70171 1.00935 inverse problem with k-NN IDW interpolation 1.67972 0.79956 inverse problem with linear regression 1.66556 0.72618

The leave-one-out validation error is illustrated graphically in the following figures for the chlorophyll as an example.

Figure 55. Chlorophyll satellite image profiles (original) and corresponding generalized forecasts from leave-one-out validation using the cell-based Sparse Bayes regression

Figure 56. Chlorophyll satellite image profiles (corrected using calibration measurements) and corresponding generalized forecasts from leave-one-out validation using the inverse problem technique with IDW k-NN prediction model

Figure 57. Chlorophyll satellite image profiles (corrected using calibration measurements) and corresponding generalized forecasts from leave-one-out validation using the inverse problem technique with regularized linear regression prediction model

Subaction 3.2 Assessing the socio-economic effects of water quality improvement measures

The goal of subaction 3.2 was to develop and apply methods for assessing the costs and benefits of water quality improvement measures. With KUTOVA model the cost-effective measures for water conservation can be identified. VIRVA model was developed for assessing the impacts of the improved water quality to recreational use value of the water course.

The models were aimed for people working at the regional and local scale as tools for water conservation planning. The outcome of KUTOVA model (the costs and achievable phosphorus load reductions as well as the cost-efficiencies of different water protection measures) can be used for water conservation planning at the catchment scale. Results of VIRVA model can be used for validating the costs of water conservation measures.

Implementation in the map server Actions 2 & 3.1 WSFS- VEMALA- Subaction 3.2 Land use LAKESTATE and climate model scenarios VIRVA model Vihma Forecasts & model scenarios Recreational Data bases value

KUTOVA model LLR model Target reduction of nutrient Cost of load measures

Figure 58. Schematic presentation of activities in subaction 3.2 and of interaction with other actions.

The pilot areas for applying socio-economic models have been chosen and a preliminary time table for their implementation has been compiled. The pilot river basins were: the River Karvianjoki, the River Temmesjoki, the River Lapuanjoki, the River Paimionjoki, Lake Hiidenvesi, Lake Vanajavesi, and Lake Pien-Saimaa. In addition, the application opportunities of the VIRVA model to some areas of Gulf of Finland will be assessed.

The tool for assessing the cost-efficiency of phosphorus load reduction actions (KUTOVA) has been developed and applied in three pilot areas (Milestone 1.2.2012). Development of the model has focused on following topics: basic assumptions and calculation principles have been critically evaluated and refined, new measures related to phosphorus load reduction of forestry have been added, and sensitivity analysis option has been added to the model. KUTOVA model has been applied in three pilot study areas (River Karvianjoki, River Paimionjoki and River Temmesjoki river basins) and preliminary results are available. The results of the River Paimionjoki case have been discussed with local stakeholders in 22.9.2011. The results from the first pilot areas showed that the model has potential in planning water conservation measures. It was shown for example that the results can be used in directing certain measures to different sub basins of the water course. The first experiences from the pilot studies also gave important feedback for the further development of the model.

The development needs of the VIRVA model have been identified. The systematic approach for estimating recreational users' value functions (relationship between water quality and value of the recreational experience) has been developed (Milestone 1.10.2011). A postal questionnaire was developed and realized in order to find out the views of people having a residence along the shoreline of the water course regarding the water quality and its impacts on recreational use (Milestone 1.2.2011). Two postal questionnaires and ten personal interviews have been realized in order to collect input data to the VIRVA model and to verify the model's assumptions. The response rates in postal questionnaires were relatively high (in River Paimionjoki 34 % and Gulf of Finland 37 %). VIRVA model has been applied in River Karvianjoki area.

A workshop was arranged for regional managers and experts in river basin management in 14.4.2011 (Milestone of Action 5 15.6.2012). ( in which the application opportunities and development needs of the socio-economic models were discussed together with river basin managers, experts and researchers. Even tough not all of the experts in the workshop did see the benefits of monetary valuation of increased water quality, part of the participant thought that it could be useful for validating the costs of the water conservation methods.

The applications of the models in River Paimionjoki has been partly done in co-operation with VELHO project (www.ymparisto.fi/velho), in River Karvianjoki the application of the models has been done in co-operation with KatTuTa project (www.environment.fi/syke/kartuta) and in River Temmesjoki in co-operation with WaterPraxis project (www.waterpraxis.net). The postal questionnaire for the owners of coastal properties in the Gulf of Finland was done in co-operation with the IBAM project (http://www.ymparisto.fi/default.asp?contentid=395763&lan=fi&clan=en).

The version of the KUTOVA model for case studies was finalized in 15.6.2012 (Milestone 1.2.2012) and applied to Lake Hiidenvesi. The Paimionjoki case study was updated with the new version of the KUTOVA model. The loading data from forestry was collected to Lake Pien-Saimaa, Lake Vanajavesi and River Vantaanjoki for KUTOVA application. A group of experts was invited to discuss the development needs of the KUTOVA model. The first meeting was arranged in 2.5.2012. Several suggestions regarding the user-interface, model characteristics and uncertainty analysis were presented. Most of them have been taken into account in the current model version. In addition new measures (gypsum) have been added to the model.

There have been many activities related to the development and the demonstration of the VIRVA model. In the model development we have focused on the critical evaluation of the basic principles of the model such as the main principles and building blocks in the defining of the value functions for different recreational uses. In addition, sensitivity analysis, as well as, the Monte-Carlo simulation based uncertainty analysis has been developed. The VIRVA model calculation sheet was renewed (Milestone 1.2.2012) in July 2012.

The case studies which progressed most during the reporting period were the River Paimionjoki case study which was finalized. The model was applied to Lake Hiidenvesi and to the Coastal area of Raasepori and the draft reports were compiled. Webropol questionnaire was designed in order to implement the questionnaire in Lake Pien-Saimaa, Lake Vanajavesi and the River Lapuanjoki. A workshop for Lake Pien-Saimaa was arranged in 14.8.2012 in order to discuss the VIRVA application and to get feedback to the draft version of the questionnaire. Feedback on the questionnaire was collected from the participants. 89

For the purposes of the models KUTOVA, VIHMA and VIRVA gathering of background data to estimate diffuse loading (particularly nutrient loadings from agriculture and forestry) has started. This information will be used also to make socio-economical estimation for the areas, for example estimating the cost-efficiencies of different water protection measures. Rather than sending the questionnaires to all pilot areas where each model shall be applied at the same time, it was seen more appropriate to gather the data of the pilot area in the same order in which the models will be applied.

The scenarios for KUTOVA and VIHMA applications were created.

The final version of Karvianjoki pilot area report was published in 5.7.2012 with results from the KUTOVA and VIRVA models. Deliverable report of the socio-economic impact assessment and models was published in the first of April. In river Paimionjoki the local stakeholders were met and the results from KUTOVA and VIRVA models were presented and feedback about the models and results were collected from the stakeholders.

The KUTOVA tool was further developed to meet the needs of regional river basin management planning. The user-interface was made more explicit. Also some measures of agriculture were divided into categories depending on the slope of the field. In addition constructed wetlands were divided in to nine categories based on their size and ratio of fields in the above catchment. The renewed KUTOVA tool was applied to Lake Vanajavesi, Lake Pien-Saimaa, Lake Hiidenvesi, River Vantaanjoki and River Lapuanjoki. The results were finalized and calculated also for the scenarios created. The results were presented to the stakeholders in the workshops in the pilot areas. The results are not yet completely reported, but they will be during the summer 2013.

The KUTOVA development group had meetings in 22.11.2012 and 6.5.2013. User training of the KUTOVA model for the river basin management planners and coordinators was arranged in 30.1.2013. Around 25 regional river basin management planners all around Finland took part to the training.

The VIHMA model runs were made for Lake Hiidenvesi, Vesijärvi, Pien-Saimaa and Pyhäjärvi of Säkylä as well as for Vantaanjoki, Vanajavesi and Lapuanjoki river basins during the autumn of 2012 and March of 2013. Model runs were made only for the entire pilot areas, because data needed for sub-basin specific model runs could not be provided by the pilot areas. Each pilot areas’ own VIHMA-results were presented in that pilot areas workshop for the local stakeholders and interested parties.

The questionnaire for VIRVA-model was implemented using internet surveys in Lake Pien- Saimaa, Lake Vanajavesi and the River Lapuanjoki. In lake Pien-Saimaa the questionnaire was open from 1.10.2012 to 21.10.2012 in which time 179 responses were given. The press release of the questionnaire was published at least online in the Etelä-Saimaa newspaper and in the Finnish Broadcasting Company regional editorial office of South Carelia. Etelä-Saimaa newspaper also wrote a broader article about the questionnaire and GisBloom project in general. The article was published in 14.10.2012. In addition radio interview about the questionnaire was recorder in 5.10.2012 and broadcasted in 8.10.2012 in a local radio channel Iskelmäradio Kaakkois-Suomi (Pop radio Southeastern Finland).

In Lake Vanajavesi and River lapuanjoki areas the questionnaires were open from 10th of October to 31st of October. In both areas around 150 responses were given. In the river Lapuanjoki the press release of the questionnaire was published at least online in the newspaper Ilkka. In lake Vanajavesi The Finnish Broadcasting Company regional editorial office of Häme broadcasted an interview about the questionnaire.

After the questionnaires the VIRVA model was applied to Lake Pien-Saimaa, Lake Vanajavesi and the River Lapuanjoki. The results were reported and presented to the local stakeholders in the pilot area workshops.

These results from KUTOVA, VIHMA and VIRVA models have been summarized and reported in Deliverable of Action 4: “Guidance document of applying the demonstrated methods in river basin management planning” for each pilot area and more general in the Synthesis report. These will be published after summer. More detailed results will also be provided for each model for each pilot area via Vesinetti.

A cost-benefit analysis for the river basin management was chosen to be piloted for Lake Kuortaneenjärvi in the River Lapuanjoki river basin. The method chosen for CBA is demonstration was the Bayesian belief network and it utilized results from KUTOVA and VIRVA as well as the LLR model and spreadsheet tool for VEMALA outputs. Based on our experiences the Bayesian belief networks can be an illustrative decision support for comprehensive river basin management planning. The influence diagrams showed the uncertainties and risks related to the river basin management planning decisions. In Lake Kuortaneenjärvi it turned out that the target of good ecological status can’t be met by reducing only the external loading, but also actions need to be taken in order to diminish the internal loading as well. Even if the internal loading is reduced together with the external loading the target of good ecological status will be met only by a chance of 52 % without the cost being disproportionate compared to the benefits. A decision tree was built on the basis of the Bayesian network in order to illustrate uncertainties related to the decisions of the mitigation measures.

