The Plan of Water and Water Ecosystem Protection for Lake Karelian Pyhäjärvi

Regional Environmental Regional Environmental Publications Publications

374 374

Water conservation plan of an oligotrophic Pyhäjärvi Karelian Lake for protection ecosystem water and water of plan The Minna Kukkonen, Jaana Kiiski, Hannu Luotonen and Riitta Niinioja clear water lake

Lake Pyhäjärvi, in Karelia, is an oligotrophic transboundary lake between Finland and Russia It is a valuable clear water lake for fishing, recreation, The plan of water and water research and nature protection It belongs to several local and national monitoring programmes The lake is loaded mainly by non-point sources such as ecosystem protection for Lake forestry and agriculture The anthropogenic impact is evident on the Finnish side, whereas the Russian side is considered almost pristine The lake is very Karelian Pyhäjärvi vulnerable to changes Deterioration of water quality was noticed in the 1980s The water conservation done in 1990s improved the water quality Water protection is still needed at the lake, but it requires cooperation between authorities, local people, doers and industries This report introduces the lake and its catchment, summarises the land use, loading sources and quantity of the load and presents the present state of the lake In the end are introduced the water protection measures of different fields usable at Lake Pyhäjärvi

INTERREG III A KARJALA

Julkaisu on saatavissa myös Internetissä: http://wwwymparistofi/julkaisut

ISBN 952-11-1932-2 ISBN 952-11-1933-0 (PDF) ISSN 1238-8610

For sale at:

North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Torikatu 36 A, 80100 JOENSUU telephone: +358 13 141 2702

Edita Plc, Customer Service, POBox 800, FIN-00043 Edita, telephone: +358 (0) 20 450 05, telefax +358 (0) 20 450 2380 email: asiakaspalvelu@edita fi Internet: http://wwweditafi/netmarket NORTH KARELIA PL 69 NORTH KARELIA REGIONAL ENVIRONMENT CENTRE REGIONAL ENVIRONMENT CENTRE 80101 JOENSUU

Regional Environmental Publications

374

Minna Kukkonen, Jaana Kiiski, Hannu Luotonen and Riitta Niinioja

The plan of water and water ecosystem protection for Lake Karelian Pyhäjärvi

INTERREG III A KARELIA

JOENSUU 2005 ...... NORTH KARELIA REGIONAL ENVIRONMENT CENTRE The publication is available also in the internet http://www.environment.fi/pka

ISBN 952-11-1932-2 ISBN 952-11-1933-0 (PDF) ISSN 1238-8610

Cover photo: Juho Kotanen Photographs: Juho Kotanen, Helge Rummukainen, Mauri Rautkari and Veikko Makkonen Figures and graphics: Anita Rämö Aerial photography permit 279/92 © National Land Survey of Finland 07/MYY/04 Layout: Tuula Ikonen

Kainuun Sanomat Oy

Kajaani 2005 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 2 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Foreword

Lake Karelian Pyhäjärvi, a transboundary lake in Finnish and Russian Karelia is a valuable clear water lake for fishing, recreation and science. It is noticed both nationally and internationally. The lake belongs to the list of protected waters established by the Nordic Council of Ministers and to the Finnish Eurowaternet since 2000. In addition the lake has been proposed to the European Union’s nature protection Network Natura 2000 where it represents an oligotrophic habitat type containing very few minerals characteristic of sandy plains, having especial importance as a habitat for submerged macrophytes. In 2002 started a Finnish – Russian joint research project “Assessment of the ecological state of the transboundary waters” under the Interreg III A Karelia programme at Lake Pyhäjärvi. The main aim of the project was to collect the present existing monitoring data and assess the ecological state of the lake in practice having Water Policy Framework Directive approach. One important task was also to develop co-operation in the practice between the two countries for the implementation of the WFD in the transboundary waters. The project was carried out by North Karelia Regional Environmental Centre, Finnish Game and Fisheries Rese- arch Institute, University of Joensuu / Karelian Research Institute, Finnish Environ- ment Institute (FEI), the City of Kitee, Kesälahti municipality, Northern Water Prob- lem Institute of Karelian Research Centre, The State Centre of Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring of the Republic of Karelia and Committee of Natu- ral Resources in Republic of Karelia. The first part of the project was finalising the plan for water and water ecosystem protection for Karelian Pyhäjärvi. The plan was first published in Finnish in 2003. The English version was made to supplement the background information of Lake Pyhäjärvi for the international research and monitoring co-operation at the lake, especially the UN/ECE transboundary/international lakes pilot programme. In addition the content of English version have some interpolations such as facts about the Russian side of the lake and correction of catchment basin numbers when compared to Finnish version. The report will be published in Russian in the future by the Russian partners. The authors would like to thank all the referees, who have read and corrected the report. We would like to give special thanks to maker-up Tuula Ikonen, graphic designer Anita Rämö, photographers and all the others, who helped to accomplish this publication.

Joensuu, February 2005

Minna Kukkonen Jaana Kiiski

Hannu Luotonen Riitta Niinioja

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 3 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 4 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Contents

Foreword ...... 3 1 Introduction...... 7

2 Study area ...... 9 2.1 General features of the study area ...... 9 2.2 Land use ...... 12 2.3 Conservation areas...... 12 2.4 Population and source of livelihood ...... 12 2.5 Fishing and fisheries...... 13 2.6 Research and monitoring ...... 14

3 Loading ...... 16 3.1 Point source loading ...... 16 3.1.1 Wastewater treatment plants ...... 16 3.1.2 Waste processing plants ...... 17 3.1.3 Fish farming ...... 18 3.2 Diffuse loading ...... 18 3.2.1 Agriculture...... 19 3.2.2 Forestry and peat mining ...... 20 3.2.3 Fur production ...... 21 3.2.4 Scattered settlements ...... 22 3.2.5 Summer cottages, camping areas and recreational accommondation services ...... 22 3.2.6 Leaching ...... 23 3.2.7 Atmospheric fallout ...... 23

4 Water quality and the ecological state of the lake ...... 24 4.1 Water colour and Secchi disc / transparency ...... 24 4.2 pH, alkalinity and oxygen concentration ...... 25 4.3 Nutrients and chlorophyll-a ...... 26 4.4 Nutrient equilibrium ...... 28 4.5 Water quality of the inflowing waters and small lakes in the drainage area ...... 29 4.6 Water quality classification...... 29 4.7 Ecological state of the lake ...... 29 4.7.1 Phytoplankton, periphyton and algal observations ...... 30 4.7.2 Aquatic macrophytes ...... 30 4.7.3 Zooplankton...... 31 4.7.4 Benthic invertebrates ...... 31 4.7.5 Fishes ...... 32

5 Plan of water and aquatic ecosystem protection ...... 33 5.1 Introduction ...... 33 5.2 State of the lake ...... 33 5.2.1 Loading change between 1990-1997/1998...... 33 5.2.2 Problems included in the lake ...... 35

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 5 5.3 Water-protective measures in different fields ...... 36 5.3.1 Agriculture...... 36 5.3.1.1 Agro-environmental subsidies ...... 37 5.3.1.2 Water-protective measures in agriculture ...... 37 5.3.2 Fur farming ...... 38 5.3.3 Forestry ...... 39 5.3.3.1 Finland’s National Forest Programme 2010 ...... 39 5.3.3.2 Environmental Programme for Forestry in 2005 ...... 40 5.3.3.3 Finnish Forest Certification System ...... 40 5.3.3.4 Water-protective measures in silvicultural practices ...... 41 5.3.4 Sparsely populated areas and summer cottages ...... 43 5.3.4.1 Goals in the 2000s for wastewater treatment ...... 44 5.3.5 Shore land development, dredging, mowing of aquatic vegetation and other activities affecting the riparian zone ...... 44 5.3.6 Other loading sources and activities affecting aquatic nature ...... 45

Conclusions ...... 46

References ...... 47

Documentation pages ...... 51 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 6 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre

Introduction ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 1 Lake Pyhäjärvi in Karelia is a containing very few minerals transboundary lake between Finland characteristic of sandy plains (EU/ and Russia. It is a valuable clear water Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC). lake for fishing, recreation, research and The lake is loaded mainly by non- nature protection (Fig. 1). The lake is point sources, forestry and agriculture. included on the list of protected waters The anthropogenic impact is evident on established by the Nordic Council of the Finnish side, whereas the Russian Ministers (Nordisk Ministerråd 1990) side is considered almost pristine and on that of lakes in need of special (Kukkonen et al. 2003). The lake is very protection (Komiteanmietintö 1977, vulnerable to changes. Decreasing Työryhmän mietintö 1992). It belongs to Secchi depths (transparency) and several local and national monitoring increasing chlorophyll-a in the 1980s programmes and has been part of the suggested a deterioration of water Finnish Eurowaternet since 2000 (Niemi quality. Local people noticed it as et al. 2001). The lake was made part of sliming of the shoreline stones and the European Union nature protection fishing nets, as increased vegetation in network Natura 2000 where it the littoral zone, as algal disturbances represents an oligotrophic habitat type and turbid water. The use and usability of the shoreline and shore waters decreased.

Fig. 1. Scenery of Lake Pyhäjärvi on the Finnish side. Photo: Veikko Makkonen.

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 7 The concern over the state of the residents and some regular summer lake caused a chain of studies and plans visitors organised and registered an related to the lake and its catchment area association, Karjalan Pyhäjärvi ry. The in the late 1970’s (e.g. Väylä Oy 1981, association has done valuable voluntary Meriläinen & Kokko 1982). Regional work to protect the lake. water authorities, municipalities and A joint Finnish-Russian research local fishery collectives all participated project started in 2002. It was called in the plans. The first result of the co- “Assessment of the Ecological State of an operation was a research and protection Oligotrophic Lake – as exemplified by the plan for Lake Pyhäjärvi. It included Transboundary Lake Pyhäjärvi on the tightening up the licences to reduce Finnish-Russian Border” and financed by discharge and several ecological studies the INTERREG III A Karelia programme to assess the ecological status of the (Luotonen et al. 2002). The project has lake. The results of ecological studies adopted the Water Policy Framework corresponded with the signs of water Directive (WFD), and the first quality deterioration. This led to the publication, the protection plan for Lake work to restore the lake. A common Pyhäjärvi, was published first in Finnish water protection guide was published in 2003 and will later be published in in co-operation with municipalities, Russian. It consists of information of the statutory fishery associations and study area, estimated load to the lake, regional water protection authorities in water quality of the lake and 1992 and delivered to all local recommended water protection households (Karjalan Pyhäjärvi, Vesien- methods for the lake. This English suojeluopas 1992, A water protection version is complemented with guide). A comprehensive study of land catchment information of the Russian use and pressures affecting the lake side. In the text the facts are from the were carried out at the beginning of the Finnish side of the lake, unless 1990s and published in 1994 by Piirainen otherwise stated.

and Vänskä (1994). In 1994 the local ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 8 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre

Study area ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 2 2.1 General features of bifurcated, the main outlet being through Puhoslampi pond into Lake the study area Orivesi. The total catchment area of the Lake Pyhäjärvi is part of Vuoksi River Russian side is 171 km2 of which 113 km2 Basin. Geographically the lake is located is land. The landscape is mainly forested on both the Finnish and Russian sides. with mixed forest: coniferous and On the Finnish side it reaches North and broad-leaved trees and secondary South Karelia counties and the provinces spruce copses. 12 % of the landscape is of East and South Finland. The surface covered by peat bogs, about 5.5 km2 area of the lake is 248 km2, of which 201 being swamps (Fig. 3). Some forestry km2 is on the Finnish side (Fig. 2). The practices such as logging are carried out lake is large in proportion to its in some parts of the catchment area. catchment area 975 km2, 804 km2 is on Small river and creek chains with 124 the Finnish side. In Kukkonen et al. ponds and lakes divide the catchment (2003) the total catchment area of Lake area. The largest lake is Lake Lieväjärvi, Pyhäjärvi is stated as 1 019 km2. The total 246 ha, and the second largest Lake catchment area is corrected in this report Korpijärvi, 239 ha, extending on both after going through the old maps of sides of the border. The shoreline of Lake Karelia; the catchment area on the Pyhäjärvi on the Russian side is very Russian side is less following the re- broken. The high eastern edge is evaluation being now 171 km2. The covered by mixed forest, with conifers surface water percentage of the area is dominating. The shorelines are steep 29 % on the Finnish side and 34 % on the and rocky, with occasional shallow Russian side (including Lake Pyhäjärvi). sandy shores (Fig. 4). Several forested The majority of Lake Pyhäjärvi is islands are found throughout the lake. situated between the 1st and 2nd The largest is Martinsaari, with a total Salpauselkä ice marginal formations/ area of 5.8 km2. glacial fluvial. The bedrock is mainly The mean depth on the Finnish Archanean granite. The lake is side is 7.9 m and the maximum depth is morphologically very complex with a 26 m, in two locations. The mean depth large number of islands and several of the Russian part of the lake is 7 m and sedimentation basins. Eskers form long, the maximum depth 20 m. The lake has narrow capes into the lake and small a total volume of 1960 million m3. The rocky promontories jut out. There are water level was lowered by 1.5 m in the deep bays with several islands in the 1830s in order to have more land for southern basin. The middle part is cultivation (Käyhkö 1994). The water shallower and divided by several large level has been regulated within the islands. The main deep basin of the lake range + 79.11–79.80 m for the purposes starts from the middle part and reaches of a hydroelectric power plant in the almost 20 km to the north. From the Puhos canal since 1960. The mean northern basin, Hiekanpäänselkä, the discharge, MQ, is 8.2 m3 s-1 and the waters flow through the Syrjäsalmi inlet theoretical retention time is 7 years. into Hummonselkä basin. The lake is

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 9

Fig. 2. Lake Pyhäjärvi and point source loadings. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 10 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre The drainage area of Lake beginning of May. Winter lasts about Pyhäjärvi on the Finnish side includes 155–160 days. The average snow cover 35 groundwater sources, which are during winter is 55–60 cm. The yearly located there either partly or totally. 8 rainfall is 600–700 mm. The lakes are of them are important water sources and covered by ice usually by the end of 22 are suitable for use. The total area of November and the break up of the ice the groundwater sources is 145 km2 and cover is approximately 12 May (the the groundwater yield is 76 550 m3 d-1. average of 1961–1990, Hydrologic Yearbook Climatically, Finland belongs to 1995). The period of growth begins in the transition zone between a maritime May and lasts to October being about and a continental climate. North Karelia 160–170 days. The autumn and spring is situated in the area of the continental are a bit shorter in eastern Finland climate in the boreal zone. Temperatures compared to the other parts of the tend to be very low in winter and country (Ruuhisalmi 1974). The large moderately high during summer. There lake also has spatial microclimates in is permanent snow cover from different sub-basins and catchment approximately 25 November. It melts areas. away between the end of April and the

Fig. 3. Map of the catchment basin on Russian side.