Action 4 Demonstration of tools to river basin districts and local management projects

Actions 2 & 3 Planning and Identification Demonstration of implementation of data and models and of models, methods information methods and map services needs

Action 4 Workshops and meetings in pilot areas

Lake Lapuanjoki Karjaanjoki Vesijärvi river basin river basin

Lake Pien- Lake Lake Vantaanjoki Saimaa Pyhäjärvi Vanajavesi river basin

Paimionjoki Temmesjoki Karvianjoki river basin river basin river basin ,

Figure 59. Schematic presentation of activities in action 4 and its interaction with other actions

Subaction 4.1 Integrating the methods into the river basin management planning

Subaction 4.1.1 Pilot areas in the river basin districts

The fourth work package was responsible for demonstrating in pilot areas the tools and methods developed in other work packages and giving feed back and reporting about their usability. In Grant Agreement there were three pilot areas already chosen to be involved in the project, Lapuanjoki and Karjaanjoki river basins, particularly Lake Hiidenvesi area and Lake Vesijärvi. They were also project partners and their progress has been presented more detailed in chapters focusing on subactions 4.1.2; 4.2.1 and 4.2.2, whereas in this chapter the primary focus is on non-partner pilot areas. In addition to these three pilot areas, four more pilot areas were selected by the end of year 2010 as also promised in the Grant Agreement. First part of the selection process was to meet local stakeholders of each possible pilot area in order to introduce the project, evaluate the suitability of the area and to inquire their interest of joining the project. GisBloom was represented by action and/or relevant subaction leaders whereas the local participants were from local Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment (i.e.ELY-centres, former Regional Environment Centre) and other interested parties in the area in question. Final selection of the pilot areas was decided in steering group meeting held 1st of November 2010. Selected pilot areas are lakes Pien-Saimaa

and Pyhäjärvi of Säkylä and Vanajavesi and as confirmed in the next meeting, Vantaanjoki river basin. Furthermore three river basins, Paimionjoki, Temmesjoki and Karvianjoki, were included to the subaction 3.2 (Assessing the socio-economic effects of water quality improvement measures) due to the sizeable synergy benefits with some other socio-economic valuations made on these areas. Meeting with Paimionjoki and Karvianjoki representative took place in 26.10.2010 in Helsinki. Temmesjoki was then also added as an economical pilot area in negotiations in videoconferences, in order to further continue the co-operation established already in Waterpraxis programme, which was seen to greatly benefit the development of especially KUTOVA-model in subaction 3.2.

Figure 60. The location of pilot areas

Table 16. Brief descriptions of pilot areas Pilot area Geography Environmental issues Lapuanjoki Large river (150 km) in Diffuse load from agriculture. river basin Western Finland. Ecological status varies from bad to moderate. Karjaanjoki Biggest river (65 km) in Most of the diffuse load comes river basin uusimaa area in South Western from agriculture. Mustionjoki's and (Lake Hiidenvesi) Finland. Lake Hiidenvesi (29 lake Hiidenvesi's ecological status km2) is the second biggest lake is moderate. of the river basin. Lake Vesijärvi Large lake (109 km2) in Heavily polluted by municipal Southern Finland. waste waters in the past. Ecological status is from moderate to good. Lake Pien-Saimaa Part of Finland's biggest lake Diffuse loading from many sources, Saimaa in Eastern Finland like agriculture, forestry and (120 km2) dispersed settlement. Ecological status is moderate. Lake Pyhäjärvi Biggest lake in South Western Diffuse load from agriculture. Finland (154 km2) Ecological status is good. Vanajavesi Situated in Southern Western Both diffuse and point source river basin Finland (120 km2) loading. Ecological status is moderate Vantaanjoki Situated in Southern Finland Diffuse load from agriculture. river basin (101 km). Over one million Ecological status is moderate. people lives in the river basin. Paimionjoki Biggest river (110 km) that Delivers biggest nutrient loads to river basin runs to Archipelago Sea in Archipelago Sea. Ecological status terms of river basin area is poor. Temmesjoki Situated in Northern Finland Diffuse loading from forestry in the river basin (80km) upper stream and agriculture in the lower stream. Ecological status is poor. Karvianjoki Situated in Western Finland Diffuse loading from agriculture river basin (110 km) and forestry. Ecological status is moderate.

In order to specify the interests and real needs of the pilot areas, two questionnaires were sent to the main participants of each area. The first questionnaire targeted on gathering useable background information about the area for other Actions and the second on specifying which of the tools or methods to be developed in other Actions each pilot area would find interesting or useful. However it was pointed out that all tools and methods would not be demonstrated in each of the pilot areas, but the modellers would take pilot areas interests in consideration when making the final decisions on which areas they will demonstrate eachs of the tools and methods.

Both questionnaires were sent out and gathered via e-mail during November 2010. The results showed that there are areas in need for all kinds of tools and methods but also areas with more precise problems and therefore also more defined needs. The results were used when constructing 8 themes to guide and maintain more effectively the co-operation and 94

communication between (sub)actions and pilot areas. The interests of each pilot area towards the tools developed or other outputs of different subactions is presented in table 17. Aim is that by involving the pilot areas to the development phase, the level of usability and practicality of the tools especially considering the River Basin Management Planning work to be done in the areas, will improve. First theme meeting concerning economical tools was held on 16th of March and a joint meeting of 5 other themes on 6th of May 2011, both in Helsinki (see also table of dissemination materials in annex 1).

Table 17. Pilot areas interests towards different subactions

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 3.1 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.2 Hiidenvesi X X X X X X X X X Vesijärvi X X X X X X X X Lapuanjoki X X X X X X X X X Vanajavesi X X X X X X X X X Pien- X X X X X X X X X Saimaa Pyhäjärvi X X X X Vantaanjoki X X X X X Paimionjoki X Karvianjoki X Temmesjoki X X X X X X X X X

By autumn 2011, when the web based map service Vesinetti had been developed to the point where it could be used and shown in pilot area meetings, it was taken to the centre of the meetings to demonstrate its potential, first in Pyhäjärvi on August 29th-30th, then in Temmesjoki on September 7th – 8th, and in Lapuanjoki on September 27th. Mapservice was also introduced in Kumpula's seminar in Helsinki held on October 5th-6th, where there were participants from Hiidenvesi, Karvianjoki, Paimionjoki, Vesijärvi, Lapuanjoki and Vantaanjoki pilot areas. (see below table 18 and in annex 1 Dissemination materials). Being able to see what the final product, mapservice Vesinetti, would look like, helped the pilot area participants to think out loud what data they might want to find through this service and what might be most useful for them or for other authorities facing similar problems and demands. They also made suggestions what kind of information would be most useful for local citizens to be able to find in order to ease the flow of questions to authorities on some subjects. Many in the pilot areas seemed genuinely pleased about the services potentials.

By actually seeing the mapservice, people in pilot areas were also able to make many development suggestions about it and this was widely encouraged by the developers of the service. Main points to be considered in developing the service was for instance that there are many different places where the pilot area people might need to present or use the information, how "scientific" should the information, that was needed in different forums, be, what other services already have similar local information and how these services are to be linked with each other.

As described in the above chapter, by the end of February 2012 two or more meetings with each pilot areas stake holders took place. Mainly they were more targeted meetings with only

one pilot area represented, but also project's joint meetings served well in gathering specific data concerning different pilot areas.

The first workshops were held in Lakes Pyhäjärvi (29.-30.8.2011), Vesijärvi (1.9.2011), Pien- Saimaa (15.12.2011) Vanajavesi (10.1.2012) and Hiidenvesi (1.2.2012) and in Lapuanjoki river (27.9.2011). In these workshops the potential methods and application opportunities of the products to be produced in Actions 2 and 3 were presented and discussed. In economical pilot areas, Temmesjoki, Paimionjoki and Karvianjoki river basins, the focus was more on economical analyses. That’s why the most appropriate way to realize the workshops was considered to be in socio-economic theme meetings of which the first was held on March 16th and the second on October 4th 2011 and where all three economical pilot areas were represented as well as other pilot areas interested in socio-economical analysies and who were able to participate.

Main point in these workshops was to present the latest version of Vesinetti map service and to get feedback from its future end users i.e. stakeholders in each pilot area, so that the service would eventually deliver as much as possible of the information they need, that the information to be produced in Actions 2 and 3 will focus on most relevant issues from the pilot areas' point of view and that it will eventually be presented in most useful form for them to use it further and that this service would support and compliment the different systems already in use, instead of presenting the same information yet in another place. The developing stage is the best time to include and anticipate the end users opinions and this kind of early feedback is highly valued by the developers of the service.

The first workshop in Vantaanjoki river basin was planned to be held during spring of 2012 to demonstrate current version of Vesinetti and to gather opinions and development suggestions about it from local authorities and potential end users. Due to some difficulties in finding a suitable time for the key participants before the summer, it was decided to move the workshop to autumn and it was held on 8th of October. Although this provided a better time to present model results made for this area than the spring would have, it also ment that this workshop was not held before June 1st 2012, which was the milestone of Action 4.1, when the first round of workshops should have been finalized.

Figure 62. Lake Pyhäjärvi (Sari Väisänen) Figure 61. River Vantaanjoki

The second workshops were planned to be held by 1st of March 2013, i.e. the milestone for the second workshops been held in all pilot areas. On February 2013 the workshop for Vesijärvi in Lahti was held on 4th, for Vantaanjoki in SYKE Helsinki on the 11th and for Lapuanjoki in Seinäjoki on 14th, which was the third workshop for the Lapuanjoki River Committee, as mentioned in the Grant Agreement with a dead line of 1st of May. On March the workshop for Vanajavesi was held in Hämeenlinna on 7th, for Pien-Saimaa in Lappeenranta on 15th and for Hiidenvesi in Lohja on 27th. The workshop for Pyhäjärvi was forced to be held on April 5th due to busy schedules of the local participants.

Figure 63. Workshop in Vanajavesi (Sari Väisänen)

Also the demonstration of the results for Tvärminne was held on 15th of April. For the economical pilot areas of Karvianjoki, Paimionjoki and Temmesjoki, workshops were not even planned to be held. In addition Hiidenvesi results were presented for the Hiidenvesi hanke co-ordination group on 30th of May 2013. The workshops were planned to be quite interactive, meaning that the local participants would be using the Vesinetti service, go through its contents with the researchers on site and give feedback and development suggestions. In Vesijärvi, Vanajavesi, Lapuanjoki and Hiidenvesi this was achieved as close to this original plan as possible, for the Vesinetti demonstration were held in computer class rooms or other places with facilities for usage of computers and Internet for large groups of people. However, due to some delays Figure 64. Workshop in Pyhäjärvi (Sari Väisänen) and technical problems in development of Vesinetti, the model results were presented apart from the Vesinetti, but one section of the workshops were devoted for the participants to use 97

Vesinetti with the help of experts present. In other workshops it was not possible to arrange the Internet or computer access to all the participants, but they were given a detailed presentation on the current situation of Vesinetti and they were encouraged to give feedback as well. But especially in these workshops the main focus was on presenting the model results of the area. This way also the milestone of "Data gathered and models applied in pilot areas" was achieved for the most parts on time, before the 1st of March.

In each workshop the average of local participants present was about 10 people. They were asked to fill out a short questionnaire in order to gather their opinions on Vesinetti and also on the model results presented. Participants worked in local cities’ or municipalities’ environmental departments, ELY-centers, water protection associations etc. Although most of the respondents felt that the actual internet service Vesinetti was still a bit unfinished, many thought that once finished, it will be a good tool and forum for many types of audiences and distribution of information. Mostly it was seen useful for expert use or for people with some level of knowledge on water protection issues.

Table 18. Pilot area workshops. Date Pilot area Event Participants Attachment 16.3.2011 Rivers 1st 5 local 20110316 Muistio Teeman Temmesjoki, Workshop participants/ F_kokous.docx Paimionjoki 7 GisBloom and participants Karvianjoki 29.- Lake 1st 10 local - 30.8.2011 Pyhäjärvi Workshop participants/ 7 GisBloom participants 1.9.2011 Lake 1st 12 local 20110901 Kutsu Vesijärven Vesijärvi Workshop participants/ kokoukseen.docx 5 GisBloom participants 27.9.2011 River 1st 4 local 20110927 Lapuanjoki 1. Lapuanjoki Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 2 GisBloom participants 04.10.2011 Rivers 2nd 4 local 20111004 GISBLOOM F- Temmesjoki, Workshop participants/ teema.doc Paimionjoki 8 GisBloom and participants Karvianjoki 15.12.2011 Lake Pien- 1st 4 local 20111215 GisBloom Pien- Saimaa Workshop participants/ Saimaa.doc 4 GisBloom participants 10.1.2012 Lake 1st 11 local 20120110_Muistio_vesijaosto.d Vanajavesi Workshop participants/ oc 4 GisBloom participants 98

1.2.2012 Lake 1st 14 local 20120201 Karttapalvelutyöpaja Hiidenvesi Workshop participants/ Lohjalla.doc 12 GisBloom participants 8.10.2012 River 1st 7 local 20121008 Vantaanjoen Vantaanjoki Workshop participants/ GisBloom 1. työpaja.doc 11 GisBloom participants 22.11.2012 River 2nd 15 local 20121122 Lapuanjoki 2. Lapuanjoki Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 6 GisBloom participants 4.2.2013 Lake 2nd 9 local 20130204 Vesijärvi työpaja Vesijärvi Workshop participants/ asiantuntijoille.docx 9 GisBloom participants 11.2.2013 River 2nd 2 local 20130211 Vantaanjoki 2. Vantaanjoki Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 10 GisBloom participants 14.2.2013 River 3rd 12 local 20130214 Lapuanjoen 3. Lapuanjoki Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 6 GisBloom participants 7.3.2013 Lake 2nd 13 local 20130307 Vanajaveden 2. Vanajavesi Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 9 GisBloom participants 15.3.2013 Lake Pien- 2nd 4 local 20130315 Pien-Saimaa 2. Saimaa Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 6 GisBloom participants 27.3.2013 Lake 2nd 20 local 20130327 Hiidenveden 2. Hiidenvesi Workshop participants/ työpaja.docx 8 GisBloom participants 5.4.2013 Lake 2nd 6 local 20130405 GisBloom 2. työpaja Pyhäjärvi Workshop participants/ Pyhäjärvellä.docx 5 GisBloom participants

The participants gave also feedback on the models presented (Table 19). Although some models were seen too general to be used on small catchments, participants saw much good in them. All in all WSFS-VEMALA and KUTOVA models were seen most practical and useful. VEMALAs strengths were the opportunity to get at least some knowledge on all waters, even those without surveillance. It was seen potentially very useful in RBMP work but also when making more local water shed restorations.

KUTOVA on the other hand was seen able to provide assistance on prioritizing the measures according to their effectiveness and costs. There was also seen potential for it to be used in order to plan, scale and allocate different measures and their optimal combinations. VIRVA received credit for being the first practical model in Finland for estimating water related benefits in a consistent way, which opens many possibilities for its use in RBMP work. LLR-models strength was seen to lie in its ability to evaluate the needs for measures in the watershed and in planning restorations for lakes. VIHMA concentrates on the biggest load producer in Finland, agriculture, so it’s evaluation on how to diminish the loading from fields was thought to be much needed especially in larger areas. The satellite pictures and the data obtained from them as well as from automatic measuring were seen to provide very comprehensible way to communicate up-to-date information also for public in very visual and therefore powerful way. Statistical models strength was seen to be in forecasting the effects in changes in land use. The possibility to link many of the models to get a continuance was also seen to be very good.

Although models were seen useful, many valuable development suggestions for the future were given for them. Main concern was how to get the input data and processes described in the models more precise, to enhance the trustworthy of the results. Many of the models also operate better in large areas, whereas practical planning and restoration work takes place in more locally and much smaller catchments, so it would be important to be able to use models in planning process also in smaller areas. It was also seen important to be able to present the model results in easily understandable and visual way, so they can be better used in public events also.

The respondents were instructed to choose only 3 most suitable models. All models were not run or presented in all pilot areas. The number of respondents in the workshops where particular model was presented is shown inside the bracket ( ).

Main user group for Vesinetti was seen to be experts, planners and people who are at least in some level somewhat familiar with water management issues. The good things in Vesinetti were the ability to add own materials e.g. reports in it for others to see them. There was some concern about how Vesinetti would be kept up to date after the GisBloom project and will it be develop further. There were also wishes to add other SYKE datas or to have access to them through Vesinetti.

Workpackage 4 had a deliverable Guidance document of applying the demonstrated methods in river basin management planning. This was constructed as a Finnish report (Mallit avuksi vesienhoidon suunnitteluun – GisBloom pilottialueilla) in SYKE report-series. The final manuscript was ready in August 2013, within the deadline set for the deliveraqble, 31th of August. The actual publication will be published online by the end of September 2013. The main objective was to give short summeries for each pilotarea about their areas results to help directly with their River basin Management Plans or to give insight how they could utilize these tools and models in their upcoming work. For example many models were used to

100

evaluate the effects of the planned measures or their combinations to give an insight how well the targets set in the plans could be met. Also Vesinetti and Järviwiki

Table 19. Feedback on the models from the second workshops. Seen most useful in Model RBMP work Comments from the respondents in the pilot area Total amount of 42 respondents Getting at least some knowledge on all waters, VEMALA 25 (42) even those without surveillance Possibility to evaluate the needs for measures in LLR 25 (42) the watershed and to plan restorations for lakes Provides assistance on prioritizing the measures KUTOVA 22 (34) according to their effectiveness and costs Practical tool to evaluate the loadings generated VIHMA 19 (42) from the most loading intensive sector in Finland, agriculture. Gives a different perspective on how to allocate Nutrient balance charts 12 (42) measures between basins. The first practical model in Finland for VIRVA 9 (32) estimating water related benefits in a consistent way Remote sensing and 8 (23) Provides a comprehensive way to communicate satellite images up-to-date information also to public Statistical loading 7 (29) Forecasting the effects in changes in land use model Mind maps on A different way to communicate about 6 cyanobacteria euthrophication to the public

Subaction 4.1.2 The Lapuanjoki river basin

Demonstration of models and methods in the work of the River Committee In the river Lapuanjoki catchment area the methods and tools developed in GisBloom were and still are demonstrated in the work of the Lapuanjoki River Committee. The Committee was established in 1999 and consists of municipals, regional councils, authorities and organizations in the area. It promotes water protection and spreading of environment- concerning knowledge to the people living in the catchment. The River Lapuanjoki Working Group executes the program of actions approved by the River Lapuanjoki Committee. A project planner was employed in August 2012 by the Centre for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment for South Ostrobothnia (the ELY Centre for South Ostrobothnia) to plan and to put in action the demonstrations of the methods and tools in the work of the Lapuanjoki River Committee, mainly in the work of the ELY Centre for South Ostrobothnia. The project planner also acted as a contact person between the Lapuanjoki River Committee and model experts and helped to collect background information needed for some models.

101

Every action and dissemination material also in river Lapuanjoki pilot area are summarized in the table of dissemination materials in annex 1.

Information meetings and workshops Information meetings were held for the River Lapuanjoki Working group on 16th of December 2010 and 10th of March 2011 with the aim to identify the lakes which are to be used as target areas in this pilot area. Three lakes were identified: Lake Kauhajärvi (Lapua), Lake Kuortaneenjärvi and Lake Kuorasjärvi. In total, three workshops were organized for the River Lapuanjoki Working Group to demonstrate the methods and tools developed in GisBloom. All of them took place in the town of Seinäjoki, in South Ostrobothnia. The first workshop was held on 27th of September 2011 in co-operation with sub actions 2.5. and 3.1.2. At the meeting the first beta draft of the internet based map service Vesinetti was presented and the development potential was discussed mainly with respect to the program of measures elaborated for the river Lapuanjoki catchment. 8 participants (4 from the pilot area) attended the first workshop. The second workshop was held on 22nd of November 2012 with 15 participants (9 from the pilot area). It was carried out in co-operation with the model experts of the models used in the River Lapuanjoki pilot area. Vesinetti was further demonstrated and more suggestions how to improve it to meet the needs of the final users were collected. Also some preliminary results of VIRVA, WSFS-VEMALA and LLR -models for the three pilot lakes and for the whole river basin were presented. The third and final workshop was held on 14th of May 2013. At that work shop the focus was on presenting the results yet not introduced in the earlier workshops and collecting yet more comments from stakeholders. 19 people (11 from the pilot area) attended the work shop.

Demonstration of models in the water management work The river Lapuanjoki catchment area is set, because of the possibility offered by GisBloom, as a pilot river basin in utilizing model based methods in water management planning. The main target is to update the program of measures for river Lapuanjoki (2010−2015) for the period 2016−2021 with the help of tools and models provided by GisBloom. The ELY Centre for South Ostrobothnia is responsible for this work, but The River Lapuanjoki Working Group is also taking part in the work by commenting and suggesting measures proposed and by evaluating their impacts. Prior to updating process, the ecological status of lakes and rivers in the river Lapuanjoki catchment area had to be defined. The classification work started in the autumn 2012 and was completed in September 2013. WSFS-VEMALA LakeState model values (modeled chlorophyll a, phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations in lakes) were used as supporting factors in the ecological classification of lakes that didn´t have measured biological data or when there were too few measurements. The feasibility and accuracy of the LakeState model was also tested by comparing simulated values with measured data. Nutrient diffuse loading model (WSFS-VEMALA) was used in identifying the amount of the nutrient load entering water bodies. Loading information was used in grouping similar water bodies to help classification of water bodies from which there was no biological or physicochemical measurements available. WSFS-VEMALA LakeState and Nutrient diffuse loading models will also be utilized in the updating work of the program of measures, which will be started in the autumn 2013. WSFS- VEMALA LakeState model and its original internet based version (LakeState LLR) will be used in defining the extent of reduction of nutrient load needed to be able to achieve good ecological status in lakes, which still are in poorer than good ecological state. The Nutrient diffuse loading model will be used to identify the amount of nutrient load in different 102

catchment areas and the leaching to lakes and downstream water bodies. VIHMA model will be used to assess the load from fields and the effect of different tilling methods, for example. KUTOVA+ model will be used to evaluate the costs and achievable phosphorus load reductions of different water protection measures and combinations of measures. It will also be used to evaluate cost efficient combinations of measures for each sub area. Guidance for farmers The significant part of diffuse load in the river Lapuanjoki basin comes from agriculture. Also the results of KUTOVA+ (calculated by model experts in SYKE) shows that the largest reduction in phosphorus load can be achieved by targeting the water protection measurements mostly in agriculture. For this reason, it was decided by the River Lapuanjoki Working Group to offer local farmers free guidance of how to control nutrient balance of their farm and also other suggestions how to reduce the amount of nutrients leaching to water systems. KUTOVA+ results were used as help in selecting cost-efficient measures. In total 10 volunteering farms were informed and all of them got their own handbook, which included proposed measures. Handbooks also included information about JärviWiki and Vesinetti internet services. Also a summary report was written including description of over all state of water protection in farms visited and what measures were suggested. This report can be found in Vesinetti by the end of September 2013. The information gathered in this action will be used as a help in planning farming guidance in the next agri-environmental support period.