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 11 Fig. 4. Scenery of Lake Pyhäjärvi on the Russian side. Photo: Juho Kotanen.

2.2 Land use dortmanna L., Littorella uniflora Asch, Isoëtes lacustris L. and I. echinosphora The catchment area of Lake Pyhäjärvi Durieu, Myriophyllum alterniflorum L.). on the Finnish side is mainly forested. About 13.5 % is covered by arable land and 0.006 % is open peat bog (Table 1). 2.4 Population and source There are no exact numbers available for the Russian side. of livelihood

Depopulation of the catchment area on 2.3 Conservation areas the Finnish side started in the end of the 1980s and has been going on ever since. The drainage area on the Finnish side The birth rate has decreased and includes several nature protection migration increased (Table 2). The areas; 238 hectares are privately livelihood around the lake is based on protected and owned and about 297 primary production more than average hectares have been bought by the compared to the other parts of North government (in 2003). Some natural Karelia. Industry and services are habitats in the catchment basin and the centralised in the municipalities of lake itself are included in the NATURA Kesälahti and Uukuniemi and the town 2000 programme, where the lake of Kitee (Table 3). represents an oligotrophic habitat type Permanent civil housing is absent containing very few minerals on the Russian side. Some signs of aban- characteristic of sandy plains (EU doned houses exist. The only permanent Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC). It also settlement is the border guard de- has special importance as a habitat for tachment and the housing connected to

submerged macrophytes (e.g. Lobelia it. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 12 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Table 1. Land use on the sub catchment areas on the Finnish side. Number Surface* Arable Open Forests Total area of the sub waters land mire Peat land Minerogenic inc. s waters Land area catchment 1area ha % ha % ha % ha ha % ha ha

4.391 20 519 41 3 845 13 0.3 ** 3 076 21 103 83 49 616 29 097 4.392 1 347 21 917 18 0.2 ** 693 3 236 79 6 340 4 993 4.393 40 <1 1 220 18 2.5 ** 2 289 2 872 77 6 703 6 664 4.394 157 8 327 18 0 0 35 1 434 79 2 011 1 855 4.395 2 ** 811 19 0.2 ** 868 2 453 78 4 279 4 277 4.396 434 8 443 9 0 0 1 315 2 905 85 5 397 4 963 4.397 345 13 15 <1 0.1 ** 494 1 646 96 2 571 2 226 4.398 185 8 45 2 0 0 626 1 293 95 2 215 2 030 4.399 20 2 110 9 0 0 242 853 88 1 266 1 246

The Total 23 047 29 7 731 14 3.0 ** 9 637 37 785 83 80 389 57 351 drainage area * surface water percentages are based on the total land and water area. Forests, arable land and swamps are calculated from the total land area **) < 0.05%.

Table 2. Population in Kitee, Kesälahti and Uukuniemi in the 1990s (North Karelian County administrative board 1998). Year The change Municipal 1990 1994 1995 1996 1997 1990-97 Pop. Pop. Pop. Pop. Pop. %

Kitee 11 350 11 168 11 058 10 963 10 840 - 5 Kesälahti 3 155 3 131 3 071 3 004 2 975 - 6 Uukuniemi 719 639 623 612 603 -16

Table 3. Source of livelihood in Kitee and Kesälahti in 1995 (Pohjois-Karjalan liitto 1997) and Uukuniemi municipality in 2001 (www.uukuniemi.fi). Source of livelihood Town/municipal Primary production Industry Services Persons % Persons % Persons %

Kitee 803 21 1 089 28 1 915 49 Kesälahti 270 28 266 28 402 42 Uukuniemi 28 12 54 North Karelia 9 123 16 12 655 22 37 119 63

2.5 Fishing and fisheries is privately owned. Fishing pressure is moderately high. In 1990 1 552 house Lake Pyhäjärvi is important for holds, 7.7 households per km2, fished the recreational fishing and fisheries (Fig. lake. 5). The lake with its catchment area Professional fishing, mainly by belong to the Puruvesi – Pyhäjärvi trawling, seine or nets, has grown in Fisheries region, which is sub-divided recent years especially in the southern into 13 statutory fishery associations. areas. In 1998 about 30 individuals, 10– 90 % of the lake is controlled by 12 15 households, earned part of their statutory fishery associations and 6 % income from fishing (North Karelia

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 13 Fig. 5. Whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus), vendace (Coregonus albula) and smelt (Osmerus eperlanus). Sketch by Hannu Hokkanen.

T&E-Centre, Centre for Fishing Industry endemic species), whitefish and spike. 1998). Two of them earned over 30 % of The restoration of fish populations in their income from fishing (North Karelia Lake Pyhäjärvi is planned. The effective TE-Centre, register of professional method could be trawling, autumnal fishermen). In the southernmost part, seine fishing, under-ice winter seining Uukuniemi, there were ten professional and fishing with both large and small fishermen of whom two earned over fyke nets. The costs set the limit for 30 % of their income from fishing. restoration. The catch of the economically important fish, vendace, has varied between years. In 1979 the catch was 2.6 Research and highest being 237 500 kg (Auvinen 1987a, 1987b). It declined towards the end of monitoring the 1990s. In 1997 it was just over 100 000 kg and in 1999 80 000 kg Karelian Pyhäjärvi has been involved in (Auvinen & Nurmio 2001). Due to the several national, regional and bilateral eutrophication of the lake in recent monitoring programmes since the 1960s years the number of perch, smelt, roach (Niinioja 2000). The lake has been and ruffe in the catch has increased included in the Finnish Eurowaternet (Tammi et al. 2003). The most common monitoring network since 2000 (Niemi catch today is perch or roach. et al. 2001) and proposed as a target area Planting fish is currently the major for the UN/ECE “Pilot projects on method for maintaining fish stocks in transboundary/international lakes” (Pie- Lake Pyhäjärvi. Species planted include tiläinen & Heinonen 2002).

brown trout, pikeperch, grayling (not an ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 14 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Lake Pyhäjärvi forms an interes- The partners in the project are North ting subject for research. The Finnish Karelia Regional Environment Centre, side has been impacted by people for the Finnish Game and Fisheries hundreds of years, but the Russian side Research Institute, the Karelian is nearly pristine. The lake is very vul- Research Institute at the University of nerable to changes: because of the low Joensuu, local authorities of Kitee and nutrient status and low humus concent- Kesälahti and the local water protection ration, the increase of nutrients causes association. Those on the Russian side an immediate increase in production and are the Northern Water Problems the long retention time extends the ef- Institute of the Karelian Research fect of the nutrient load. Centre, the State Centre for The water quality of the lake has Hydrometeorology and Environmental been monitored since the 1960s. Since Monitoring of the Republic of Karelia the 1980s there has been on-going and the Committee for Natural studies of phyto- and zooplankton Resources in the Republic of Karelia. The (Rytzkov et al. 1987, Haakana 1999, aim of the project is to assess the present Rahkola-Sorsa 2001), benthic inverte- ecological state of Lake Pyhäjärvi using brates (Paasivirta 1987, Nurmi 1998, biological elements and indicator Virnes 2001), fish populations Auvinen groups mentioned in the WFD 1987a, b,1995, Auvinen and Nurmio (phytoplankton, macrophytes, benthos 2001) and sedimentary diatoms and fish, supplemented with (Ollikainen 1992, Ollikainen et al. 1993, zooplankton and sedimentary diatoms). Kukkonen 2004). Voluntary trans- The results are derived from existing parency monitoring started at the lake research and monitoring data together in 1997 (Niinioja & Turkka 2002). with data collected during 2002–2003. The research and development The physical and chemical data and project “Assessment of the ecological state of other environmental parameters (e.g. an oligotrophic lake – as exemplified by the land use, loading, deposition) are used transboundary Lake Pyhäjärvi on the to support the evaluation. The project is Finnish-Russian border “ started in April presented in more detail in Luotonen et 2002 and will last until the end of 2004. al. (2002) and Luotonen (2003).

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 15

Loading ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 3 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 3.1 Point source loading The sewage treatment plant of the municipality of Kesälahti received its The lake receives municipal wastewater first licence in 1977. At that time the loading from the communities of wastewater was treated in precipitation, Kesälahti and Uukuniemi (Fig. 2). Its through peat bog infiltration and previous main point source, a fish farm through a ditch into River Mustolanjoki. at Varmonniemi, Kesälahti ended in In 1981 a chemical treatment unit was 2002. In 2002 a water supply and included to improve the result. In 1995 a sewerage plan was introduced for the new treatment plant using the municipalities of Kesälahti and biological-chemical method was Uukuniemi. It includes a scheme to introduced. At that time the plant transport sewage water from the received a new licence, which stated municipality of Uukuniemi to be treated that BOD removal should be 90 % and in Kesälahti wastewater treatment phosphorus removal 95 %. Between 1995 plant. and 2001 the treatment plant has reached these targets. In 1997 it treated the wastewater of 1 400 inhabitants. 3.1.1 Wastewater treatment The wastewater of North Karelian plants Polytechnic, Kitee, is treated in an activated sludge plant built in 1981. It Five wastewater treatment plants are uses the simultaneous precipitation located in the drainage area. Two of method. The treatment capacity is for them are small sewage treatment plants 200 people and for a design flow of (Fig. 2). One of the five plants 70 m3 d-1. According to the licence the discharges into Lake Ätäskö and the BOD removal should be 90 % and others into Lake Pyhäjärvi through phosphorus removal 90 %. The plant has ditches. The annual loadings of the met the targets in 1996–2001. The North sewage treatment plants are presented Karelian Polytechnic will be connected in Table 4. to the Puhos treatment plant in the future.

Table 4. The load of municipal treatment plants in 1997 and 2001 (NKREC 1998, 2002).

Municipal Input BOD7ATU Tot. nitrogen Tot. phosphorus Treatment Year m3 d-1 kg d-1 kg d-1 kg d-1 plant in out in out in out Kesälahti 1997 241 37 0.82 16 12 2.0 0.04 2001 258 42 0.06 17 14 2.3 0.06 Kitee Puhos 1997 23 5.3 0.12 1.4 0.9 0.2 0.02 2001 28 10.6 0.21 4.1 1.4 0.5 0.04

Polytechnic 1997 26 12.1 0.18 2.5 1.2 0.5 0.01 2001 25 9.1 0.53 2.6 1.1 0.5 0.03

in = incoming , out = outgoing waste water ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 16 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Municipal wastewater of the 3.1.2 Waste processing plants Puhos population centre and nearby industries is treated in an activated The refuse disposal plant, Sopensuo, in sludge plant using the simultaneous Kitee is the only functioning waste precipitation method. The population processing facility in the drainage area. equivalent of the plant was 500 and the It is run and owned by the town of Kitee. daily design flow 145 m3 d-1 in 1998. The waste treatment and landfill plants According to the licence the removal of of Kesälahti and Uukuniemi BOD and phosphorus should be 90 %. municipalities were closed in 1996. The The plant reached the targets in 1992– Sopensuo waste processing plant was 2001. In 2003 the plant received a new opened in 1972. Since 1997 it has also licence (Kukkonen et al. 2003). It processed communal waste from the tightened up the removal of phosphorus surrounding municipalities of Kesälahti, to 93 % and included new authorisation Rääkkylä, Tohmajärvi, Uukuniemi and for the treatment (e.g. values for CODCr Värtsilä. North Karelia regional and suspended solids). In 2001 the plant environment centre regulates the served 450 inhabitants and the total functioning and environmental wastewater inflow was 25 000 m3. The protection of the plant (Licence Dnro effect of the treatment plant is 079Y0130–121, given 21 June 1999). monitored both from outgoing water Because of new regulations (Decision and the receiving bay. The plant will be of the Council of State 861/97), the plant enlarged in the future, when it will also will not store waste permanently after treat the wastewater of the North 2007. The other processes such as waste Karelian Polytechnic. The population sorting, composting and transfer of equivalent in the future will be 757 and waste will continue. the design flow 170 m3 d-1. The plant received 17 642 m3 of In addition to the three sewage waste (excluding snow) in 1997. It treatment plants, there are some small consisted mostly of refuse from com- local sewage treatment plants. In the munities, construction and industry. In village of Niukkala near Uukuniemi, addition 6 500 m3 of snow was trans- there is a treatment plant using direct ferred there. The amount of waste in- chemical precipitation after which the creased 50 % from the previous year wastewater is absorbed into the ground, (Suunnittelukeskus 1998). thus there is no direct effect on the lake The landfill leachate is conveyed water. The load of the out flowing water through ditches and a sewer to be is 0.015 kg d-1 phosphorus, 1.3 kg d-1 treated in the area. The treatment -1 nitrogen and 2.7 kg d BOD7ATU. The consists of balancing/equalisation, clari- plant will need a unit for biological fication and infiltration. The cleaning treatment by 2005 in order to comply effect was improved in 1995 after with the decision of the Council of State introducing aeration in the balancing (365/94). pool and adding an infiltration pool in Two border guard detachments the filling area. The runoff waters can Niukkala and Närsäkkälä are located optionally be circulated and infiltrated on the eastern side of the lake. in peat. Närsäkkälä is still functioning and the The annual runoff water from the number of workers varies between 5– waste treatment plant is 32 000 m3 and 10 depending on the shifts. Niukkala is the average load is 3 kg phosphorus and a former station and is currently only 1 600 kg nitrogen. After cleaning, the used for recreational purposes. Niuk- runoff waters pass through 11 km of kala has 6 permanent inhabitants. Both ditches into Lake Ätäskö. stations have a small sewage treatment The influence of the plant has been plant. The yearly load of both plants has monitored in the receiving ditches. The been 0.6–0.7 kg phosphorus and 22–26 measured values for total nitrogen, kg nitrogen. ammonium and conductivity have