Informing local residents Important part of the work of River Lapuanjoki Committee is to inform people about local environmental issues, mostly concerning rivers and lakes in the river Lapuanjoki catchment area. Although not originally planned, educational methods were decided to use to increase the common knowledge of eutrophication and algal blooms among the people living in the river Lapuanjoki area. This was done by following: A lake observation course was organized in cooperation with the Ostrobothnian branch of The Finnish Association for Nature Conservation (Suomen luonnonsuojeluliiton Pohjanmaan piiri ry.). It was a one-day course in which people were taught simple ways to observe different variables in lakes, for instance Secchi depth and the state of algal blooms, and how to save these observations in JärviWiki internet service (www.jarviwiki.fi). In addition, information about the condition of water bodies in the river Lapuanjoki catchment area was given and map service Vesinetti was introduced to the participants. The course was free of charge and everyone interested could participate in it. It was held by the lake Kuortaneenjärvi in the town of Kuortane.

Information on algal blooms and the causes of their occurrence were given to people on Finland's agriculture exhibition, “Farmari”, held in Seinäjoki 3rd ‒ 6th July 2013. The ELY Centre for South Ostrobothnia had GisBloom project’s stand in tent called “Leader tent”, where different firms and projects funded by EU’s Leader+ or other EU’s funding instruments had a chance to present their products or action. People visiting GisBloom project’s stand had also a chance to try JärviWiki and Vesinetti themselves.

The environmental education in local schools was supported by updating the environmental education package published in the River Lapuanjoki area about ten years ago, dealing with

103

local environmental features and issues. It also includes information on eutrophication and algae. The package is targeted mainly for children in primary and secondary schools.

Figure 65. and 66. Lake Observation Course in Kuortane on 2nd of August 2013.

104

Figure 67. GisBloom project’s stand in Farmari exhibition in Seinäjoki.

SUBACTION 4.2 Local and regional river basin management projects: Karjaanjoki and Vesijärvi

Subaction 4.2.1 The Karjaanjoki river basin

In Karjaanjoki river basin, Estuary of Pohjanpitäjänlahti was named as one of the estuary pilots of the project already in the grant agreement Tvärminne Zoological station as the main stakeholder. Lake Hiidenvesi catchment is the other pilot site in the area with the Association for water and Environment of Western Uusimaa (LUVY) being the main participant on this area. The case of Estuary of Pohjanpitäjänlahti is reported in subaction 2.2 (Coastal areas).

Lake Hiidenvesi

Lake Hiidenvesi is one of the project’s pilot areas. Lake Hiidenvesi is the second largest lake in the Uusimaa region and water quality is passable. The lake suffers from external loading 105

arising mainly from agriculture. Lake Hiidenvesi project aims at working at local level and our goal is to promote water protection activities in the area. The Gisbloom -project have been active in gathering up large amounts of data and processing it through different models. This has given more detailed information regarding the restoration needs of the Lake Hiidenvesi catchment area. The models deleveloped in the GisBloom project have given significant information regarding the sources and amounts of external loading.. The mass balance diagrams point out in which subcatchments the water protection action should be targeted. The tool for assessing the cost-efficiency of phosphorus load reduction actions (KUTOVA) has pointed out the most cost effective methods of water protection for the Lake Hiidenvesi catchment area. The results of the KUTOVA model has already been used in the Lake Hiidenvesi restoration plan (Hagman 2012).

Also the map based systems are important in order to gather information together and distribute it among different users.We are hoping that Vesinetti encourages local stakeholders and authorities to obtain more detailed information at local level and thus increase their awareness in the field of water protection.

Methods and approaches implemented and demonstrated in Actions 2 and 3 have been demonstrated in Lake Hiidenvesi area. In addition local citizens have prepared a village plan for water protection and restoration with the help of the new tools created in the Actions 2 and 3. A local village (Haimoo) was chosen as the pilot village for the village plan. Also the pupils of a local school have been participating in the process of making the village plan. Luvy will publish the village plan by the end of the project in 2013. This tested practice will be introduced to other areas in the Karjaanjoki river basin.

106

Figure 68. Lake Hiidenvesi has a significant recreational value (tms, tän kuvan voi jättää pois)). Photo Sanna Helttunen.

In addition, stakeholders have been familiarized with using new models developed in actions 2 and 3. The project has held two workshops in the area for the local authorities and stakeholders. The aim is to improve their overall understanding of the effectiveness of different water protection measures. Dissemination of the project’s results will continut after the project has finished. The use of the models developed in the project have and will be targeted especially towards experts in the field of water protection and environmental authorities.

Lake Hiidenvesi restoration project has disseminated information in newsletters, at project’s website (www.hiidenvesi.fi), at several meetings and public events that were held in the area. (see below annex 1 Dissemination materials).The project’s marketin material (towels and thermometers) have been given to the local stakeholders and volunteers.

Figure 69. Porla’s Lake Adventure day was a success with approximately 800 participants.

Village plan

Haimoo was selected as the pilot village for the plan for water protection and restoration since the village had no prior village plan, it’s located nearby the River Vihti which runs to the Lake Hiidenvesi. In addition the Haimoo village association is active. The villagers have been very active and enthusiastic regarding the plan and actively involved throughout the process. The aim was to gather the present information together and make a long scale development plan for the village. The aim was also to increase the activeness and social income among the people living in the village.

107

Figure 70. Active citizens at the Haimoo village meeting. Photo Anu Suonpää/Luvy.

Three village meetings were held thought the process together with local and GisBloom experts (20.11.2012, 20.1.2013, 19.3.2013). In addition, a meeting was also held at the local village school in 24.9.2012. The 5 and 6 grade pupils made their own village plan related to water protection. The process gave a great opportunity for water protection experts to work at the grass roots and involve locals protecting the local waters. Water protection is closely related to the village planning since cozinessof the area can be related to water protection. Eutrophication has a negative effect on the recreational use of the area and the state of the local waters can have an influence on the imago of the area. It’s highly important to encourage the locals to get involved in water protection and aid them to point out the most crucial things in the village which influence the state of the waters. A village plan related to water protection is suitable for areas in which majority of the inhabitants live nearby waters (lakes/rivers). The aim is to bring water protection measures and actions part of the overall village planning and therefore make it easier to the villagers to include those in the development of the village and their everyday lives. The village plan has been delivered to 60 villagers at Haimoo, published at Haimoo village’s website and at the project’s website: (http://www.hiidenvesi.fi/easydata/customers/hiidenvesi/files/sivut/hiidenvesi/kirjallisuutta/k ylasuunnitelma_haimoo_2013.pdf )

Highs school water protection working package

Luvy has planned a working package of water protection for high schools in co-operation with teachers and GisBloom experts. The working package is based on the models developed in the GisBloom project (KUTOVA and VIHMA). A background document of the tools used in water protection has been written for the students.The working package has been

108

developed and tested in cooperation with the teachers of Vihti high school. Sessions at the Vihti high school have been held three times (22.4, 29.4 and 20.5) for two separate classes.

The end result of the working package is the “Restore your lake – game” that can be used nation wide at the website (www.pelastajarvi.fi). The game has been targeted to high school pupils and for everyone interested in water protection. The game focuses on decreasing the loading originating from the catchment area. The aim is to familiarize the user with the basics of lake restoration, learn basics terms and methods that can be apllied in the catchment area. In addition the user will learn basics of cost effectiveness related to the methods. The game includes three parts: Learn!, Test your knowledge! and Restore!. Also additional material is available for those who wish to deepen their knowledge in the field of water protection and the models developed in the GisBloom –project.

Figure 71. A snapshot of the Restore your lake game –website (draft).

Figure 72. Ismo Tuormaa & Crew making the Gisbloom video in Lake Hiidenvesi area.

109

Subaction 4.2.2 Vesijärvi

Demonstrations of the relevant methodologies and tools developed in actions 2 and 3. Focus in this subaction was in finding usable measures for analyzing, illustrating and increasing understanding of eutrophication and driving forces behind this unwanted process. These measures were developed in actions 2 and 3. The role of the Lake Vesijärvi foundation was to enable successful testing of the measures firstly by proper communication with local actors and with GISBLOOM partners and secondly by delivering local data and information to relevant GISBLOOM partners. The Lake Vesijärvi foundation was interested in testing and implementing measures developed for information distribution i.e. GISBLOOM map service “Vesinetti” and measures for estimating losses of nutrients from the Vesijärvi catchments, and for dividing the load into the original sources. Usability of nationwide loading models (e.g. VEPS, WSFS-VEMALA) in one lake scale was also of great interest.

The Lake Vesijärvi Foundation participated actively in the development of “Vesinetti” map service and in the implementation of hydrodynamic model “COHERENS” in the case of Lake Vesijärvi. After the first version of “Vesinetti” was published, the Lake Vesijärvi Foundation gathered in November 2011 local experts and potential end users together with the “Vesinetti” developers into a common workshop to discuss on local demands for “Vesinetti”. A number of relevant end user aspects were identified and taken into account in further development of “Vesinetti”.

Preparations for watershed modeling according to action 2 were started in autumn 2011. As a first step a research model of SYKE for hydrodynamic modelling, “COHERENS” was decided to implement in the case of Lake Vesijärvi. The model contains several sub models of which a physical model was a starting point. Pre-work enabling testing of “COHERENS” was carried on together with SYKE and local partners. Data needed was ordered from the Ministry of Transport and Communications

The second stage of testing activities included not only “Vesinetti” and “COHERENS” but also several loading models. To enable testing of these loading models, local data on nutrient load was reviewed and the Lake Vesijärvi basin was divided into five sub-basins based by local needs in water management: Enonselkä, Paimelanlahti-Vähäselkä, Komonselkä, Laitialanselkä and Kajaanselkä. The results of GISBLOOM actions 2 and 3 were presented and widely discussed in an expert workshop in Lahti in the beginning of February 2013. All the main actors in the field of local water management were represented in the workshop, including Vesijärvi Foundation, municipal and regional environment administration, academia etc. All the participants were able to test “Vesinetti” and “Järviwiki” services by their own computers under the supervision of the developers of these services, which was a very effective way to get familier with rather complicated system like “Vesinetti”. The results of collaborative developing process of models are described in the relevant chapters related with actions 2 and 3.

The map service “Vesinetti” including several loading models has a great potential in becoming an important part of information distribution and analysis of local water management actions. The response in February 2013 workshop was very positive and after the workshop several steps have been taken to estimate nutrient loss from the catchment of Vähäselkä and Paimelanlahti as well as to increase understanding of water flow between sub- areas of lake Vesijärvi. 110

Communication activities

Success in demonstrations on the lake Vesijärvi region as well as progress in water management as a whole requires preplanning, a lot of information distribution and frequent consultation with the main parties. Water management actions to be taken in the area are based on a specific program, the so called Lake Vesijärvi Management plan, which includes different kind of activities from communication to research and lake restoration activities. The plan covering years 2012 – 2015 was written during the autumn 2011 keeping in mind the needs of GISBLOOM project. To support the implementation of water management activities a separate communication was finalized during the spring 2012 as a part of GISBLOOM activities.

Internet sites of Lake Vesijärvi Foundation have been and will be also in the future a basis of electronic information distribution. All the main results concerning Lake Vesijärvi area were available through to these web sites. Distribution of GISBLOOM information was ensured by creating a link to SYKE GISBLOOM web pages.