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 17 occasionally been higher than normal. Table 5. The average yearly (partly 5-year period) use of In addition concentrations of cadmium, feed, incremental growth of fish and nutrient load of the copper, nickel and zinc in the receiving Fish Farm Pyhäjärven Lohi Oy (NKREC 2002). ditches have sometimes been higher The The use Incremental Load than in the reference areas. Seven time of feed growth Phosphorus Nitrogen kilometres down from the plant no signs period kg a-1 kg a-1 kg a-1 kg a-1 can be observed and the impact is minimal on Lakes Ätäskö and Pyhäjärvi 1987-90 72 038 45 023 445 4 270 (Suunnittelukeskus 1998, 2001, 2002). 1991-95 75 522 47 323 379 4 473 The treatment plant has some 1996 34 325 26 000 153 1 924 influence on the groundwater sources. 1997 29 225 20 875 180 1 618 In the furthest sampling point included 1998 17 350 12 393 124 960 in the monitoring conductivity, COD, 1999 2 775 2 100 19 150 nitrogen, ammonium as well as . concentration of some metals have 2002 0 0 0 0 increased. At the nearest location metal concentrations are high but conductivity and chloride are at the same level deterioration of the water quality as the background (Suunnittelukeskus showed up as sliming of fishnets, 1998, 2001, 2002). decrease of transparency and increase of algae growth on the shoreline and on stones. After farming ceased the water 3.1.3 Fish farming quality increased; the nutrient content and algae growth diminished and Fish farming, raising rainbow trout, Secchi disc increased (Niinioja & Turkka started at the lake in the 1970s. 2002, Kukkonen et al. 2003). The official Pyhäjärven Lohi Oy received the first monitoring ended in 2000. licence in 1979. The conditions for the permit were re-evaluated in 1984, 1989, 1995 and 1996 (North Karelia, decision 3.2 Diffuse loading of riparian legislation nr 20/95/3, Dnro 1066 and 1067/96). According to the Diffuse loading originates from non- licence granted in 1996, the annual point sources and ends up in surface phosphorus load should not exceed 300 waters. It is partly autonomous and kg by the end of 1998. Thereafter it partly caused by human activities. Part should be 250 kg. In the 1970s, when the of it is spread by air. Some human farming was most intensive and the activities such as agriculture and farm was unlicensed, the annual silviculture cause and increase the phosphorus load exceeded 700 kg being diffuse load. The load depends greatly some times even 800–900 kg (Table 5). on weather conditions. During rainy At the end of the 1990s production seasons the load is higher than in dry decreased dramatically and the fish farm seasons, thus partially regulating the was closed in 2002. annual size of the load into the lake. The The fish farm was the main point location of the activities and soil texture source loader in the area (Fig. 2). also affect the load. Actions next to the Monitoring the water quality in the lake cause the largest load. The release surrounding area was started 1979. The of nutrients from peat and mineral soil areas most influenced were the also vary. The calculations of the diffuse surrounding shallow bay (Vetkanlahti, load are approximations. They are trend- max. depth 9 m) and the nearest open setting values and give an assessment

water area (Heinniemenselkä). The of different factors influencing the lake. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 18 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre 3.2.1 Agriculture Table 6. Crops cultivated in the fields in 1997 (The Mi- nistry of Agriculture and Forestry, agricultural register Nutrient release from agriculture is 1998). caused by cultivation (Fig. 6) and animal Cultivated Area % husbandry. Within agriculture, the main crops ha factors causing nutrient leaching are the use of chemical and organic fertilisers, Crops 1 395 32 production leading to monoculture and Grass 2 442 58 increased animal densities. The most Set aside 293 7 intensive time for nutrient leaching Special plants 110 3 from the fields is after the snow melts Oil plants 9 < 1 in spring or after rain. The amount of Total 4 249 100 fertilisers used, cultivation methods and climate affects the amount of nutrient In 1997 there were 243 active farms in release. The loading caused by farm the drainage area of Lake Pyhäjärvi; 231 animals is mainly formed by waste of them arable farms, the total area leaking from animal shelters and grass being 4 249 ha. The crops farmed are silage. The most important problems listed in Table 6. The potential load ori- caused by the discharge are eutrophi- ginating from cultivation is calculated cation of surface waters, groundwater using estimates from Rekolainen (1989). pollution caused by nitrate leaching, It gives different leaching approxima- decreased FTU and increased bacteria tions for all the crops. The total poten- growth causing lower hygiene in the tial leaching from the drainage area is lakes. calculated at 4 260 kg phosphorus and

Fig. 6. Farmland in the distant catchment 04.392. Photo: Juho Kotanen.

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 19 60 544 kg nitrogen. Part of the load is owns about 330 ha and forestry compa- retained in the catchment basin, especi- nies about 5 200 ha. The rest is owned ally in the distant catchment areas. It is by private individuals, communities and estimated that 66 % of the phosphorus churches. and 25 % of the nitrogen leach from the Forests in a natural condition fields of distant catchment area remains circulate nutrients in the ecosystem and in the soil. So the estimated total load therefore leaching is minor. The natural from cultivation into Lake Pyhäjärvi leaching of phosphorus and nitrogen was 2 982 kg phosphorus and 52 332 kg from untouched forests is fairly nitrogen in 1997. insignificant. Silvicultural practices such In the catchment area there were as draining, logging and fertilisation 181 farms raising animals in 1997, 169 of cause leaching of nutrients and them had cattle (Table 7). The load of suspended solids from the forests and livestock reared can be estimated by the disturb the hydrological balance in the number of animals by species and the ground and groundwater levels (Kubin average nutrient concentration of their 1977, Vitousek 1983, Kenttämies & manure. The estimation of the total load Saukkonen 1995, 1996, Turkia et al. 1998, into the lake also presumes that 2.5 % of Ahtiainen & Huttunen 1999). For the total phosphorus and 4.0 % of the example, the influence of ditching on the total nitrogen is leached directly into the hydrological balance of forest ground lake. Part of the load is retained in the lasts for 15–20 years (Kenttämies & catchment basin. According to these Saukkonen 1995) and clear cutting (Fig. facts, the potential load from animal 7) increases the nutrient leach from husbandry into the lake was 527 kg forests for approximately 3 years. The phosphorus and 7 729 kg nitrogen in 1997, amount of leached nutrients depends on which gives the total potential nutrient the size of the area, methods used, soil load from agriculture to be 3 500 kg material and methods used for phosphorus and 60 000 kg nitrogen. environmental protection. Forests under silviculture leach on average 10 kg phosphorus per km2 and 200 kg km2 3.2.2 Forestry and peat mining while forests in a natural condition leach 5 kg per km2 and 130 kg per km2, Almost 83 % (47 422 ha) of the drainage respectively (Kortelainen & Saukkonen area of Lake Pyhäjärvi is forested. About 1998, Mattson et al. 2003). The nutrient 20 % of the forests are in peat bogs. The load caused from clear cutting and light Finnish National Board of Forestry scarification in the drainage area of Lake

Table 7. Number of livestock in the drainage area in 1997 (The Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, agricultural register 1998). Animal species Neighbouring Long-distance Total catchment catchment 4.391 4.392-4.399 heads heads heads

Dairy cows 713 925 1 638 Heifer etc. 558 859 1 417 Calves 453 761 1 214 Sow - 11 11 Pigs etc. - 39 39 Horses 19 18 37 Sheeps 48 222 270 Domestic fowls 74 158 232

Chickens - 20 20 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 20 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Fig. 7. Logged area next to the lake in the 1992s. A short untouched zone at the shore. Photo: North Karelia Regional Environment Centre, photograph archives. Aerial photography permit 279/92

Pyhäjärvi has been estimated by using and 7 400 kg nitrogen. The excluded the means of nutrient leach coefficients natural nutrient leach from the ground of Rekolainen (1989). under silviculture was 3 200 kg phos- Ditching causes leaching of phorus and 95 600 kg nitrogen. nutrients and suspended solids. Metsä- Exploitation of peat resources of keskus, the local forest authority, plans bogs around Lake Pyhäjärvi has been and implements forest drainage in the on target in the 1980s. There are 3 area. The total ditching in the drainage possible areas for mining, for a total of area between 1980 and 2001 is shown in 900 ha. Two of the areas are located in Fig. 8. The nutrient load caused by the northern part and one, Juutinsuo, on ditching is calculated using Kenttämies’ the western side of the lake. None of guidelines (1994). In 1998 it was them are currently in production. In 1990 approximately 80 kg phosphorus and the Water Rights appeal court 2 105 kg nitrogen. The forests have been prohibited peat mining in Juutinsuo, fertilised significantly less in the 1990s because it would have had such a large than earlier. According to forestry negative impact on water quality and authorities there has been no fish populations. In addition the profit fertilisation in the drainage area of from peat mining would have been Karelian Pyhäjärvi during the last 13 minor compared to the benefit of the years. project. The total nutrient load caused by silviculture in the Lake Pyhäjärvi catchment area is calculated as the sum 3.2.3 Fur production of loads from individual forestry practices. The total loading of forests can There are 2 fur farms in the drainage area. be estimated in several ways. In this The farms raise mink (Mustela vison) and report natural leaching from ground raccoon dogs (Nyctereutes procyonoides). under silviculture has not been added Manure from the animals is composted to the total load. The estimated nutrient and spread on the fields. One of the load in 1998 is then 300 kg phosphorus farms, located in a groundwater area, is

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 21 Hectares 700 Distant catchment 600 Neighbouring catchment 500

400

300

200

100

1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Fig. 8. The total area ditched in the neighbouring and distant catchment areas of Lake Pyhä- järvi in 1980–2001.

closing down. The estimated yearly calculated nutrient load into the lake in nutrient load in 1998 is calculated with 1998 is then 620 kg phosphorus and coefficients of Helin (1982). On average 2 500 kg nitrogen. 14 % of the nitrogen load and 7.5 % of the phosphorus load leaches into surface waters. After subtracting the 3.2.5 Summer cottages, absorbed amount, the estimated load camping areas and recreational into Lake Pyhäjärvi is 97 kg phosphorus accommondation services and 925 kg nitrogen. Construction of new summer cottages was active around the lake in the 1980s 3.2.4 Scattered settlements (Piirainen & Vänskä 1994), but slowed down at the beginning of the 1990s. The wastewater of built-up areas and Lately the demand for suitable summer dispersed settlements is the other cottage lots has again increased. Lake significant source of nutrient load. In Pyhäjärvi is a favoured area because of 1997 about 6 300 inhabitants were not short distance to services, good road connected to communal sewerage network and tolerable distances from systems in the drainage area of Lake (southern) urban areas. At present, Pyhäjärvi. Wastewater in rural areas exceptional permits are required for consists mainly from personal hygiene, building a summer cottage on the cooking, dishwashing, laundry and shoreline. toilet. The traditional on-site waste By the end of 1998 there were 1,379 water treatment method has been a two private summer cottages on the shores - or three - chamber septic tank, with no of Lake Pyhäjärvi. The increase in further treatment before discharge into summer cottages was 16 % from 1989 to a ditch or absorbing into the soil. Closed 1998. Afterwards 34 exceptional permits tanks have been required in new were applied for, of which 22 were buildings by the shoreline. granted. The estimated annual nutrient The common method for load of a residence not connected to the wastewater treatment of grey water is communal sewerage system is 0.25 kg absorption into the ground. Water phosphorus and 1 kg nitrogen per capita closets are becoming common in the (Rontu & Santala 1995). The total latest cottages. Their black water is

collected in closed septic tanks. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 22 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre The estimated annual load of 3.2.6 Leaching summer cottages not connected to public sewage systems is 0.02 kg Removal of materials by rainwater from phosphorus and 0.05 kg nitrogen (Rontu the ground is called leaching. In nature & Santala 1995). The annual load into leaching consists of water running into Lake Pyhäjärvi is calculated supposing surface waters from the ground. In this that a person occupies the summer report we include leaching from areas cottage for 60 days annually and that at with minor human interference under least 2 people live in the cottage. Thus this heading. The soil texture and climate the load was 55 kg phosphorus and are the main factors influencing the 138 kg nitrogen in 1988. amount of nutrient leach from the Three campgrounds and three ground. According to the studies by holiday villages are located in the Rekolainen (1989) leach from untouched drainage area. One of the camping areas forest ground is 5.8–8.9 kg phosphorus is reserved for caravans. The holiday per km2 a-1 and 300–310 kg nitrogen per village cabins have dry closets. The grey km2 a-1. The approximated nutrient leach waters are in some resorts collected in from the drainage area into Lake closed septic tanks and in others Pyhäjärvi is 5 510 kg phosphorus and absorbed in the ground after septic 137 000 kg nitrogen. tanks. There are four recreational camping grounds and one holiday 3.2.7 Atmospheric fallout centre (Fig. 2) in the drainage area. They have different sizes of buildings and Nutrients entering the lake along with cottages, which have varying numbers rain also increase the load. Since 1971 of beds. In addition there are saunas, the quality of rainwater has been shower rooms and cooking facilities. monitored in Finland. The nearest The capacity of accommodation is station to Lake Pyhäjärvi is located in altogether for 140 people. Accrued black Punkaharju. The average nutrient water of the water closets is collected concentration values for rainwater in into closed septic tanks. Some resorts 1995 were 0.016 mg l-1 phosphorus and have dry closets. Grey water is collected 0.780 mg l-1 nitrogen. The atmospheric into septic tanks and absorbed into the fallout into Lake Pyhäjärvi in 1985 was ground. 0.08 kg ha-1 phosphorus and 4.2 kg ha-1 The holiday centre Pajarinhovi and nitrogen (Järvinen & Vänni 1997). The the small zoo next to it are located in values are the lowest since 1990. the northern part of the lake (Fig. 2). The According to the previous numbers the holiday centre includes a hotel (about estimated yearly nutrient load to Lake 50 beds), 32 holiday cottages (for year- Pyhäjärvi is 1 642 kg phosphorus and round use), campground and restaurant. 86 180 kg nitrogen. In the past, black wastewater was collected in closed septic tanks and grey water absorbed in the ground after septic tanks. In 2003 the whole centre was connected to the enlarged Puhos wastewater treatment plant.

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 23 Water quality and the ecological

state of the lake ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 4○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ Monitoring of water quality both locally are presented in Piirainen & Vänskä and nationally in Karelian Pyhäjärvi has (1994). The water analysing has been continued since the 1960s, when the lake done mostly in North Karelia Regional was oligotrophic and clear water. The Environment Centre using Finnish sampling sites of the lake and brooks standard methods and quality assurance and small rivers are located in the map (Mitikka & Ekholm 2003, Niemi et al. of Fig. 9. In this report the average water 2001). The results are stored in HERTTA, quality of some areas between 1980 and an environmental data management 2004 is presented. The results before that system of the Finnish Environment Administration.

4.1 Water colour and Secchi disc / transparency

The average water quality colour of the lake varies between 5–15 mg Pt l-1 and Secchi disc 3.2–7.5 m. The exceptions are Hummonselkä, a separated area in the northern part of the lake, and the mouth of River Mustolanjoki, where the water colour varies between 10 to 30 mg Pt l-1 depending partly on the season. In the 1980s the intensive peat bog draining caused higher values of water colour in the mouth of River Mustolanjoki (180 mg Pt l-1 in 1987). Secchi disc observations have been going on in the lake since the 1960s. Voluntary Secchi depth observations started in March 1997. It has been carried out biweekly or monthly at 17 sites on the lake (Niinioja & Turkka 2003). The transparency observations are made with a Secchi disc (diameter 20 cm) or with the white cover of a Limnos or Ruttner type water sampler. The Secchi results are stored in a database at the North Karelia Regional Environment Centre. The environmental authorities together with voluntary observers have also carried out monitoring of algae

Fig. 9. Water sampling stations at Lake Pyhäjärvi. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 24 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre since 1998 in the vicinity of one of the rather intensive observations in several transparency observation sites (station parts of large lakes. The continuation of 100). the regular observing methods is The range of average Secchi disc important. All observations should be transparency during open water periods made in good weather and conditions, has varied between 5.3–7.8 m in 1997– preferably at the same time of day. The 2002 (Niinioja & Turkka 2003). The method can be developed but, for lowest values were detected in 2001, example, the variation due to weather when the average values of all the conditions etc. should be studied in stations were less than 7 m (4.6–6.6 m). more detail. In 2002, most of the stations exceeded 7 m. During the summer of 2001 heavy rains of brief duration occurred in June 4.2 pH, alkalinity and and July with a monthly precipitation of over 100 mm. It is suggested that oxygen concentration heavy rains then caused high leaching of particulate matter and nutrients into The pH of the lake varies between 6 and Lake Pyhäjärvi and decreased the 8. The lowest observed value, 5.5, was transparency. in the mouth of River Mustolanjoki in An increasing trend in the 1987. The highest value, 8.3, was in transparency observation values from Taipaleenselkä (station 6) in July 1982. 1981 to 2001 is reported from station 2 The pH of the out flowing water has (Fig. 10) by Niinioja & Turkka (2003) and varied around 7. Alkalinity, the buffe- also in voluntary observations of several ring capacity against acid, has increased stations. That is thought to be a sign of during the last 20 years in the whole lake. improvement of the water quality in the In the 1980s it was classified as lake. The official results and the satisfactory but now it is classified as voluntary results during the summers good (Heikkinen & Alasaarela 1988). of 1998–2002 concur with the decreasing Oxygen concentrations on average trends in chlorophyll-a maxima, nitrate have been good in the lake. In some of concentrations and DIN/DIP ratios of the deepest basins (stations 58, 159, 2 Lake Pyhäjärvi in 1976–2001 (Rekolai- and 31, map, Fig. 2) the oxygen nen et al. 2001). concentrations have decreased under Voluntary monitoring is a valuable 4 mg l-1 during stratification, but the tool for lake and lakeshore monitoring oxygen saturation has still stayed over (Niinioja & Turkka 2003). It enables 20 %, the oxygen concentration being

years 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 0

meter 6

Fig. 10.The Secchi disc transparency values at station 2 from 1980 to 2002.

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 25 then satisfactory. Station 31 was an concentrations 210–445 µg l-1 and exception in 1989. The oxygen depletion chlorophyll-a 1–5 µg l-1 (Fig. 11). The caused an increase in the concentrations concentrations have decreased slightly of phosphorus and iron in the during the 1990s, which can be hypolimnion (Kukkonen et al. 2003). interpreted as a sign of improvement in water quality. The phosphorus concentration on the Russian side is 4.3 Nutrients and around 6 µg l-1, the nitrogen consen- tration around 230 µg l-1 and the chlorophyll-a chlorophyll-a 1 µg l-1. The middle part of the lake is much The average total nutrient and more influenced by human activities chlorophyll concentrations in the than the southern part. Taipaleenselkä epilimnion during the most intensive is situated outside the municipality of growing season in Lake Pyhäjärvi are Kesälahti (station 4). There are inlets of typical of oligotrophic waters (Forsberg several ditches from agricultural areas. & Ryding 1980). Higher values have The water quality in the area can be been observed in the regions, where classified as oligotrophic according to loading has been more intensive (e.g. nutrient and chlorophyll-a concen- -1 -1 next to the fish farm and the outlet of trations (Ptot 6 µg l , Ntot 300 µg l , River Mustolanjoki). In Fig. 11–13 are chlorophyll-a < 4 µg l-1). presented the average areal total Ukonniemenselkä is a receiving nutrient and chlorophyll-a concen- bay for River Mustolanjoki, through trations in the epilimnion during which flow waters from Hanelinlampi summer (n=1–4) between 1982–2004. and the drained peat bog of Juutinsuo. Water quality of the southern part Kesälahti municipal sewage treatment of the lake has stayed almost the same plant also discharges into the ditches of during the last 20 years. The phosphorus the bog (Fig. 2). There are two sampling concentrations in the epilimnion have stations outside Mustolanjoki (stations varied between 5–10 µg l-1, nitrogen 99 and 118). The nutrient and

Fig. 11. The average total nutrient and chlorophyll-a concentrations during summer months

in the southern parts of Lake Pyhäjärvi (station 58) from 1982 to 2004. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 26 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Fig. 12. The average total nutrient and chlorophyll-a concentrations near River Mustolanjoki inlet (station 118) during summer months from 1982 to 2004. chlorophyll concentrations are high near sliming of fishing nets and algal blooms. the river inlet (Fig. 12) and lower at Divers in the lake have also noticed a station 99. The outlet water of River layer of suspended solids in the Mustolanjoki is more like the lake hypolimnium. The surrounding forests water, but the average concentrations are drained and the ditches bring in the area are still slightly higher than detritus into the lake. The concen- in other parts of the lake. trations of nutrients are much higher in The main point source loader off these creeks than in the lake (Kukkonen Cape Varmonniemi has been the fish et al. 2003). farm in the 1980s and 1990s. It caused The national monitoring station of higher nutrient and chlorophyll-a the lake (station 2), which has been -1 concentrations (Ptot 10 µg l , Ntot 250–450 monitored since the 1960s is located in µg l-1, chlorophyll-a 4–6 µg l-1) there the northern part of the lake. The when compared to the other parts of the nutrient concentrations have stayed lake. The bay next to the farm was quite stable during that time. There is a monitored during the time the farm was slight decreasing trend in the values in active. Currently, the farm is closed and recent years (Fig. 13), which can be the concentrations have decreased. The interpreted as a sign of improved water water quality has improved after closing quality. down the farm. The water quality of the separated The water quality of the large open Hummonselkä (st. 31) has improved water area beginning from the Russian during the last ten years. Before it was side can be classified as oligotrophic almost mesotrophic but currently the

(stations 130, 109, 115, 159). The total nutrient concentrations are low, Ptot 3–6 -1 -1 -1 phosphorus varies between 3–7 µg l , µg l , Ntot under 300 µg l . Chlorophyll-a total nitrogen between 180–300 µg l-1 concentrations have also stayed typical and chlorophyll-a 1–5 µg l-1. The water of oligotrophic waters, 2–3 µg l-1 and has quality has stayed the same during the stayed lower than they were in the last 20 years. Despite low values there 1980s. Run off waters of the peaty has occasionally been a slight lack of drainage carry humic substances into the oxygen in some of the deepest basins, lake. The average colour, 14–33 mg Pt l-1,

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 27 Fig. 13. The average total nutrient and chlorophyll-a concentrations of the station 2 during summer months from 1982 to 2004.

-1 and CODMn, 13–17 mg l in the but according to the monitoring results hypolimnium, are higher than in the rest the water quality is not affected by out- of the lake. let waters (Kukkonen et al. 2003). The main outlet of Lake Pyhäjärvi goes through the Puhoslampi pond to Lake Orivesi. The quality of discharging 4.4 Nutrient equilibrium waters resembles the lake water. The colour of the water has been higher in Nutrient limitation of algal growth is the past but at the present it is at the usually caused by phosphorus. The same level as is in the other parts of the bioavailable N (nitrate and ammonium) lake. The wastewater treatment plant of and P (dissolved reactive phosphorus) Puhos also discharges in to that pond, decrease to a very low level during the

Fig. 14. Nutrient ratio and balance at station 2 in 1982 and between 1994 and 2002. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 28 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre most intensive algal growth. The 4.6 Water quality DIN:DIP nutrient ratios and nutrient balance were calculated with equations classification (e.g. Forsberg et al. 1978, Salonen et al. 1992) to determine the limiting nutrient Before the approval of the water in Lake Pyhäjärvi. The most extensive framework directive (EU 2002), Finnish data to be used was from the northern surface waters were divided into five station 2. According to the results the quality classes on the basis of oxygen limiting nutrient during August was content, colour, turbidity, transparency, phosphorus in 1982 (Fig. 14). From 1994 nutrients, hygienic indicator bacteria, to 2002 nitrogen became the limiting chlorophyll-a, algal blooms and toxic nutrient for algal growth in summer. It compounds (www.environment.fi). It benefits blue-green algae since they are provided an overall view of water good competitors for nitrogen. quality in a lake and described the suitability of the water for water supply, fishing and recreational activities. The 4.5 Water quality of the present classification of Lake Pyhäjärvi is based on data between 1994 and 1997. inflowing waters and small Most of the lake is classified as excellent lakes in the drainage area (Niinioja et al. 1996, 1999, 2005, www.environment.fi). Some of the Several streams and ditches enter Lake areas with most human interference are Pyhäjärvi. Many of them go through in lower classes: areas further from the drained peat bogs and forested areas. fish farm are classified as satisfactory, The water quality and rate of flow of the mouth of River Mustolanjoki is the outlets vary greatly depending on good and the outlet of Ätäskö good. the weather conditions and activities in Taipaleenselkä and Hummonselkä used the drainage area. The flow is fast and to be classified good but the water transport of sediment is high especially quality of those parts has improved to in spring. The largest inflow is River excellent. The water quality of Lake Mustolanjoki. Nutrient concentrations, Ätäskö is influenced by the surrounding colour, turbidity and pH differ from the drained areas and cultivated fields and -1 water quality of the lake; Ptot 10–98 µg l , classified as passable. -1 Ntot 260–2 230 µg l , colour 15–600 mg Pt The criteria of classification in l-1, turbidity 1.3–17 FTU and pH 3.7–7.46. Finland will change to meet the demand Dissolved nutrients are easily of the EU Water Framework Directive. accessible for algae. PO4-phosphorus Future classification will be based on concentrations are high in almost all the ecological and chemical status of ditches entering the lake. High nitrate surface waters. The proportion of concentrations are typical of runoff biological variables will increase in waters from cultivated fields. Nitrate monitoring programmes. and ammonium concentrations are high in ditches entering the southern areas and Taipaleenselkä (station 42). 4.7 Ecological state of the There are all together 106 ponds and lakes in the drainage area of the lake lake. The largest and most closely connected is Ätäskö, a mesotrophic and Lake Pyhäjärvi represents an humic (dystrophic) lake. Small lakes in oligotrophic clear water lake and has the drainage area have been studied less been an object of many ecological except Ätäskö and Hanelinlampi, which studies. The biological objects studied are more closely connected to Lake include macrozoobenthos, zooplankton, Pyhäjärvi than the others.