Electronic newsletters were used to different targeted audiences. The most important target groups in terms of promoting local water management activities were media, farmers, fishermen, partners of the Lake Vesijärvi Foundation and environmental administration. Existence of GISBLOOM project was informed by newsletters as well as main pilot area activities. Due to the timetables and structure of GISBLOOM, the main results of pilot testing are still coming and therefore will be distributed by electronic newspaper and local public media during the next months.

Local media is very interested in following water management actions and measures used in the Lake Vesijärvi. Targets of GISBLOOM project and main dynamics of eutrophication were presented in two separate interviews (2011 and 2012) of local radio channel “Radio Voima”. Same topics were discussed in two radio interviews (2010 and 2012) of YLE Lahti as a part of interviews in annual “Järvikalapäivä” in Hollola municipality.

Presentations were used to inform formal bodies of Lake Vesijärvi Foundation and environmental administration. Target groups were: the board and the commision of the Lake Vesijärvi foundation and municipal councils of Lahti, Asikkala and Hollola. GISBLOOM project and its` activities were presented as a part of larger presentation of Lake Vesijärvi activities.

Information afternoons arranged in June 2012 in Siikaniemi, Hollola for fishermen and for the donators of the Lake Vesijärvi Foundation in February 2013 in Lahti were very valuable. In both meetings a lot of questions were raised and discussed in terms of algal blooming, external and internal nutrient load and water management measures to decrease eutrophication. Furthermore, numbers of Individual face to face meetings were arranged with the key persons on the pilot area in order to clarify their needs for communication and co- operation in terms of achieving the goals of GISBLOOM project. The persons met represented the city of Lahti, the University of Helsinki, Suomen riistakeskus, fishermans organizations, NGO Vesijärven ystävät and local newspaper Etelä-Suomen sanomat.

The most relevant fair in terms of delivering GISBLOOM information was annual Lahti fish market, which takes place in the harbor of lake Vesijärvi in September. A number of people

111

were contacted and a couple of hundreds of GISBLOOM leaflets were delivered during Lahti Fish markets in 2011 and 2012.

Planned activities which have not been implemented in GISBLOOM project or which are still to come

The project plan included lectures at elementary schools to activate both pupils and their teachers in monitoring water quality of their own lakes. This activity is very important because water management is a never ending process which needs input from generation after generation. The reason why the activity was not implemented in GISBLOOM project was that other local actor in the field of water management, Päijät-Hämeen kalatalouskeskus was already decided to arrange a parallel road show in the schools of the Lahti region. There was no need and reason to repeat action, which was already taken care of other project and other actor. Because of the activities taken by Päijät-Hämeen kalatalouskeskus outside the GISBLOOM project, the goals and requirements of wp 4.2.2. in terms of arranging activities at local elementary schools, were fulfilled without use of resources allocated to that purpose in the project.

Advertising and informing of GISBLOOM project in local newspapers was another planned activity, which did not take place in GISBLOOM project. Finalization of GISBLOOM end products took time and the structure and content of e.g. “Vesinetti” is targeted rather to the experts in water management than to the wider public. Instead, GISBLOOM project was disseminated rather extensively through other acticities that is electronic newsletters, radio broadcasts and networking events. Some larger articles in local newspapers are still to come.

The map service “Vesinetti” and measures for estimating losses from the Vesijärvi catchments have been tested during the project. However, some further testing and development in a real work situation is still needed.

Despite of the imperfection of implementation of aforementioned tasks the dissemination value was not reduced.

5.2 Evaluation Evaluation of project results (Table 20) indicated no major shortcomings. In fact, all the objectives were met successfully.

Table 20. Evaluation of tasks of the project. Task Foreseen in the revised proposal Achieved Evaluation 2.1 Metadata on available Metadata description of the most phytoplankton data from lakes important Finnish data sources for phytoplankton and environmental variables was successful. By purpose the Yes metadata description was not comprehensive for all variables, because of the abundance of data that located in many different archives. 2.1 Information on factors determining The importance of external and internal algal bloom occurrence in lakes environmental factors on cyanobacterial Yes abundance and blooms were studied using two representative data sets. Collection of 112

environmental data took more time than originally planned. After the data from different sources were compiled, the analysis was carried out successfully, and the role of different variables in shaping cyanobacteria biomass was demonstrated. 2.1 Model based ecological Classification with the LLR model tool classification of pilot area lakes will was done for 20 lakes or lake parts in 7 be compared to classification based pilot areas. The modelled outcomes were on the available information on probability distributions of chlorophyll a water quality and biological Yes and total nutrients. The comparison elements. between the modelled and traditional classification result was done by using median values of the probability distribution. 2.1 Demonstration of data and LLR model was successfully used in pilot knowledge acquired in pilot areas areas to demonstrate the data and the LLR Yes classification tool itself. Conceptual models describing algal bloom mechanisms were also demonstrated. 2.1 The monitoring and evaluation of LLR model was used in selected pilot efficiency of action to meet the areas to demonstrate and estimate the desired objectives and in efficiency of actions (total nutrient Yes disseminating the lessons learnt at loading, nutrient and chlorophyll national and European level. concentrations). Results were reported in Guidance and Synthesis reports. 2.1 The monitoring and evaluation of Sub-action had a strong demonstration demonstration character of action character via the classification tool LLR. High emphasis was given to Yes demonstration in the pilot areas where it was monitored and evaluated and reported in progress reports. 2.2 Metadata report. Yes Available databases and observation systems of SYKE and Tvärminne Zoological Station such, bathymetric data, nutrient and production dynamics in the bay and coastal areas and river load.

Pilot area demonstration and Yes Nutrient load model from Pojo bay was dissemination reports demonstrated at Tvärminne Zoological station on the 15.4.2013

GIS- 3d modeling, differential Yes The Pojobay nutrient cycling and equation modeling, and ecosystem model was presented in the participation to pilot area Conference Knowledge for the future - demonstrations and dissemination IAHS - IAPSO - IASPEI Joint Assembly in Gothenburg 24.7. 2013 under the title” Modeling water exchange, nutrient loads and ecosystem in a brackish water bay” 2.3 A compilation of data on catchment Yes Data has been collected from several characteristics and human impacts sources and reported in the Milestone “Metadata report on the available databases and observation systems to provide enough information to build up a

113

database for statistical analysis”. The methodology how the data is handled is described in the Deliverables “Report on nation-wide diffuse load equations for phosphorus and nitrogen, and comparison of the two modeling approaches for selected catchment”, (completed in August 2012 and the updated version May 2013). 2.3 Nation-wide diffuse load equations Yes Four different equations were chosen as for phosphorus and nitrogen and a the final models explaining specific Total load prediction tool Phosphorus and Nitrogen loading. Moreover, the outputs of stepwise regression procedure were included as Model 5. The final equations are reported in the Deliverable subtask 2.3., May, 2013. 2.3 Demonstrations in the pilot areas Yes The models and the results have been presented in the pilot areas and the lessons learnt from the pilot areas have been reported in the synthesis report. The statistical model is easy to use and understand unlike all the other more physically based models. Therefore, the use of statistical models improves the dialogue between stakeholders and water managers/researchers.

2.3 Demonstration of data and Yes The statistical model has been further knowledge acquired in pilot areas introduced to the coordinators of the RBMD’s. There is a plan to apply the statistical model nation wide and compare the results with the VEMALA (National scale nutrient loading model for Finnish watersheds ) model. 2.3 Identification of the most Yes Validation of the models showed that the significant data gaps and specific equations do not fully work in all areas: needs for further for example, the loads ended up being research. negative for the catchments that had large lake percentage. In addition, new explanatory variables, such as the soil test P and more precise soil data could be added to the statistical analysis to obtain more information on the effect of agricultural areas and the texture of top soil on the nutrient losses. 2.3 The monitoring and evaluation of Yes Reported in Guidance and Synthesis efficiency of action to meet the reports desired objectives and in disseminating the lessons learnt at national and European level. 2.3 The monitoring and evaluation of Yes Monitored and evaluated in demonstration demonstration character of action workshops and reported in progress reports.

114

2.4 Satellite based temperature, Yes Pilot area products were made for the turbidity and chlorophyll a years planned in the proposal with the estimates from cloudless days exception of 2012 (instrument failure). Algorithm for the new variable, Secchi transparency, was developed. Additional water body based products for the needs of ecolocical classification were provided, also for areas outside the pilot areas.

2.4 Results of automatic station Yes The measurements were re-corrected, measurements which improved their usability in local scale. Pilot areas also gained from technical advices related to sensor. In lake Pien-Saimaa had occasional problems data quality. Additional product were made from the primary data e.g. time series, mean Chl for the needs of classification. 2.4 Demonstration of data and Yes Demonstrations have been given in those knowledge acquired in pilot areas pilot areas, where methods were applied. Local experts working in ecological classification should have participated in pilot area meetings. 2.4 The monitoring and evaluation of Partly Monitoring and evaluation on national and efficiency of and in disseminating European level has been made based on the lessons learnt at national and the pilot area feedback. European level 2.5 Service architecture available for Yes Released open source software serving INSPIRE compliant GIS components available for integration to software and other information end user systems. systems for Primary INSPIRE and OGC standards compatibility demonstration

2.5 Standardised environment for Yes A GIS based Web accessible system for utilizing and developing different the use of hydrological modeling of computational models which utilize waters and information sharing developed information on water bodies and in 3 phases including drainage basins - Full functionality including interactive model execution - Complete operative system tests - Final release of documentation and system SW - Planned guidelines for system future development and systems maintenance practices - Monitoring and evaluation reports for project monitoring and management - Emphasis on pre-set modelling scenarios and dissemination of pre-calculated results, limited and/or experimental approaches for interactive model execution 2.5 To provide geographical Yes Geographical information databases for information databases for executing model execution were completed