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 29 periphyton, phytoplankton, fishing and 4.7.2 Aquatic macrophytes fish population, macrophyte and sedimentary diatoms. The data collected Along with phytoplankton and forms a good basis for further research periphyton studies macrophyte and development. vegetation was analysed in Lake Pyhäjärvi in 1981 (Meriläinen & Kokko 1982, Meriläinen et al. 1987). On the 4.7.1Phytoplankton, periphyton Finnish side the macrophyte vegetation and algal observations was typical of oligotrophic lakes except near the loading points where it showed The phytoplankton of the lake has been an increased nutrient status. The monitored regularly since 1963 in the Russian side was dominated by national sampling station 2 (Fig. 10, oligotrophic species. In 2002 another Heinonen 1980, Turkia 1986, Lepistö et study of macrophytes in Lake Pyhäjärvi al. 2003). Since the 1960s only minor was carried out in the project “Assessment changes in the phytoplankton biomass of the Ecological State of an Oligotrophic and in species composition have Lake – as exemplified by the Transboundary occurred. In the 1980s exceptionally the Lake Pyhäjärvi on the Finnish-Russian phytoplankton biomasses and also the Border”. amount of Cyanophyceae were notably The high visibility in Lake high. The spatial variation was studied Pyhäjärvi creates good conditions for in 2002 from five different stations the growth and production of typical (stations 2, 4, 31, 58 and 96, Holopainen submerged macrophytes species of an et al. 2003) and it showed some spatial oligotrophic lake (Luotonen et al. 2003). variation in phytoplankton biomass and The main littoral habitat of the lake is species composition. Biomass was stony (a heterogeneous habitat almost twofold at sampling station 2, substrate varying from cobbles to blocks close to the outlet of the lake, compared with sandy areas between) and in some to the other basins in 2002. parts of the lake homogeneous sandy Voluntary algal bloom monitoring bottoms. The areas consisting of organic has been ongoing since 1998 at the lake. substrate are few located in small areas During that time 10 out of 70 near bogs or near the impact of point or observations had algal blooms non-point loading sources. The species (Niinioja et al. 2003). The dominant composition varies according to the genus in the blooms has been Anabaena littoral habitat. The frequency and the and especially the species Anabaena species coverage vary greatly between lemmermannii. Besides monitoring, 56 the different habitats, as well as within samples of algal bloom have been the same habitat. Typical macrophytes collected by citizens during the open of the lake are dominant isoetids species water periods between 1989 and 2002. such as Lobelia dortmanna L. (Fig. 15), The periphyton and phyto- Littorella uniflora Asch. Isoëtes lacustris L., plankton of Lake Pyhäjärvi were I. echinosphora Durieu, Subularia aquatica studied in 1981 (Meriläinen & Kokko L. and Eleocharia acicularis (L.) Roem. & 1982, Meriläinen et al. 1987). The Schult. Typical helophytes are Phragmites periphyton was dominated mainly by australis (Cav.), Equisetum fluviatile L. oligotrophic species. Mesotrophic and in small very restricted areas also species were abundant near loading Schoenoplectus lacustris (L.) Palla. The points. The phytoplankton data agreed most abundant elodeids are with the periphyton data but in a lower Myriophyllum alterniflorum DC. range. Potamogeton gramineus L., P. perfoliatus L.,

Sparganium gramineum Georgi and in ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 30 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Fig. 15. Lobelia dortmanna. Photo: Mauri Rautkari, Nature photograph archives. some areas also Elodea canadensis Michx., 40 % and rotifers about 10 %. The Nymhaeids are located mostly in the zooplankton fauna is typical areas with organic substrate; typical ofoligotrophic waters and does not species are Nuphar lutea (L.) Sibth. & Sm. reflect eutrophication. The biomass of and Potamogeton natans L. The zooplankton fauna in the Russian side vegetation is typical of oligotrophic, was low (129–237 µg l-1) in 1978–1980. clear water lakes. Eutrophic species are The values are much lower compared to common at loading points. the Finnish side, but the study methods are not comparable to each other (Rahkola-Sorsa 2001). 4.7.3 Zooplankton

Zooplankton on the Finnish side of Lake 4.7.4 Benthic invertebrates Pyhäjärvi have been studied by the Karelian Institute, Department of The first comprehensive benthic Ecology in 1996 and 1999 (Haakana 1999, invertebrate study in Lake Pyhäjärvi Rahkola-Sorsa 2001) and by Ryzkov et was conducted in 1984 (Paasivirta 1987). al. (1987) on the Russian side in 1978– It included several study areas and 1980. The areas studied have been a bay depths (5–26 m). A comparison of the off the fish farm and a bay in the effects on the fish farm to the southern part representing the reference surrounding area was also conducted. area. The results of 1996 revealed only According to the results the fauna was minor differences between the two typical of oligotrophic waters. The studied areas. The number of Cladocera eutrophication caused by the fish farm was slightly higher at the fish farm than showed up in only a few areas. Benthic in the reference area during June to July invertebrates revealed increased (Haakana 1999). The average zoo- nutrient concentrations in a spot in the plankton biomass was slightly higher southern part and also in the separated (1 060 µg l-1) at the fish farm in 1999 than Hummonselkä. in 1996 (733 µg l-1, Rahkola-Sorsa 2001). Benthic invertebrates in the station In both years the fauna was dominated 2 (Fig. 9) have been sampled by copepods 50 % followed by Daphnia concurrently with national lake

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 31 monitoring in 1989–1992. In the results, Brown trout, Salmo trutta L. the species assemblages exemplified an Whitefish, Coregonus lavaretus L. increased nutrient status, but ratios Ruff, Gymnocephalus cernua L. between species had stayed stable, Grayling, Thymallus thymallus L. which revealed stable conditions in the Three-spined stickleback, Gasterosteus bottom/hypolimnium (Nurmi 1998). aculeatus L. Virnes (2001) studied benthic Pikeperch, Stizostedion lucioperca L. invertebrates off the fish farm and as a Bream, Abramis brama L. reference site the same bay as in Burbot, Lota lota L. Haakana (1999) and Rahkola-Sorsa’s Smelt, Osmerus eperlanus L. (2001) studies. The results resembled the Vendace, Coregonus albula L. results of the zooplankton studies. At Bleak, Alburnus alburnus L. the fish farm the increased number of White bream, Blicca bjoerkna L. oligochaetes revealed higher nutrient Arctic char, Salvelinus alpinus L. status in sediments. Anyhow, the Bullhead, Cottus gobio L. species and number of individuals in Minnow, Phoxinus phoxinus L. deep water off the farm were the same Stone loach, Noemacheilus barbatulus L. as in other oligotrophic lakes. The benthic fauna of littoral areas showed no clear differences between the areas. Fish populations, especially vendace, The species assemblage was dominated have been widely studied (e.g. Auvinen mainly by oligotrophic species. The 1987a, b, 1988a, b, 1995, Auvinen & Nur- number of individuals varied in the mio 2001, Westermark 2002). Ryzkov et littoral mainly because of diversity in al. (1987) have studied fish populations habitats. in the Russian side. The local voluntary The profundal fauna of an people (Karjalan Pyhäjärvi ry.) have oligotrophic and clear water lake may also participated in fish stock studies. reflect mesotrophic conditions. That is They have done several samplings with partly caused by the deep productive survey nets. The population of vendace layer. In a clear water lake the has varied during the last 20 years and concentration of phytoplankton is low is at the present around 70 000 kg a-1. but the productive layer may be thicker The ecological status of Lake than in mesotrophic lakes (Meriläinen Pyhäjärvi was assessed in test fishing 1992). Under these circumstances the in 2002 as a part of the project “Assessment productive layer may maintain a of the ecological state of the transboundary mesotrophic profundal fauna. waters” (Tammi et al. 2003). For the study the lake was divided into 8 areas two of them being on the Russian side. The lake 4.7.5 Fishes was test fished with multimesh survey nets. The results revealed that fish The ichtyofauna of the lake is in rather communities consisted mostly of perch. good condition. The most usual catch of Based on the results the water quality the lake is perch and roach. On the basis of the northern areas can be assessed as of catches the lake is populated by good and the rest of the lake as excellent. several fish species (e.g. Ryzkov et al. 1987, Westermark 2002):

Perch, Perca fluviatilis L. Roach, Rutilus rutilus L. Pike, Esox lucius L.

Ide, Leuciscus idus L. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 32 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Plan of water and aquatic

ecosystem protection ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 5 5.1 Introduction water quality variables, such as phytoplankton community, macro- In the past water protection in Finland phytes, benthic fauna and fish. was implemented mainly according to national policy-making and legislation. After Finland became a member of the 5.2 State of the lake European Union (EU) in 1995, the Water Framework Directive (WFD) and the Community regulation have provided Problems and suggested actions a framework for the water protection required to restore the lake. policy in Finland. The third national water protection programme was adopted by the Finnish Government in 5.2.1 Loading change between 1998 giving the objectives in water 1990-1997/1998 protection up to 2005 (The Environment Ministry 1998). The programme The estimated nutrient load into Lake stipulates that the Ministry of the Pyhäjärvi has decreased since 1990. The Environment together with the phosphorus load has decreased 55 % and representatives of various sectors must nitrogen 12 % (Table 9, Fig. 16). The prepare a programme of action, phosphorus load has diminished incorporating the details of jointly especially from point sources. Some agreed measures and action to be taken loading sources have also closed or are on water protection in general and on closing. The proportion of some ex- specific pollutants, in order to meet the loaders has been relatively small and the targets set. It set out the relevant frame effects concentrated in the surrounding for planners, policy-makers and those areas. monitoring water protection schemes. The importance of a diminishing Currently the water legislation diffuse load has accentuated when the needs harmonising in relation to the EU point load has decreased. The high regulation. Some amendments in acts proportion of diffuse loads originates have been done and are being processed. from leaching and atmospheric fall out, In addition the law for organising which are both hard to diminish. Other management of water basins is before diffuse loaders are agriculture and the Finnish parliament (September forestry. In Table 9 the load from forestry 2004). Water quality monitoring is also practices also includes leaching from the changing. Various EU directives and ground due to silviculture. It has been other international obligations direct taken into account so that the results are the future development of water quality more relevantly comparable with monitoring. According to the WFD, numbers calculated in the beginning of ecological classification of surface 1990 (Piirainen & Vänskä 1994). The waters should be used in assessing numbers of point sources are true values water quality. Ecological classification whereas the numbers of diffuse load are will be based on measured biological estimates, which are affected by several

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 33 Table 9. Estimated load of phosphorus and nitrogen into Lake Pyhäjärvi in 1990 and 1998. Phosphorus Nitrogen The change The change Year 1990 1998 1990–1998 1990 1998 1990–1998 Loading source kg kg % kg kg % Municipal waste water 200 30 -85 4 500 5 200 16 Fish farming 400 200 -50 4 700 1 600 -66 Animal husb. 1 500 500 -67 8 300 7 700 -7 Cultivation 3 300 3 000 -9 45 000 52 000 16 Agriculture total 4 800 3 500 -27 53 000 60 000 13 Ditching 300 80 -73 5 500 2 100 -62 Forestry total 5 900 3 500 -41 101 000 103 000 2 Fur farming 1 600 100 -94 8 200 900 -89 Atmospheric fall out 5 500 1 800 -67 136 000 96 800 -29 Total 20 000 9 000 -96 316 000 272 000 -14

Fig. 16. Nutrient load into Lake Pyhäjärvi in 1990 and 1998, a) phosphorus, b) nitrogen. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 34 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre factors and are not accurate. For Construction on the shore changes example, the effect of used water the scenery. Too close riparian protection activities done in the area is construction affects the natural hard to take into account. In addition vegetation and fauna and the load from the calculation methods in 1990 and dense habitation is much higher than 1997/1998 differ slightly. from a sparsely populated area. Silvicultural practices such as draining, clear cutting and ploughing change the 5.2.2 Problems included in the scenery on the shores and cause nutrient lake leach into the lake. Wide buffer zones between the shoreline and treated areas - methods and goals for protection diminish the effects. The protection of Lake Pyhäjärvi The aim of the protection is to keep Lake can be implemented in several ways. Pyhäjärvi in an oligotrophic and natural The first is restrictions in licences given condition and maintain at least the to point source loaders in the drainage current stock of fish. Problems existing area. The second is teaching and in the lake and in its aquatic nature in advising people about more protective relation to water protection targets for methods in activities that may cause 2005 -programme are listed in Table 10. deterioration in water quality. The third Since point source loading has is direct activities in the lake: for decreased the main focus has been example, fish fauna can be restored by directed at diffuse loading in Lake manipulation of the food chain. Pyhäjärvi. Rivers and ditches run Officially it can also be affected by nutrient, detritus and humus from comprehensive riparian plans and agricultural and silvicultural areas. The planning, which control the number of load is clearly seen especially in spring cottages by the shore areas. By keeping when snow melt waters flow into the the water quality high, the lake will stay lake. Most of the ditches end directly in appropriate and sustainable for the lake; there are no buffer zones recreational use and also a source for between the lake and the ditch. The clean, healthy water. detritus and solid substances Other threats to Lake Pyhäjärvi are accumulate in the hypolimnion. Local Lake Ätäskö, Lake Hanelinlampi and divers have reported a metre deep layer River Mustolanjoki. River Mustolanjoki of solid substances in the deep water. In originates in Lake Hanelinlampi, a small the long run the decomposition of the lake surrounded by peat bogs and organic matter in the bottom can cause agriculture. The nutrient status and oxygen depletion. The suspended solids production are much higher in the lake are also partly disrupting planted than in Lake Pyhäjärvi, in 2001 total crayfish by filling their small hiding phosphorus was 71 µg l-1, total nitrogen places. 1 100 µg l-1 and chlorophyll-a 52 µg l-1.

Table 10. The problems related to the utilisation and protection of Lake Pyhäjärvi and its aquatic nature (based on Mononen et al. 1994). Object The problem Fishing sliming of nets, the increase of roach Aquatic nature changes in native fauna and flora, built shoreline, increase of aquatic vegetation Landscape shoreline development, densely built holiday homes, ditching, clear cutting Recreational use algal blooms, swimmer’s itch Utilisation of water algal blooms

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 35 Fig. 17. Scenery of Lake Ätäskö. Photo: Helge Rummukainen.

Lake Ätäskö is a large, 13 sq km, water harvested. The restoration began in 2002 body closely connected to Lake and by August 2002 30 % of the planned Pyhäjärvi (Fig. 17). The water quality of activities were completed. The effects the lake was poor but has improved in of the restoration are monitored by recent years. Currently, the water colour sampling the streams and ditches in the is 30–140 mg Pt l-1, average summer total restored area. The monitoring continues phosphorus in the epilimnion is around to 2004 and the final report of the project 25 µg l-1, total nitrogen 570 µg l-1 and is planned for 2005. chlorophyll-a 11 µg l-1. 78 % of the drainage area is forested and 13 % is in agricultural use. Agri- and silvicultural 5.3 Water-protective activities have influenced the lake and algal blooms are usual almost every measures in different fields summer (Kukkonen et al. 2003). Restoration of Lake Ätäskö is ongoing in co-operation with local 5.3.1 Agriculture people and the water and forestry authorities (LT-Kuopio 2000, 2001a, Finland’s third programme of water 2001b, Anon. 2002). The aim of the protection targets for 2005 (Council of project is to improve the water quality State 19.3.1998) sets out the targets for and recreational possibilities of the lake. phosphorus and nitrogen reductions in The activities for restoration and agriculture. According to the decree 50 % protection include establishment of of the average loading level in 1990– filter strips of vegetation between 1993 of both phosphorus and nitrogen waterways and cultivated fields and leach originating from crop fields should ditching outlets. Old ditches are be cut and 85 % of nutrient leach in restored to almost natural conditions animal husbandry.

and vegetation in littoral zone is being ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 36 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Water protection in agriculture is 5.3.1.2 Water-protective measures directed by laws and by decrees and in agriculture decisions based on laws. One of the most important is the decree of The The estimated agricultural load to Lake Council of the State given in 2000 (931/ Pyhäjärvi in 1997/98 was 3 500 kg 2000). It is based on the EU Nitrogen phosphorus and 60 000 kg nitrogen, Directive (91/676/EU) and targets the which are 33 % and 22 %, respectively, reduction of nitrates originating from of the total load. The phosphorus load agriculture. It regulates, for example, has decreased 22 % since 1990 and the storage conditions of manure and the nitrogen load increased 12 %; the use of manure and other fertilisers in the increase originating mainly from fields. The cutting of nutrient leach in cultivation. The decrease in farm agriculture aims to fulfil the enviro- animals has diminished the load from nmental regulations of European Union. animal husbandry. The numbers of both years are estimates and cannot be compared directly to each other because 5.3.1.1 Agro-environmental of slightly differing calculation subsidies methods. In addition the reduced nutrient load of environmentally Water protection measures in friendly cultivation methods is hard to agriculture can be financed with an estimate in calculations. environmental aid subsidy Increased use of chemical and or- (www.mmm.fi/english/agriculture/ ganic fertilisers and the trend of agri- environment/). Environmental support cultural production towards monocul- is compensation for the costs and tures and higher animal densities cause income losses due to the required an increase in nutrient levels in surface measures, in addition it includes an waters and deterioration in the long run. incentive. With the help of Ploughing fields in the autumn, parti- environmental support the aim is to cularly in cereal crop production, leaves reduce the load on the environment, in the fields with no protective vegetati- particular, surface waters and on cover for winter and spring, which groundwater as well as the air through are periods of higher rainfall and nut- more efficient utilisation of plant rient leaching. nutrients and reduction of the risk due The load originating from to the use of pesticides. Environmental agriculture can be decreased at a support for the programming period reasonable cost by using good farming 2000–2006 consists of the basic and practices. Some of the methods, such as additional measures intended for all preventing nutrient loss and using farmers and special measures requiring accurate fertilisation, can be money more efficient environmental protection saving. It is estimated that restrictions and management measures. The on the use of fertilisers and manure, support is based on the arable area. In establishment of filter strips of the programming period 2000–2006 the vegetation along waterways, and an EU contributes, on average, 56 % of the increase in the vegetation covering environmental support. The provisions fields in the wintertime will reduce the for it are laid down in the Government total phosphorus load by 30 %. Decree on the criteria for compensatory Additional methods in agricultural allowances and environmental support water protection are (www.mmm.fi, (644/2000) of 26 June 2001. For more www.environment.fi): information look at the brochures published by the Ministry of · Conservation tillage reduces erosion Agriculture and Forestry or their (conservation tillage can be no tillage, Internet pages (www.mmm.fi). spring tillage or reduced tillage e.g. use of a cultivator instead of a plough).

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 37 · Fields should be ploughed parallel to can be used for, the condition of the shoreline to reduce erosion. equipment and those eligible to · Fields, where the slope exposure is to spread pesticides. the lake, are not ploughed in autumn. · Within animal shelters, the nitrate · Fallow ground instead of ploughed decree includes instructions on field protects the ground from erosion manure storage, handling and and retains nutrients in it. It is spreading. The storage must be leak- suggested that a vegetation cover be proof and maintained. The storage has maintained especially during winter. to be big enough to store the yearly · Proper functioning covered drains output of dung. Optionally manure slow down the current on the ground can be delivered to a user, who has a and force the leaching water to go licence, regulated by environmental through the ground and make the use law, for that purpose. of nutrients by plants more efficient. · The liquid in grass silage should be · Wide filter strips of vegetation along placed in tanks. Runoff waters from the waterways prevent the load from farmyards, milking sheds and surface runoff. buildings used for livestock can be · Sedimentation basins in the main infiltrated into the soil or otherwise ditches gather suspended matter. treated if there is no risk of them · Hygrophytes along the shore purify ending up in surface waters. runoff waters. · New methods for water protection in · Fertilising should be done when it agriculture and animal husbandry will causes least nutrient leach. be suggested for adoption. The latest · The use of manure as a fertiliser is methods for environmental pro- regulated by the decree of the Council tection at the farm level should be of the State. According to the decree applied. That involves setting the spreading manure is forbidden environmental protection targets and between October 15 and April 14, with drawing up an action plan jointly by some exceptions. The manure should the farmers and local authorities. always be spread on unfrozen ground More information about enviro- and never in areas where it can be nmentally friendly farming methods, connected with flood areas. The field licences and laws and orders related must be ploughed within a day after to farming can be got from local dressing with manure and in autumn agriculture and environment immediately after spreading. The authorities. nutrients in manure have to be taken into account in the fertilising plan. · Over 50 % of the fields in the 5.3.2 Fur farming catchment basins Lake Pyhäjärvi are grass. Therefore, special attention According to water protection targets should be paid to the fertilisation of for 2005 the nutrient load from fur grass fields. The fertilising should be farming should be decreased by 55 % done while establishing the field. Top from the estimated average of 1993. dress fertilisation of grass fields with There were two fur farms in the drainage phosphorus increases phosphorus area of Lake Pyhäjärvi. One of them, leaching and should be avoided. located in the groundwater area, is · The use of pesticides is established in closing down. The proportion of the law (The Pesticide Act 327/1969, nutrient load from fur farms is very Poisonous Substance Decree 729/1995 small, but they can affect the inlet areas, and The Chemical Act 744/1989). It if the water leaks into the lake.

regulates the purposes that pesticides ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 38 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre The load from fur farming can be of Agriculture and Forestry Publications decreased by renovating old and 2/1999, www.environment.fi). This leaking facilities and planning proper programme was designed to meet the waste treatment and drying facilities. demands set by international forest The investments can have environ- policy, but had also far-reaching effects mental support. The nitrate decree given in Finland. The programme was by the State Council also covers fur approved 4 March 1999 by the farming and must be taken into account, Government. The aim of the Forest especially in handling, storage and Programme was to establish a spreading of manure. The manure favourable level of protection for the should be removed frequently from forest species and habitats. The below the cages and composted or used programme is implemented in as a fertiliser. Filtration waters can be accordance with the forest and absorbed into the ground if they are no environmental legislation and the threat to ground or surface water. New Environmental Programme for Forestry fur farms should be located in places 2005. The amount of certain forestry where there is no threat to surface activities will increase by 2010, therefore waters and where the surrounding it follows that a careful environmental environment will not be disturbed impact assessment is a justifiable part significantly. The new facilities should of the National Forest Programme be constructed using the best available process. technology and equipment. According to the forest programme ditch cleaning and supplementary drainage in Finland will 5.3.3 Forestry be increased from 75 000 hectares to 110 000 hectares per year. The main- Water protection in silvicultural tenance and use of the drainage sites practices is regulated by legislation in must be analysed as an entity which Finland. The goals for protection are set includes the water management, the out in The National Forest programme nutrient balance, the need for thinning, 2010 (Ministry of Agriculture and regeneration, transport and road access, Forestry 1999), Environmental ecosystem management and, in Programme for Forestry in 2005 particular, the protection of the water (Ministry of Forestry and Agriculture system. In suitable places key biotopes and Ministry of Environment 1994) and can be restored to their natural in Finland’s third programme of targets condition. The load imposed on the for water protection by 2005 (Ministry water system by drainage restoration of Environment 1998). According to the should be continuously decreased. The programmes both phosphorus and construction of forest roads will drop nitrogen load into surface waters should from 2 000 kilometres to about 1 000 be decreased 50 % compared to the kilometres a year. The nutrient and average level in 1993. In addition the suspended solids load from forestry load of suspended solids and metals into practices may further decrease from the the lake should be obstructed contemporary levels, because the (www.forest.fi/). recommendations of the national environmental programme for forestry 5.3.3.1 Finland’s National Forest will affect forestry practices. However, Programme 2010 such progress is endangered if the total volume of the forest sector increases. The reformation of Finnish forest legislation was done in the end of 1990s. At the same time the Government decided to initiate the drafting of a National Forest Programme (Ministry

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 39 5.3.3.2 Environmental Programme · First-time drainage is prohibited in for Forestry in 2005 peat bogs of a natural state. That refers to an ecosystem, which gathers peat, The Ministry of Agriculture and and where people have not interfered Forestry and the Ministry of the with the natural water balance or Environment approved the Environ- nature. The criterion does not prevent mental Programme for Forestry in 1994 the drainage of other types of ground (Ministry of Forestry and Agriculture for forest management or for and Ministry of Environment 1994). It regeneration purposes, nor the specifies the objectives and procedures provision of single drains in peat for the sustainable forest management bogs. Undrained parts in old drainage of a target holding in Finland in 2005. areas can be drained in connection The main points in the environmental with supplementary ditching if the protection have been the revision of the draining is well adapted to the main forest legislation and nature purpose and does not endanger the conservation legislation, as well as the biodiversity of peat bogs and forests. overall financing programme for Peat bogs reserved for peat production conservation programmes. The are not included in the criterion. recommendations of the national · Water protection plan of drainage area environmental programme for forestry has to be incorporated in the drain will affect forestry practices. The issues maintenance plan drafted by the related to water protection include forest organisations. The water body several orders. protection plan consists of issues such as: the impact of measures to the level 5.3.3.3 Finnish Forest Certification of the water table, protection methods System for especially valuable habitats, possible danger of corrosion, Finnish Forest Certification System inclination ratios and conduction of (FFCS) has been designed to meet local water, water body protection Finnish conditions. Certification measures and their dimension. indicates impartially and reliably that · A buffer zone is left along the shores forests and forest ecosystems of Finland and banks of waterways and minor should be sustainable managed. The later bodies in timber haulage, ditch certification consists of criteria, which cleaning and supplementary ditching, are based on several issues. They agree forest fertilisation, site preparation well also with local Forest programme and prescribed burning. As a basis for 2001–2005 of North Karelia and applying the criterion the appropriate Southeast Finland. Among other criteria recommendations in “The forestry water the certificate includes orders related to protection guide” (Hänninen et al. 1995) water protection, for example, (for more should be taken in account. definite explanation see www.ffcs- finland.org): The buffer zone is a marginal strip that is left between the area under · The new forest road construction development and the water system or plans drafted by the forest small body of water, for the purposes of organisations should include water or ecosystem protection. It takes assessment of environmental impacts up solid matter and nutrients from and a study on biological and loading. Timber harvesting is allowed environmental values. The in the buffer zone, but site preparation environmental report must include and removing ground vegetation during the impact of road construction on logging and silvicultural practices are waterways and required water not allowed. The width of the buffer

protection measures. zone is determined by the inclination of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 40 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre the ground surface, soil type, forestry of maintenance and supplemental measures and by the nature and area of ditching. According to the new forest the watershed and water system. programme, maintenance ditching should increase 20 % when compared · In soil scarification a method suitable to the ditching done in 1996–1999 in the for the site and as light as possible is private forests (Pohjois-Karjalan used. Deep ploughing is not used in metsäohjelma 2001–2005, Forest mineral soils. On inclines, leaching is programme of North Karelia 2001– prevented by means of suitable 2005). measures. In deep ploughing the The total nutrient load, calculated depth of the ploughing on a site as a total load from single forestry exceeds 25 cm on average. The practices, is today less than ten years restriction on ploughing depth does ago. During the last few years nature not apply to hummocking or conservation and environmental hummocking with ditches. The buffer protection have attracted more attention zones of water systems are not in forestry policies. In Finland this means scarified at all. in particular the protection of waters and · Forest fertilisation is prohibited in the water habitats. buffer zones of waterways and minor Environmental impacts due to water bodies, in the valuable key silvicultural practices can be minimised habitats (see criterion number 10 in greatly by proper planning and timing. FFCS, www.ffcs-finland.org) and in It includes suitable timing and groundwater areas important for appropriate methods for the area. Both water supply. Highly soluble surface and groundwater are included fertilisers are spread only when the in the protection. In the following ground is not frozen. Wood ash is not section some water protection methods included in forest fertilisers. The are presented in addition to those extension of the criterion to apply mentioned in the certificate. More also to wood ash is taken into information can be obtained from Tapio, consideration after additional the forestry development centre, the information from the ash spreading Internet and Hänninen et al. (1995). experiments has been acquired. · Water protection methods in draining 5.3.3.4 Water-protective measures depend greatly on the characteristics in silvicultural practices of the area. The methods used should to be planned at the particular site and Forested lands dominate the drainage should be more intensive near water basins of Lake Pyhäjärvi, especially the areas than further away. Even before northern part (Fig. 18). The nutrient and planning, it should be considered if suspended solids load from forestry the draining is really needed and will practices has decreased in the last 15 the results meet the purpose. years; the annual volume of silvicultural · The best time for draining is during practices was less in the end of 1990s the dry season. than in the beginning of 1990. The · Other silvicultural practices such as estimated phosphorus load decreased scarification or fertilisation should be about 40 % since the beginning of the avoided when draining. 1990s. The estimated nitrogen load · Draining of large areas should be increased 2 %. The calculation methods divided into several years. differ slightly between the years. The · The ditches should flow slowly and fertilisation of forests has drastically they should never end directly in a decreased in ten years. During the last lake, river or stream. Instead they ten years there has been no fertilisation should end in buffer zones or according to the local forestry infiltration areas and far enough to be authorities. In the future there is a threat outside the flood zone.