115

the main models defined during the project 2.5 Web user interfaces to access and Yes Pilot area demonstration and demonstrate the system dissemination reports performance 3.1 Development of nutrient leaching Yes The Vemala model developed and applied model for describing the effects of for the target river basins and the climate and land use change developed model is directly applicable for all Finland. The model is capable for simulation of the effects of climate change and changes in agriculture on nutrient leaching. 3.1 Algal blooming forecasts Yes The developed Vemala model was integrated with LakeState model in order for production of chlorophyll-a forecasts. LLR model was setup in www.vesinetti.fi web based map service to be executed with preprocessed lake specific input data. LLR model calculates nutrient and chlorophyll a with different loading scenarios and estimates Maximum Permissible Nutrient Load. 3.1 Nutrient leaching and algal Yes Vemala model was applied for scenarios blooming scenarios for future. The scenario results include nutrient and chlorophyll-a levels in the lakes with different land use scenarios. 3.1.2 Data assimilation techniques Yes Bayesian estimation and MCMCsimulation were implemented to assimilate data to models. 3.1.2 Algal bloom forecasts stored in a Yes The automatically predicted chlorophyll a GIS database (Vemala and LLR) and turbidity maps can be loaded to the Vesinetti system. Warning system not done. 3.1.2 Demonstration of data and models Yes Computation techniques have been applied on lake Säkylän Pyhäjärvipilot area data and results were demonstrated there. 3.2 Total monetary benefits from water Yes Benefits for recreational use were quality improvements in the pilot calculated as planned with VIRVA model areas for 7 pilot areas. 3.2 Improved quality of public and Yes Workshops and meetings with stakeholder involvement stakeholders in the pilot areas were succesfull. Especially KUTOVA model and its results improved the discussion. Results of cost and benefit analyses have been presented to wider public audience in Lake Pien-Saimaa, the river Paimionjoki and the river Karvianjoki. Several newspaper articles or radio interviews were also given. 3.2 Improved knowledge basis for Yes Especially KUTOVA (applied in 8 pilot compiling River Basin areas) model has proved to add realism in Management Plans river basin management planning. Feedback from pilot area workshops 116

suggests that the local river basin management planners and coordinators as well as other stakeholders found KUTOVA helpful for RBMPs. 3.2 Improved understanding of the Yes User training for KUTOVA and VIHMA VIHMA, VIRVA and KUTOVA tools was arranged in 1/2013. National models and application of the VIRVA model has been their usability in the WFD-work. planned for the RBMP purposes. The tools were used together with LLR and VEMALA in means of comprehensive planning of RBM 3.2 Identification of the most Yes Considering the KUTOVA and VIRVA significant data gaps and specific models the most significant data gaps and needs for further research uncertainty sources have been identified. As well uncertainty analysis have been added to the models 3.2 Demonstration of data, models and Yes The models and the results have been knowledge acquired in pilot areas reported as well as the lessons learnt from the pilot areas have been reported in the synthesis report and guidance document. 3.2 The monitoring and evaluation of Yes Feedback has been collected from the efficiency of action to meet the workshops, the results and experiences desired will be published. An article about the objectives and in disseminating the KUTOVA and VIRVA models is being lessons learnt at national and writed European level. 4.1.2 A shared understanding of the Yes The river Lapuanjoki has had its own river current situation and opportunities committee for over 20 years now. The and means to improve it. member organizations in The River Lapuanjoki Committee participate actively to the annual meetings concerning the ongoing water management projects and other nature projects in the area. It is commonly acknowledge that diffuse nutrient loading, particularly, is a significant problem in the river Lapuanjoki catchment. The members in the river Lapuanjoki Working Group have actively participated in workshops and have test used the tools and methods GisBloom has offered. 4.1.2 The experiences from the pilot can Yes The river Lapuanjoki is a pilot river in be utilized in the work of other utilizing modeling methods in preparing river communities as well as in the program of measures at basin level. The river basin management planning backbone of the Program of Measures for focused working groups. river Lapuanjoki will be utilized in compiling the program of measures for the other major rivers in Western Finland. The project has demonstrated new ways of evaluating the effects and cost efficiency of measures. This information will be used in the planning process and in compiling the River Basin Management Plan for the

117

RBD of Kokemäenjoki-Saaristomeri- Selkämeri. 4.1.2 Demonstration of data, models and Yes Models and results have been presented in knowledge acquired in the pilot three workshops held with The river areas Lapuanjoki Working Group and SYKE’s model experts. The VEMALA LakeState model and Nutrient Load model results have been used/tested in classification work. Models were used also in preparing the Program of Measures for river Lapuanjoki.

KUTOVA model results are tested in compiling environmental handbooks for the volunteered farms in the river Lapuanjoki area.

4.1.2 The monitoring and evaluation of Yes Reported in Guidance and Synthesis efficiency of action to meet the reports. desired objectives and in disseminating the lessons learnt at national and European level. 4.1.2 The monitoring and evaluation of Yes Monitored and evaluated in demonstration demonstration character of action. workshops and reported in progress reports. 4.2.1 Local citizens of pilot area prepare Yes Haimoo village was selected as the pilot village plan for water protection for the village plan. Three village and restoration. This tested practice meetings were held thought the process will be introduced to other areas of together with local and GisBloom experts Karjaanjoki river basin (20.11.2012, 20.1.2013, 19.3.2013). In addition, a workshop was also held at the local village school in 24.9.2012 with 5. and 6. grade pupils. The village plan has been published at Lake Hiidenvesi restoration website and also delivered to the villagers as a paper copy.

4.2.1 Members of agricultural managing Yes Workshops and meetings with group of Lake Hiidenvesi stakeholders in the pilot areas have been restoration project will be successful. The stakeholders of the Lake familiarized with testing of new Hiidenvesi restoration project have been models (action 2 and 3) by using introduced to the models developed in the instant feedback GBL-project. User training of the models was found useful. The organisation of the Lake Hiidenvesi restoration project changed in 2012 and the agricultural managing group no longer exist as a separate group. In the current restoration project 2012-2015 the group that has been invited to test the models has included also local environmental specialists, local volunteer organisations, local authorities etc. besides the members 118

of the past agricultural managing group.

4.2.1 Study material on local water Yes Vihti high school was selected as the pilot protection and presenting for local school for the teaching package. Local and high schools will be finished in co- GBL experts met the students 3 times. operation with teachers Vihma and KUTOVA models were demonstrated for the students. In addition, background information related to water protection methods was introduced to the students. The end result of the working package is the “Restore your lake – game” that can be used nation wide at the website (www.pelastajarvi.fi). The game will be finished by the end of September 2013.

4.2.1 Functional network of Yes Meetings were arranged twice a year. environmental and local authorities, environmental specialists and volunteer organisations of the Karjaanjoki River basin will meet twice a year to promote and plan sensible water protection of WFD

4.2.1 Demonstration of data, models and Yes The models, Vesinetti and the project knowledge aquired in pilot areas results have been presented in the pilot areas and the lessons learnt from the pilot areas have been reported in the synthesis report and guidance document. Public events related to water protection were organised and the stakeholders have been informed of the GBL-project.

4.2.1 The monitoring and evaluation of Yes Dissemination of the results continues efficiency of action to meet the until the end of the project and from there desired objectives and in onwards. The project has been presented disseminating the lessons learnt at in several meetings in the river basin area. national and European The village plan will be published and level. disseminated regionally. The teaching package will be disseminated nationally at the Lake Hiidenvesi project website.

4.2.1 The monitoring and evaluation of Yes Monitoring and evaluation reports have demonstration character of action been finished and no major clarification requests have been made.

4.2.1 Information distribution at Yes Information distirbution has taken place Karjaanjoki river basin (Internet, throughout the project and it will continue newsletters, newspapers, public also after the project has finished. information evenings and restoration meeting) 4.2.1 Stakeholder analysis and Yes Workshops have been held as planned for demonstrations at Karjaanjoki the stakeholders. Summary of the completed questionnaires is presented in the action 119

4.0 4.2.2 Improved knowledge on usability Yes Total benefits can`t be analysed yet. Until of methods and measures produced now local experts in the field of water in actions 2 and 3 management are familiar with the work done in actions 2 and 3. The testing of relevant measures and as a result of testing, improvement of knowledge on usability took some time. 4.2.2 Views and experiences of those Yes Testing of relevant measures and as a affected by management actions result of testing, improvement of considered are gathered, and knowledge on management actions took understandability as well as some time. Information distributed to the acceptable to the public are tested wider public has been able to include basic issues at quite a general level. 4.2.2 Increased public awareness of Yes The knowledge on the status of the water environmental issues as well as the in lake Vesijärvi as well as in the rivers environmental situation in the and streams flowing to the lake has catchment improved as well as activity in monitoring water bodies in one`s livelyhood. As a sign of increased activity of the public, the number of e-mails and calls related with water management has clearly increased. 4.2.2 Public acceptance, commitment and Yes As said in a previous (upper) box. support with regard to the water management actions 4.2.2 Demonstration of data, models and Yes To enable testing of loading models, local knowledge acquired in pilot areas data on nutrient load was reviewed and the Lake Vesijärvi basin was divided into five sub-basins based by local needs in water management.The results of GISBLOOM actions 2 and 3 were presented and widely discussed in an expert workshop in Lahti in the beginning of February 2013. All the main actors in the field of local water management were represented in the workshop. Alla the participants were able to test “Vesinetti” and “Järviwiki” services by their own computers under the supervision of the developers of these services, which was a very effective way to get familier with rather complicated system like “Vesinetti”. However, the testing of relevant measures and as a result of testing, improvement of knowledge on usability will take some time. 4.2.2 The monitoring and evaluation of Moderate Proper testing of the new products efficiency of action to meet the required an iterative process which was desired objectives and in challenging in a three years project disseminating the lessons learnt at schedule of which development of the national and European level. products takes at least two years. 4.2.2 The monitoring and evaluation of Yes Reported in synthesis report. demonstration character of action. 5 Website of the project Yes Website was published in the beginning of 120

the project and was kept on date ever since. 5 LakeWiki website Yes LakeWiki website was published in summer 2011. 233 802 persons visited LakeWiki and 788 141 loadings were made in 2012. In 2013, until the 17th of December, Lakewiki had gained 286 219 visits and 910 398 pageviews.

5 Project brochures (1 in the Yes The project and its target were introduced beginning of the project, 1 at the in the first project brochure (2300 in end including also results) Finnish, 200 in English). The second brochure was a postcard, a quick introduce to the main products of the project, Vesinetti and LakeWiki, together with photo. 500 postcards have been delivered. 5 Marketing material (1 web banner, Yes As two marketing materials instead of one 1 poster, 1 marketing product, are deliverables, the web banner that was PowerPoint presentation) mentioned in proposal, is not planned to do. The first marketing material, 300 towels with text www.vesinetti.fi and the second marketing material, 750 thermometers with printing of www.jarviwiki.fi and www.vesinetti.fi, were delivered to the local citizens in the summer events and to the stakeholders in workshops and meetings. Both Finnish and English posters were done. All partners have presented them in their seminars and stakeholder meetings. Several power point presentations of the project have been given. 5 Layman's report Yes Layman’s report was ready in autumn 2013.500 reports in Finnish were printed. English version is only in Internet. 5 Notice boards Yes 11 notice boards were placed in different pilot areas. 5 Synthesis report of project results Yes Synthesis reports were submitted in due for stakeholders and policy makers time. They will published on web pages in Finnish and English after the publication in scientific journals. 5 Action-specific reports Yes Deliverable reports of actions have been made. Village plan of Haimoo for water protection and restoration will be published in autumn 2013 by Association of water and environment of western Uusimaa. and SYKE 5 Press releases Yes 2 given and one was given in autumn 2013 5 National stakeholder seminars Yes In seminar of Finnish river basin restoration network, 14.-16.8.2013, Lahti, Finland. The Final all participant meeting was

121

arranged in Helsinki, 18.9.2013 together with the network of Finnish planners of programs of measures (PoMs).

5 Videos (1 trailer, 1 video) Yes Trailer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0lRc2 -pcwQ Video in Finnish: http://youtu.be/Oa4GHvpxgT4 in English: http://youtu.be/oWIVWrlL6c0 in Swedish: http://youtu.be/_T406PkpnJE

5 Teaching material and training Yes 11 workshop (the potential methods and courses application opportunities of the products have been presented and discussed and current version of Vesinetti has been demonstrated to gather development suggestions about it) 4 training courses of Vesinetti Teaching material has been produced by Association of water and environment of western Uusimaa and SYKE. The environmental education package targeted for schools have bee updated also in river Lapuanjoki catchment area 5 International symposium Yes A symposium on CLIMATE CHANGE CHALLENGES IN RIVER BASIN MANAGEMENT in 17–19 January 2011, Oulu, Finland. SIL 2013 international limnology conference in August 2013 in Hungary.

5.3 Analysis of long-term benefits Innovation GisBloom project developed and demonstrated new innovative tools for monitoring ecological status of surface waters and for planning, management measures. With these tools eutrophication and algal blooms in lakes and coastal areas can be demonstrated, monitored and controlled more efficiently than before. As a result, nutrient loading to surface waters can be reduced cost efficiently, eutrophication and algal blooms will mitigated and good ecological status will achieved as planned.

Innovation value of demonstrated tools was evaluated in terms of their efficiency of monitoring and management of ecological status of surface waters compared to conventional

122

technologies. The web based map services (data, tools and models) proved to be much more democratic, transparent and fluent in that they provide an easy access to monitoring data, computational tools, plans and reports. They facilitated also discussion, information exchange, and dealing with differences between beneficiaries and stakeholders.

Demonstration value the demonstration character was excellent due to the extensive testing in several river basin pilot areas and to the remarkable amount of feedback from planners and stakeholders. As a result, the tools were adopted by river basin management planners and stakeholders in public and private organizations and right after the project, the ministry on environment funded mobilization of tools and the related consultancy service in SYKE. As a summary, tools were demonstrated, validated and adopted by the intented end users and their usage in collation of programme of measures started during the project.

Environmental benefits While delivering these direct environmental benefits, The GISBLOOM project contributed to the achievement of the environmental objectives of EU Water Framework Directive (WFD, 2000/60/EC), Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC) and Nitrates Directive (91/676/EEC) by building capacity for river basin management under climate change.

Improved efficiency of monitoring, communication and management is the major long-term environmental benefit that will help participatory monitoring and planning of mitigation measures and bolster the commitment of stakeholders and public to the implementation of management plans. The improved understanding of casual linkages between land uses and ecological status of waters will increase the motivation, preparedness and ability of public to act and to participate the planning and implementation of measures. In addition, a newly set- up modelling consultancy service of Finnish Environment Institute for river basin managers will complement the existing operations model of river basin management.

Savings and business opportunities Resulting long-term savings and business opportunities are evident: lower cost of unit nutrient load reduction of migitation measures, improved water quality for recreation, fisheries, household and industrial water uses and the spin-off of new private sector business opportunities using demonstrated tools and information technologies.

Social impacts Improved opportunities for participation in river basin management and the stregthened commitment of public and stakeholders to the monitoring and management surface waters, new business opportunities and the fair shear of costs benefits between beneficieries and stakeholders will be among the most important lomg-term social impacts. Improved water quality and resulting business opportunities will promote, in turn, the creation of employment in the field of fishing, tourism and industry.

123

Replicability and transferability Demonstrated tools are replicable and transferable on national and Euopean scale. Commercialisation potential was clearly demonstrated by Aronaut Ltd (one of the beneficiaries) and by the set-up of consultancy service of Finnish Environment Institute. For stakeholders the web based map tools provide free access to monitoring data, estimation results, plans and reports. Water framework directive is a legistlative driver for transfer of the tools to national and European arenas, whereas fragmentation of environmental administration and beneficiaries is the biggest obstacle. The specific target groups of demostrations are authorative, public and private river basin managers, beneficiaries and stakeholders. The visibility of project is realized by drawing attention through web services (www.vesinetti.fi and www.jarviwiki.fi) and the successful demonstrations.

Indicators of success The long term indicators of the project success are 1. In how many river basins the tools are used? 2. What is the numer of users and of the instances of use? 3. What are the savings in the implementation of management per river basin? 4. What are the benefits of improved ecological status per river basin? 5. What is the number consultancies of the newly set-up consultancy service in Finnish Environment Institute? 6. What is the numer of new businesses in monitoring, planning and management of river basins and in fisheries, tourism and industry? 7. The numer of authorities, beneficiaries and stakeholders which are networking using developed and demonstrated web services?

Action specific benefits The innovation and demonstration value of project actions is outlined below more in detail:

Lakes: Cyanobacterial bloom intensity and frequency is a metric of the phytoplankton quality element in lakes of the Water Framework Directive status assessment. The results of subaction 2.1. increased understanding on cyanobacteria occurrence and controlling factors in Finnish lakes. The analysis provided nutrient thresholds that can be used as target concentrations for lake water for management purposes and monitoring to avoid cyanobacteria mass occurrences during summer. Models proved to be useful tools in ecological classification of lakes.

Coastal areas: Nutrien load and ecosystem model can be easily applied in other coastal areas. In the next step the model will be tuned for the Vanhankaupunginlahti bay area on the coastal area of Helsinki City. Vantaajoki river is running into the bay and the area is important for recreation of Helsinki citizens.

Catchments: The use of the nutrient load model developed in Subaction 2.3 makes it possible to estimate eutrophying pressures in un- or poorly monitored catchments and will help in the planning and implementation of River Basin Management Plans. The model can also be used in well- monitored areas for tentative assessment of the effect of future pressures and abatement measures. In addition to the Water Framework Directive, the model may be used in the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive. The long-term benefits are formed by the implementations of – hopefully – more cost-efficient abatement measures, 124

which can result in cost savings. A potential long-term benefit may also include better environmental awareness of various stakeholders, as the model developed here may increase the public understanding of the load generating processes. Hopefully, the model would give scientific basis for a policy process leading to better environmental actions that would produce social benefits due to positive effects in the state of impacted waters. The model developed is based on a versatile concept that can be further elaborated, which helps the concept to be used for other elements than nutrients (in fact the data and the method is currently being used by another water-related project in Finland) and in other European regions than Finland.

Remote sensing and automated measurements: The use of satellite images in Water Frame Directive work improves the accuracy of ecological classification by providing spatially intensive data as well additional temporal information for water bodies. Satellite images also help in the implementation of the directive by providing estimation of water quality for the areas which do not belong to the routine monitoring programmes.

MERIS images cover whole Europe and the same methods as applied here can be used for other European lakes and coastal waters. The satellite image processors used here are freely available in the Internet (BEAM software). However, the results should be validated, because applicability of the processors in other European waters may vary e.g. due to different optical properties. The tools developed for making the water body products can be used in any region, where water bodies are defined in GIS format.

Utilization of satellite images in ecological classification through making water body based products readily usable for the end users have high demonstrational value also in international level.

Information tools www.Vesinetti.fi features and functionalities were observed to work well, and Vesinetti can significantly ease up water management planning and modelling work when used extensively by all relevant parties. Dispite extensive information campaigns, benefits of Vesninetti can further be improved by positioning it in the heart of hydrological reporting and water management activities.

Among others – current functionalities could be better aligned with national and EU’s hydrological reporting requirements. This would mean that additional improvements in the documentation management area as well as better alignment with working practices would be needed.

Other possible improvements could be related to individual user’s needs to have preconfigured views and predefined reporting macros to help their non professional users to take additional benefits from Vesinetti. Current modelling capabilities are very good – but due to large amount of paramet level knowledge requirements – limits possibilities to be used by non professional users.

Ecological forecasts and asseements The developed Vemala and Vihma models of nutrient loading estimation under different climate change and land use scenarios is available for updated and more case specific scenarios for the target river basins after the GisBloom project. Also the Vemala model is set 125

up and usable for nutrient loading simulation and scenario runs for any river basins in Finland and the model can be applied for similar basins in the Northern Europe or Asia.

VIHMA-model is likely to be put online in order to facilitate its usage among local experts or ELY-centres (Centres for Economic Development, Transport and the Environment). The aim is to get it to wider use in RBMP work from here on. GisBloom has greatly facilitated in this by providing multiple chances to develope, test and present the model.

LLR model was setup to estimate the Maximun Permissible Nutrient Load of lakes to be used as target for the planning of cost efficient nutrient load mitigation measures using Vemala, VIHMA, KUTOVA and VIRVA models. LLR model can be run from www.vesinetti.fi web based map service using preprocessed lake (and, in near future, estuary) specific data.

Data assimilation The principal scenario for data assimilation for forecasting algal blooms was identified. It comprises chlorophyll-a forecast, MERIS satellite imagery, data from automatic measuring stations and field observations by the public.

Calculations were made for Säkylän Pyhäjärvi as the discontinuation of Meris satellite data prevented possibilities to develop analysis further on. However the technology that was piloted here will be a useful demonstrator for the use of data from future Sentinel satellites, due for launch in 2014 and 2015.

Economic cost and benefits - selection of cost efficient combinations of measures The KUTOVA and VIRVA models help to implement the EU water framework directive, which aims for good ecological status of the surface waters. The KUTOVA tool can help to allocate the financial resources of river basin management planning better, which enhances the long-term sustainability. The tools and their results have also proven to improve the communication between decision makers, experts, authorities and local stakeholders. The results of the tools cannot be directly transferred into new areas, but they have been designed to be easily applied to new areas. The tools could even be transposed to other countries in Europe with few adjustments.

Demostrations Use of different tools and models as well as Vesinetti map service as a whole are aimed to assist local authorities for example in constructing new or enhancing the existing RBMPs. The project wanted to show how these models could be used for instance in evaluating the potential effects of different measures or combination of measures presented in RBMPs. The aim was to help making RBMP evaluations more comparable between different areas. The driver in involving the local administrators and authorities was to better understand their needs and to take them into account as much as possible in the development work of the models and Vesinetti.

There is a strong emphasis to expand the usage of these models in Finland’s RBMP work in the near future. Extensive use of these models and their results in RBMPs can be seen as an indicator of project success. One of the main ingredients in making this possible was the ability to have so many pilot areas in GisBloom where to test the models and to have 126

interaction with local authorities and experts. Local authorities are also encouraged to start using Vesinetti and Järviwiki more widely as a communication channel of monitoring and management and of new results to citizens and other experts.

Lake Hiidenvesi The GisBloom project has given important information to the Lake Hiidenvesi restoration project and for local decision makers. During the project Lake Hiidenvesi restoration plan was updated (Hagman 2012). The models developed in the GisBloom project were utilised in the restoration plan. VEMALA gave significant information regarding external loading. Kutova and Vihma models have been useful when making decisions regarding the water protection methods used in the catchment area.

The use of the models will continue. It is important to get the local environmental authorities and environmental specialists also to use the models in their work through Vesinetti. Vesinetti will also increase and ease the information exchange between authorities and experts in the field of water management.

Järviwiki is a useful tool for locals and volunteer organisations to save their observations made at the lake (e.g. on algal blooms, water temperature and Secchi depth).

Lake Vesijärvi Decreasing external load into Lake Vesijärvi is one of the most important tasks in local water management agenda. Due to limited resources it is crucial to allocate resources as wisely as possible. Tools developed in Gisbloom project play an important part in this work. Lake Vesijärvi is formed of six more or less separated sub basins. All of them have their own characteristics and have to be managed more or less separated areas. Producing and analyzing data at a detail level needed in such small scale water management has not been possible by tools available before Gisbloom project. The Vesinetti map service with new nutrient loading models will help a lot in local water protection e.g. increase the quality of nutrient loading analysis and estimations.

Lapuanjoki river basin The GisBloom project has supported the communication between authorities and local stakeholders concerning the state of water bodies in the river Lapuanjoki catchment area and necessary means to improve their condition. The modeling results of the project have e.g. provided valuable information on the amount and origin of the nutrient load in the area and given perspective on the quantity of measurements needed and their targeting to different sectors to gain sufficient reduction in nutrient leaching to reach good ecological status in local waters. Models and their results will in the future serve as a good support when justifying different water conservation actions to local stakeholders and in the elaboration of the Program of Measures for River Lapuanjoki.