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 41 Fig. 18. Forested shore line at Lake Pyhäjärvi. Photo: Juho Kotanen.

· Ditches should have dams to slow · Buffer zones are used between down the current. In addition ditching operated areas and water areas. and maintenance breaks should be · Scarification on the incline should be left. Over the breaks the flow will done transversal to the slope. continue as an over land flow. · Ploughing of mineral soils is avoided. · Sedimentation basins, side holes 1–2 · Forest roads are built in the areas m3, are recommended along the where they cause least destruction to ditches. They will decrease the flow waterways. and collect solid matter. The side holes should be already in the upper sections To minimise the nutrient load in forest of ditches. fertilisation several issues should be · Old tortuous streams that have been observed. rejected in previous ditching should be restored to use. Old stones · When a forest is fertilised, nutrient removed earlier from the ditches content should be equal to the need. should be replaced. · Slowly soluble fertilisers are · In groundwater basins ditching is not recommended. recommended and heavy methods in · Protected areas, rank vegetation areas scarification should be avoided. and buffer zones are not fertilised. · 10-15 m zones next to creeks and 50 m Cutting and scarification increases zone to shores are left with out erosion and washout of the nutrients. fertilisers. Water protection methods of cutting · Fertilising acid peat bogs with and scarification are very much the same phosphorus is not recommended. as in draining. · Unproductive peat bogs are not fertilised. · The load can be decreased by timing; · Peat bogs located in important the best cutting time is in winter when groundwater areas are not fertilised. the ground is frozen. · In addition chemical pesticides should

be avoided. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 42 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Fig. 19. A dam in a ditch. Photo: Helge Rummukainen.

5.3.4 Sparsely populated areas together with national goals that are set and summer cottages by requirements of recipient waters. All recipient waters in Finland are sensitive The significance of wastewater pol- but the sensitivity has not been defined lution from rural areas has grown as according to the nutrient. treatment of municipal wastewater has The Ministry of Environment has improved over the last decade. Currently prepared a new decree on the demands the phosphorus load to water bodies for wastewater treatment in areas not from the sparsely populated areas with connected to public sewerage. It was no public wastewater services is higher accepted in June 2003 and came into force than the total phosphorus load from the in 2004. In the proposal more efficient settlements served by public sewerage sewage treatment than septic tanks are and wastewater treatment required (www.environment.fi). The (www.environment.fi). suitable methods depend partly on the Membership of the European lot and distance from surface waters. Union and other international and More advanced methods are required bilateral agreements affect the closer to waters. Soil absorption requirements for wastewater treatment systems, package wastewater in Finland (www.environment.fi). All treatment plants and holding tanks for regulations of the Council Directive collecting toilet wastewater are concerning urban wastewater treatment becoming common. According to the have been incorporated into Finnish proposal all localities not connected to legislation. The Finnish Government the public sewerage has to define the Resolution on the Water Protection wastewater they produce and how they Targets to 2005 reflects these demands treat it.

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 43 5.3.4.1 Goals in the 2000s for the toilet used, other facilities and the wastewater treatment density of population in the area. There are several methods for decreasing the load from sparsely populated areas. According to the Water Protection Targets to 2005 the organic load from · If the area is populated densely scattered settlements should be reduced enough sewerage covering several by 60 % and the phosphorus load by 30 % houses is recommended. Treating of the average situation in the early capacity of a large unit is usually more 1990s. In addition methods decreasing effective than in many small ones. the nitrogen of wastewater should be · In the shore area, the use of earth or developed and adopted. To achieve dry closets is recommended. The these goals, several legislative, waste of a dry closet can be composted administrative, informative and along with other biological waste. financial measures need to be taken. · If water closets are built, they should Wastewater from new or renovated be equipped with a closed tank or the houses should be treated by the best property must have a small sewage available technology and on-site treatment plant of its own. The tanks wastewater treatment should be must be emptied regularly and the improved in 60 000 houses and in 50 000 sludge transferred to a treatment holiday homes by 2005. plant for proper treatment. The number of summer cottages · Gray waters can be allowed to settle on the shores of Lake Pyhäjärvi has in septic tanks and after that infiltrate grown continuously. 186 new holiday into the ground, never directly into homes were built between 1989 and surface waters. 1997. Since 1997 34 new construction · Detergents having phosphorus as an licences have been issued. The year ingredient should be avoided in the round use of summer cottages is areas lacking a proper wastewater growing along with the increase in spare treatment system. time, which causes a need for more · The wastewater equipment should be luxury equipment in the cottages. kept in proper condition and Currently, washing machines and water maintained regularly. It should be closets are desired for the holiday renewed when more efficient homes. That will increase the amount equipment is available. of wastewater and the need for treatment plants. Holiday homes, which are often situated close to the shorelines, are not usually connected to 5.3.5 Shore land development, the public sewer and this causes dredging, mowing of aquatic pollution problems. Developing a water vegetation and other activities supply and sewerage services would affecting the riparian zone decrease the nutrient flow from sparsely It should be in the private and public populated areas. interest to keep the shores and lakes in The best methods for water as natural condition as possible. Shore protection in sparsely populated areas land development, for example, building would be to be connected to public summer cottages and other buildings, sewerage. Anyhow it is not possible in should not change the natural conditions all locations because of high costs. of the waterfront significantly. Nature Therefore the treatment should be done reservoirs and other valuable sites and using the best available methods on site. habitats must be taken into account The treatment method used depends on when planning shore land development.

the wastewater produced, the model of The construction on land is regulated by ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 44 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre The Land Use and Building Act. The recommended. Depending of the size of Water Act regulates construction on the project written notice to the water. authorities is needed. Additional Shore land development information about permits etc. is deteriorates the water quality by mixing available in Regional Environment the sediment in the water and Centres and on the Internet pages increasing suspended solids. That (www.environment.fi). decreases the use of the water for domestic or recreational purposes. Dredging and building up of the 5.3.6 Other loading sources and shoreline change the natural habitats of activities affecting aquatic many plants and animals, for example, nature fish. If the mud is not moved far enough away, it can flow back into to the lake Atmospheric fall out was one of the causing impairment in the water quality. main load sources into Lake Pyhäjärvi. Dredging can also release phosphorus Its proportion has declined in recent from sediments. Vegetation and years. Long-term transport by air is hard macrophytes can be valuable breeding to avoid. It can be decreased mainly by grounds or feeding habitats for fish or restrictions on industry and traffic or by birds. The timing of dredging and similar agreements between countries. Local activities must be done when it causes methods should decrease effluent least harm to the surrounding nature discharge from agriculture. and neighbours. During the most The internal load in a lake is caused intensive summer holiday season by nutrients released from sediments. activities should be avoided, because in That often happens when the oxygen some cases they can be against The saturation drops very low in the Water Act. hypolimnion or by bioturbation. The The need for permission related to internal load is not a significant source The Water or The Land Use and of phosphorus in Lake Pyhäjärvi. It Building Act depends on the size of the might happen locally during desired activity. It is recommended to stratification in the deepest areas if the discuss this beforehand with the oxygen saturation drops too low. It is authorities. They can advise the proper prevented by decreased organic load timing or if the action needs permission into the hypolimnion. The avoidance of and what other issues must be suspended solids and organic matter considered before starting the project. will decrease the oxygen consumption That can save the project owner from in the bottom. many conflicts with neighbours and Regeneration of fish stocks needs officials. the manipulation of nutrient chains and Permission is not always needed. fishing of under utilised species of fish. Lake water can be obtained for domestic Professional fishermen could be use. The riparian rights owner can build supported financially to fish but it is a quay for private use unless it harms usually a question of the cost-benefit the public interest or neighbours. Small relation. Planting of fish species should scale dredging, transforming of stones be done with care. or aquatic vegetation can be done Because of the special without notice to authorities. However characteristics of Lake Pyhäjärvi (clear, discussion with neighbours, the owner non-humic water, low in nutrients), it is of the riparian rights and local Statutory very vulnerable to nutrient load. Fishery Association about the issue and Therefore, the protection of the lake taking note of their opinion is must be preventative.

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 45

Conclusions ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 6○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ Lake Pyhäjärvi has partly recovered Since the point source load in to the lake from the past state of the lake. The has decreased, the main attention, at the recent state can be assessed as moment, has to be paid to diffuse load oligotrophic at the moment; in some coming from several sources. Air loading points can be noticed signs of pollution, as one form of it, is hard to increased nutrients status. avoid. International contracts are one Improvement of the water quality has way, but the dominating winds affect been noticed as decreased nutrient to the amount of air pollution concentrations, increased water ultimately. Silvicultural and agricultural transparency and by local people; the practices increase the diffuse load. fishing nets get less slimy as they used Draining and log cutting as well as to and there is less algae on the rocks of farming should be done the way it the shore line. Even though the causes the least nutrient load to Lake situation in the lake has improved, it is Pyhäjärvi. There are several ways to unknown, what will happen in the accomplish the practices. The best future. The lake is very sensitive to available methods should be considered. nutrient enrichment, and even a slight Beside water quality the aquatic nutrient load can cause deterioration of nature need to be protected, which stand water quality. Besides changing nutrient for keeping the riparian zone and shore ratios may lead to unpredictable further land in as natural condition as possible. changes in the algal flora, even though Too close riparian construction affect the nutrient overall loading would the natural vegetation and fauna and remain low. As an example N:P -rate has the load from dense habitation is much declined, which may have an effect on higher than from sparsely populated blooms of blue green. The area. Because of the special characteris- characteristics of Lake Pyhäjärvi, clear, tics of Lake Pyhäjärvi, it is very vulne- colorless water and long retention time, rably to nutrient load. Therefore the pro- interact the state of the Lake. Clear tection of the lake has to be preventive; water enable deep productive layer, the restoration of waters will be more when light penetrates deep in the lake. difficult and expensive. The long retention time affect the nutrient circulation in the lake by

extending the time of availability. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 46 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre References

Ahtiainen, M. & Huttunen, P. 1999. Long-term effects of forestry managements on water quality and loading in brooks. Boreal environment research 4: 101–114. Auvinen, H. 1987a. Growth, mortality and managemant of whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus L.s.l.), vendace (Coregonus albula L.), roach (Rutilus rutilus L.) and perch (Perca fluviatilis L.) in Lake Pyhäjärvi (Karelia). Finnish Fisheries Research 8: 38–47. Auvinen, H. 1987b. Fisheries in the Finnish Zone of lake Pyhäjärvi (Karelia). Finnish Fisheries Research 8: 53–57. Auvinen, H. 1988a. Factors affecting the year class strength (Coregonus albula, L.) larvae in Lake Pyhäjärvi (Karelia, SE Finland). Finnish Fisheries research 9: 235–243. Auvinen, H. 1988b. Distribution and food of vendace (Coregonus albula,L.) larvae in Lake Py- häjärvi (Karelia, SE Finland). Finnish Fisheries research 9: 107–115. Auvinen, H. & Nurmio, T. 2001. Kalastus karjalan Pyhäjärvellä vuonna 1999. Kala- ja riistara- portteja 239: 1–19. Fishing at Lake Pyhäjärvi in 1999, in Finnish. Forsberg, C. Ryding, S.-O., Claesson, A. & Forsberg, A. 1978. Water chemical and/or algal assay? Sewage effluent and polluted lake water studies. Mitt. Int. Verh. Limnol. 21: 352–363. EU Habitats Directive 1992/43/EEC EU Water Framework Directive 2000: Directive 2000/60/EC. Haakana, H. 1999. Karjalan Pyhäjärven vesiensuojeluohjelmaan liittyvä kalasto- ja eläinplank- tonselvitys vuosina 1996–98. Joensuun yliopiston Karjalan tutkimuslaitoksen moniste. 8 pp. Fish and zooplankton study of Karelian Pyhäjärvi in 1996–98, in Finnish. Heikkinen, K. ja Alasaarela, E. 1988. Happamoituneiden vesistöjen neutralointi, kirjallisuus- katsaus. 93 pp. Vesi- ja ympäristöhallinnon julkaisuja 18. Neutralisation of acid surface waters, in Finnish. Heinonen P. 1980. Quantity and composition of phytoplankton in Finnish inland waters. Publ. Water Res. Inst. 37. 91 pp. Helin, J. 1982. Turkistarhojen aiheuttama ainekuormitus pinta- ja pohjavesiin. Vesihallituksen monistesarja nro 140. 172 pp. Nutrient load to surface waters caused by fur farming, in Finnish. Holopainen A.-L., Niinioja R. & Lepistö L. 2003. Phytoplankton as an indicator of ecological state of the oligotrophic transboundary Lake Karelian Pyhäjärvi on the Finnish- Russian border. In Ruoppa M., Heinonen P., Pilke A., Rekolainen S., Toivonen H. and Vuoristo H. (eds.) How to assess and monitor ecological quality in freshwaters. TemaNord 547: 146–149. Hydrologinen vuosikirja 1984–1986: vertailujaksona 1961–1985. Raija Leppäjärvi (ed.) Vesi- ja ympäristöhallitus 1990. 235 p. Hydrological yearbook. Hydrologinen vuosikirja 1992. Vertailujaksoina 1961–1990/1981–1990. Raija Leppäjärvi (ed.). Vesi- ja ympäristöhallitus 1995. 168 pp. Hydrological yearbook. Hänninen, E., Kärhä, S. & Salpakivi-Salomaa, P. 1995. Metsätalous ja vesiensuojelu: Metsäte- hon opas. 23 pp. Forestry practices and prevention of water pollution, in Finnish. Järvinen, O. & Vänni, T. 1997. Sadeveden pitoisuus- ja laskeuma-arvot Suomessa vuonna 1995. Suomen ympäristökeskuksen moniste 78. 68 s. Concentrations and fallout values of rainwater, in Finnish. Kenttämies, K. ja Saukkonen, S. (eds.) 1995. Metsätalouden vesistövaikutukset ja niiden torjunta. METVE-projektin loppuraportti. Suomen ympäristö 2. Prevention of water pollution in forestry practises, in Finnish. Kenttämies, K. & Saukkonen, S. 1996. Metsätalous ja vesistöt. Yhteistutkimusprojektin Metsätalouden vesistöhaitat ja niiden torjunta (METVE) yhteenveto. Maa- ja metsätalousministeriön julkaisuja 4. Prevention of water pollution in forestry practises, in Finnish. Komiteanmietintö 1977:49. Erityistä suojelua vaativat vedet. Maa- ja metsätalousministeriön suojeluvesityöryhmä. 59 pp. Surface waters needing special protection, in Finnish.