Piloting Vesinetti and JärviWiki in the river Lapuanjoki area showed that people are interested on their local waters and in getting up-to-date information on the state. Web based tools ment for communication and collecting and spreading information have become an important tool for communication between authorities, stakeholders and citizens. Therefore it is necessary to develop these kinds of interactive tools further and to emphasize the user friendliness on all levels. User friendly internet based (modeling) tools will also help local organizations and stakeholders plan their action properly and with a relatively low budget.

127

The new/redeveloped modeling methods provided by the GisBloom project also supports the water management planning on a more general scale in the area. Models and their results were used e.g. as supporting factors in ecological classification of lakes (both in the River apuanjoki catchment as well as in the whole region of the ELY-center for South Ostrobothnia). Models and their results will still be used in updating the program of measures for the River Lapuanjoki catchment but also for the other main river basins in the region of the ELY-center for South Ostrobothnia. Modeling tools will in the future become more and more important in water management planning due to limited resources available for monitoring.

5.4 Dissemination issues

The aim of communication was to improve:  public, authorities' and stakeholders' understanding of factors affecting on the status of waters.  the understanding of algal blooms in lakes and coastal areas and their responses to management measures.  the awareness and motivation of citizens and stakeholders in order to build up their capacity to protect waters.

5.4.1 Dissemination: overview per activity

All dissemination objectives that were set in the communication plan were gained during the project. All of he dissemination happenings of the project are listed in the annex 1 (including the partners activity). The dissemination activities of the pilot areas and partners are described more precise in Action 4. The tools of the GisBloom project was seen useful for expert use or for people with some level of knowledge on water protection issues. All of the dissemination products were very liked and delivered widely.

The number of dissemination material, workshops and seminars in the GisBloom project is listed beneath. Lists of the dissemination actions in pilot area of the partners are in the end of each partners’ chapter.

 Video and trailer  Marketing materials  Towels with text www.vesinetti.fi (300 towels were delivered)  Twelve noticeboards erected in the pilot areas.  Thermometers with printing of www.jarviwiki.fi and www.vesinetti.fi (750 pieces were delivered) Seminars and cooperation meetings  18 seminars  50 cooperation meetings  4 internal seminars  Workshops organised  20 workshops in the pilot areas  8 training sessions  7 other workshops The project in the media:  19 public events  7 articles in papers and newsletters  4 radio presentations  Press release and 5 press conferences Websites and web services  Vesinetti www.vesinetti.fi  Järviwiki www.jarviwiki.fi  Project website: o www.syke.fi/hankkeet/gisbloom (in Finnish) o www.syke.fi/projekt/gisbloom (in Swedish) o www.syke.fi/projects/gisbloom (in English)

Synthesis and Dissemination Action focused on the synthesis and dissemination of the results of the entire project but also on the general communication of the project. The action was started by doing the Communication plan for internal and external communication. That was also the first deliverable which was sent to the Monitoring group by 1.2.2011. The email list of the researchers was collected and informative email messages of the project were sent. The visual identity was planned for the project. The www-pages was set up, first in Finnish and later also in English and Swedish. During 7.5. – 30.11.2013 which is the time of new webpages of SYKE there were ca. 850 visitors in project www-pages. (the number of the older visitors wasn’t possible to get) The project poster and PowerPoint presentation in English was made for the Symposium Climate Change Challenges in River Basin Management which was held in Oulu 17.-19.1.2011. The web-based desktop for the project was established.

The project brochure in Finnish (with summary in Swedish, 2300 pieces) and in English was finalized. Also the poster and the PowerPoint presentation in Finnish were finalized. The info of the project published in part of the bulletins of the LakeWiki website on May and the national blue-green alga monitoring on June 2011. Several presentations were given by different actions (annex 1). Informative email messages of the project were sent to the researchers, partners and stakeholders. LakeWiki website (proto) was completed (deliverable 1.7.2011). Several workshops were organized in the pilot areas.

129

The first marketing material, the towel with text www.vesinetti.fi was planned and completed (deliverable 15.6.2012). 300 towels were delivered to the local citizens in the summer events and to the stakeholders in workshops and meetings. The aim of the marketing material is to advertise both the web service Vesinetti.fi and the project. The planning of the GisBloom video was started (deliverable 15.6.2013). The editor and the cameraman were chosen and the cinematographing was started. Workshops and training courses for experts were organized in the River Basin Districts and pilot areas (Milestone 15.6.2012 this is described in action 3.2). Twelve noticeboards were finished and erected in the pilot areas. Notice boards were documented and the photographs were sent to the EU commission by 15th of June 2012. They could not be set and documented earlier, due to the harsh winter weather circumstances of the pilot areas. Presentations of the project were given. Informative email messages of the project were sent to the researchers, partners and stakeholders. GisBloom project and LLR- and VEMALA- models were presented in 13-15 August, 2012 in XXVII Nordic Hydrology Conference in Oulu (Finland).

The trailer and the GisBloom video was finished (deliverable 15th of June 2013). Trailer “Lakewiki and Vesinetti, new methods for river basin management”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0lRc2-pcwQ and the video “Healthy local lakes” in Finnish: http://youtu.be/Oa4GHvpxgT4 in English: http://youtu.be/oWIVWrlL6c0 in Swedish: http://youtu.be/_T406PkpnJE

The second brochure (deliverable 1.7.2013) was finalized. It is a postcard, a quick introduce to the main products of the project, Vesinetti and LakeWiki, together with photo. 500 postcards will be delivered to the local citizens in the summer events and to the stakeholders in workshops and meetings.

Lakewiki (final deliverable 1.7.2013) is in use and being actively maintained at www.jarviwiki.fi. The English version is available at www.jarviwiki.fi/english

Also the second marketing material (deliverable 30th of September 2013), 750 thermometers with printing of www.jarviwiki.fi and www.vesinetti.fi were ordered. There was a mistake in first version of printing. That’s why the stickers with correct text were ordered and sticked over the wrong text. They were delivered to the local citizens in the summer events and to the stakeholders in workshops and meetings.

500 Finnish Layman’s report (deliverable 30th of September 2013) has been printed and will be delivered to the pilot areas and stakeholders. The English version is published in Internet. Synthesis report (deliverable 30th of September 2013) was written. Presentations of the project have been given. Informative email messages of the project have been sent to the researchers, partners and stakeholders.

The final seminar was organised for the river basin management planners as well as for the project partners, stakeholders in the pilot areas and researchers in 18th of September 2013.

Two scientific articles have been submitted (in annexes)  A practical tool for selecting cost-effective combinations of phosphorus loading mitigation measures in Finnish catchments to The International Journal of River Basin Management  A national scale nutrient loading model for Finnish watersheds – VEMALA to Environmental Modellind and Assesment journal 130

The table on dissemination activities is attached into Annex 1.

5.4.2 Layman's report The GisBloom Layman's report (20 pages) was produced in printed and electronic forms, and it contains all the points suggested in the Common Provisions. It was published in Finnish (500 copies) In English the report is in Internet. Layman's report was published and distributed in the national stakeholder seminars of the GisBloom project in 16.8.2013 (Annunal seminar of Finnish lake and river restoration network) in Lahti and in 18.9.2013 (The final seminar of the GisBloom project for the river basin management planners as well as for the project partners, pilot areas and researchers) in Helsinki. It has also been mailed to the national and regional stakeholder contacts of SYKE (universities, libraries, governmental and regional administration). The PDF version of the Layman´s Report can be found in GisBloom web pages. Layman's report both in paper and electronic versions (as pdf-file, Annex 6.3.1) is attached to this Final report.

5.4.3 After-LIFE Communication plan After-Life communication plan is included as Dissemination Annex 1.

131

7. Annexes

7.1 Administrative annexes Adminstrative annex 1: Gantt table Adminstrative annex 2: Final outcomes indicators Adminstrative annex 3: GisBloom notice boards

7.2 Technical annexes Deliverables Technical Annex 1. Report on algal blooms and their controlling 2.2 factors in coastal waters Technical Annex 2. Report of the socio-economic impact assessment 3.2 and models Technical Annex 3. Marketing material (1st) 5 Technical Annex 4. Report on nation-wide diffuse load equations for 2.3 phosphorus and nitrogen, and comparison of the two modelling approaches for selected catchment Technical Annex 5. Report of the factors determining algal bloom 2.1 occurrence in lakes based on the analysis of long-term bloom monitoring results Technical Annex 6. Report on production of water quality and algae 3.1 blooming forecasts for the public with WSFS-VEMALA-LakeState model and forecast production system Technical Annex 7. Report of the WSFS-VEMALA-LakeState 3.1 model scenarios of the effect of land use change on water quality and algae blooming Technical Annex 8. Numerical demonstrations of different scenarios 2.2 of the ecosystem model Technical Annex 9. Video 5 Technical Annex 10. LakeWiki website (final) 2.5, 5 Technical Annex 11. Project brochure (final) 5 Technical Annex 12. Report on algal bloom metric development in 2.1 the pilot area Technical Annex 13. After-LIFE Communication Plan 1 Technical Annex 14. Guidance document of applying the 4 demonstrated methods in river basin management planning Technical Annex 15. Final report on algal blooms and their 2.1 controlling factors Technical Annex 16. Report on the load prediction tool, load 2.3 predictions for the present. Load estimates for selected future agricultural production and changing climate scenarios. Technical Annex 17. Description of the GISBLOOM Information 2.5 tool Technical Annex 18. Marketing material (2nd) 5 Technical Annex 19. Synthesis report of project results for 5 stakeholders and policy makers (in Finnish and English) Technical Annex 20. Layman's report 5

132

7.3 Dissemination annexes Dissemination Annex 1: Dissemination activities and After-Life communication plan Dissemination Annex 2: Brochures Dissemination Annex 3: Posters Dissemination Annex 4: Power Point presentation Dissemination Annex 5: Layman’s report (Finnish and English) Dissemination Annex 6: Video Dissemination Annex 7: Project website pages Dissemination Annex 8: Project bulletins and Power Point presentations in press conference Dissemination Annex 9: Scientific articles submitted:  A practical tool for selecting cost-effective combinations of phosphorus loading mitigation measures in Finnish catchments to The International Journal of River Basin Management  A national scale nutrient loading model for Finnish watersheds – VEMALA to Environmental Modellind and Assesment journal Dissemination Annex 10: Reports:  Mallit avuksi vesienhoidonsuunnitteluun GisBloom -hankkeen pilottialueilla (Guidance document of applying the demonstrated methods in river basin management planning)  Haimoon vesienhoidollinen kyläsuunnitelma – Kuvaus toiminnallisesta suunnitteluprosessista (The village plan of Haimoo – Using active methods in planning process)

7.4 Financial annexes Financial Annex 1: Project Consolidated Statement of Expenditure Financial Annex 2: External auditor’s report Financial Annex 3: Standard payment request and financial statement/ beneficiary's certificate Financial Annex 4: Participant statement of expenditure for the coordinating beneficiary and the associated beneficiaries Financial Annex 5: VAT certificates for beneficiaries 2, 3 and 6, as requested in the Mid-term report feedback on 16 July 2012 Financial Annex 6: Explanation of time registration system SOLE TM, as requested on 5 Sept 2013 after the external monitoring team visit 5.6.2013 Financial Annex 7: Salary slips, payment proofs and time sheets, as requested in the Mid- term report feedback on 16 July 2012

133