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 47 Kortelainen, P. & Saukkonen, S. 1998. Leaching of nutrients, organic carbon and iron from Finnish forestry land. Water, Air and Soil Pollution 105: 239–250. Kubin, E. 1977. The effects of clear cutting upon the nutrient status of a spruce forest in Northern Finland (64 28' N). Acta Forestalia Fennica 155. Kukkonen, M., Kiiski, J., Luotonen, H. & Niinioja, R. 2003. Karjalan Pyhäjärven vesien- ja ve- siluonnonsuojeluohjelma. Alueelliset ympäristöjulkaisut 319. 90 pp. The plan of water and water ecosystem protection for Lake Karelian Pyhäjärvi, in Finnish. Kukkonen, M. 2004. Paleoekologia niukkaravinteisen ja kirkasvetisen järven ekologisen tilan arvioinnissa Rajavesien ekologisen tilan arviointi -hanke. Alueelliset ympäristöjulkai- sut 343. 40 pp. Paleolimnology in assessing ecological state of on oligotrophic and clear water lake, in Finnish. Käyhkö, P. 1994. Pohjois-Karjalan järvenlaskut. Pohjois-Karjalan vesi- ja ympäristöpiirin moniste 6. Joensuu. Lowering the surface of lake in North Karelia, in Finnish. Lepistö, L., Jokipii, R., Niemelä, M., Vuoristo, H., Holopainen, A.-L., Niinioja, R., Hammar, T., Kauppi, M. & Kivinen, J. 2003. Kasviplankton järvien ekologisen tilan kuvaajana. Suomen ympäristö 600. 80 pp. Phytoplankton as indicator of the ecological status of lakes. The use of monitoring data in the Vuoksi rever basin during years 1963–1999 for assessment and classification, in Finnish. LT-Kuopio Oy 2000. Ätäskön kunnostussuunnitelma I osa. Restoration plan for Lake Ätäskö, in Finnish. LT-Kuopio Oy 2001a. Ätäskön kunnostussuunnitelma II osa. Restoration plan for Lake Ätäs- kö, in Finnish. LT-Kuopio Oy 2001b. NATURA-arviointi, Ätäskön kunnostussuunnitelma, II vaihe, Pyhäjär- ven alueen luontokokonaisuus. NATURA-evaluation, Restoration plan for Lake Ätäs- kö, in Finnish. Luotonen, H., Niinioja, R., Karttunen, K., Rask, M. & Viljanen, M. 2002. Transboundary Lake Karelian Pyhäjärvi on the Finnish – Russian Border Area – Assessment of the Ecological Status. In: M. Ruoppa & K. Karttunen (eds.), Typology and ecological classification of lakes and rivers. TemaNord 566: 98–101. Luotonen, H. 2003. The assessment of the ecological status of lakes – the present state of the WFD implementation work in Finland. In: Viljanen, M. and Shirenko, L., 2004. Proceed-ings of the Workshop on Sustainable Use, Management and Development of Lake Ladoga Basin. University of Joensuu, Reports of Karelian Institut 3: 24–29. Mattsson, T., Finér, L., Kortelainen, P. & Sallantaus, T. 2003. Brook water quality and background leaching from unmanaged forested catchments in Finland. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution 147: 275–297. Meriläinen, J. & Kokko, H. 1982. Karjalan Pyhäjärven tila kesällä 1981 levästöjen ja suurkasvil- lisuuden ilmentämänä. Loppuraportti, Joensuun yliopiston Karjalan tutkimuslaitoksen monista. 15 pp. Ecological state of Karelian Pyhärvi in 1981, assessed by periphyton and macrophytes, in Finnish. Meriläinen, J., Kokko, H. & Järvinen, A. 1987. Perifyton of Lake Pyhäjärvi (Karelia). Finnish Fisheries Research 8: 20–26. Mononen, P., Niinioja, R., Savolainen, J. & Wahlgren A. 1994. Vesiensuojelun tavoiteohjelma 2005 – Karjalan Pyhäjärvi-tarkastelu. Pohjois-Karjalan vesi- ja ympäristöpiiri. 10 pp. Target for water protection by 2005 – Lake Karelian Pyhäjärvi. Niemi. J., Heinonen, P., Mitikka, S., Vuoristo, H., Pietiläinen, O.-P., Puupponen, M. & Rönkä, E. (eds.) 2001. The Finnish Eurowaternet with information about Finnish water resources and monitoring strategies. Finnish environment 445. 62 pp. Nieminen, M. & Ahti, E. 2000. Soiden metsätalouskäytön vesistövaikutukset. Metsätieteen ai- kakauskirja 2: 321–32. The effect of forestry practises in peat bogs on surface waters, in Finnish. Niinioja, R. & Ahtiainen, M. 1987. Water quality of Lake Pyhäjärvi (Karelia) in 1980s. Finnish Fisheries Research 8: 13–19. Niinioja, R. & Turkka, J. 2003. Transparency measurements – a tool for environmental monitoring? An example from Lakes Pyhäjärvi and Ätäskö, Finland. In: Simola, H., Terzhevik, A. Yu., Viljanen, M. & Holopainen, I. J. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fourth International Lake Ladoga Symposium. University of Joensuu, Publ. of Karelian Res.

Inst. 138: 393–399. ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 48 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Niinioja, R., Mononen, P. & Rämö, A. 1996. Pohjois-Karjalan vesistöjen tila 1990-luvun alussa. Joensuu, Pohjois-Karjalan ympäristökeskus. Alueelliset ympäristöjulkaisut 17. 53 pp. The state of North Karelian surface waters in the beginning of 1990s, in Finnish. Niinioja, R., Mononen, P. & Rämö, A. 1999. Vesistöt Pohjois-Karjalassa 1990-luvun lopulla. Poh- jois-Karjalan ympäristökeskus. Brochure 4 pp and www.environment.fi. The state of North Karelian surface waters in the end of 1990s, in Finnish. Niinioja, R., Mononen, P. & Rämö, A. 2005. Pohjois-Karjalan vesistöt 2000-luvun alussa. Poh- jois-Karjalan ympäristökeskus. Brochure 4 pp and www.environment.fi. The state of North Karelian surface waters in the beginng of 2000, in Finnish. Nordisk Ministerråd 1990. Nordiske Vassdrag- vern og inngrep. Miljörapport 11. 143 pp. North Karelia County Administrative Board 1998. Pohjois-Karjala tilastoina 1995. Pohjois-Kar- jalan lääninhallitus, Sivistys- ja kehitysosasto, Julkaisu n:o 16. Statistics of North-Karelia in 1995. North Karelia T&E-Centre (Employment and Economic Development Centre), Center for Fishing Industry 1998. Nurmi, P. 1998. Eräiden Suomen järvien pohjaeläimistö. Valtakunnallisen seurannan tulokset vuosilta 1989–1992. Suomen ympäristö 172: 1–74. Macroinvertebrates of some Finnish lakes. The results of national survey in 1989–1992, in Finnish. Ollikainen, M. 1992. Karjalan Pyhäjärven tila 1980-luvulla sedimentin piilevien ilmentämänä. Vesi- ja ympäristöhallinnon julkaisuja Sarja A 87. 90 pp. Ecological state of Lake Karjalan Pyhäjärvi in the eighties revealed by surface sediment diatom assemblages, in Finnish. Ollikainen, M., Simola, H. & Niinioja, R. 1993. Changes in diatom assemblages in the profundal sediments of two large oligohumic lakes in eastern Finland. Hydrobiologia, 269/ 270: 405–413. Paasivirta, L. 1987. Macrozoobenthos of Lake Pyhäjärvi (Karelia). Finnish Fisheries Research 8: 27–37. Pietiläinen, O-P. & Heinonen, P. (eds.) 2002. Monitoring of international lakes. Background paper for the guidelines on monitoring and assessment of transboundary and international lakes. UN/ECE Working group on monitoring and assessment. 82 pp. Piirainen, T. & Vänskä, T. 1984. Karjalan Pyhäjärven valuma-alueen maankäyttö. Pohjois-Kar- jalan vesi- ja ympäristöpiirin moniste 4. 58 pp. The land use of the catchment area of Karelian Pyhäjärvi, in Finnish. Rahkola-Sorsa, M. 2001. Karjalan Pyhäjärven eläinplanktonselvitys vuosilta 1996 ja 1999. Jo- ensuun yliopiston Karjalan tutkimuslaitoksen moniste. 13 pp. Zooplankton in Lake Ka- relian Pyhäjärvi in 1996 and 1999. Rekolainen, S. 1989. Phosphorus and nitrogen load from forest and agricultural areas in Finland. Aqua Fennica 19: 95–107. Rekolainen, S. & Kauppi, L. 1990. Maatalouden aiheuttama fosfori- ja typpikuorma vesistöi- hin. Vesitalous 1: 17–18. Phosphorus and nitrogen load in to surface waters originating from agriculture, in Finnish. Rekolainen, S., Mannio, J., Mitikka, S., Vuorenmaa, J., Lepistö, L., Lepistö, A., Kenttämies, K., Rissanen, J., Syri, S., Pietiläinen, O.-P., Ekholm, P., Malve, O., Mäkinen, R. & Nikander, A. 2002. Nitraattitypen väheneminen Suomen järvissä: esiselvitys syistä ja seurauksis- ta. Suomen ympäristökeskuksen moniste 244. 33 pp. Diminished nitrate nitrogen of Finnish lakes, a pilot survey of reasons and consequences, in Finnish. Rontu, M. & Santala, E. 1995. Haja-asutuksen jätevesien käsittely. Vesi- ja ympäristöhallituksen monistesarja 584. 94 pp. Waste water treatment in sparsely populated areas, in Finnish. Ruuhisalmi, I. 1974. Pohjois-Karjalan ilmastosta, Pohjois-Karjalan luonto, pp. 19–20. The climate in North Karelia, in Finnish. Ryzkov, L.P., Kostylev, Ju, V., Polina, A.V., Valetov, V.A., Ermakov, S.A., Bondarenko, V.A., Kitaev, S.P., Spak, A.D., Ivanov, N.O., Ermolaev, G.J. & Harlamov, A.M. 1987. Fisheries research in the Soviet Zone of Lake Pyhäjärvi. Finnish Fisheries Research 8: 3–12. Salonen, S., Frisk, T., Kärmeniemi, T., Niemi, J., Pitkänen, H., Silvo, K. & Vuoristo, H. 1992. Fosfori ja typpi vesien rehevöittäjinä - vaikutusten arviointi. Vesi- ja ympäristöhallin- non julkaisuja. Sarja A 96. 139 pp. Phosphorus and nitrogen in the eutrophication of waters, in Finnish.

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 49 Suunnittelukeskus Oy 1998. Kiteen alueen vesistöjen yhteistarkkailun perusteellinen yhteenveto vuosilta 1995–97. Raportti. 24 pp. Summary of collaborative monitoring of surface waters in Kitee area in 1995–97, in Finnish. Suunnittelukeskus Oy 2001. Kiteen alueen vesistöjen yhteistarkkailun perusteellinen yhteenveto vuosilta 1998–2000. Raportti, useita erillisselvityksiä. Summary of collaborative monitoring of surface waters in Kitee area in 1998–2000, in Finnish. Suunnittelukeskus Oy 2002. Kiteen alueen vesistöjen yhteistarkkailun yhteenveto vuodelta 2001. Raportti. 26 pp. Summary of collaborative monitoring of surface waters in Kitee area in 2001, in Finnish. Tammi, J., Westermark, A. & Rask, M. 2003. Ecological status of Lake Pyhäjärvi classified by using fish community data – are the divisions of the lake in reference condition? Ruop- pa, M., Heinonen, P., Pilke, A., Rekolainen, S., Toivonen, H. & Vuoristo, H. (eds.) How to assess and monitor ecological quality in freshwaters. TemaNord 547: 156–159. Työryhmän mietintö 1992:63. Erityistä suojelua vaativat vesistöt. Vesistöjen erityissuojelutyöryhmän mietintö. Ympäristöministeriö, ympäristönsuojeluosasto. 176 pp. Surface waters that need special protection, in Finnish. Virnes, A. 2001. Karjalan Pyhäjärven kahden lahden tilan selvitys pohjaeläimistön tilan perusteella. Joensuun yliopiston Karjalan tutkimuslaitoksen moniste. 15 pp. Ecological state of two bays in Lake Karelian Pyhäjärvi based on macroinvertebrates, in Finnish. Vitousek, P. M. 1983. The effects of deforestation on air, soil and water. In: Bolin, B. ja Cook, R. B. (ed.) The major biogeochemical cycles and their interactions. pp. 223–245.

Other information sources:

North Karelia T&E-Centre (Employment and Economic Development Centre), Center for Fishery Kymen TE-Centre, Center for Fishery, Kouvola Finnish Environment Institute, National Land Survey and interpretation of stand of trees Environmental database, algae register Environmental database, HERTTA-register

Internet sources:

FFCS-forest certification in Finland www.ffcs-finland.org, 11.4.2002 Waste waters of sparcely populated areas and summer cottages www.environment.fi/ Farming subsidies in environmental protection in 2000–2006 www.environment.fi/ NATURA-evaluation www.environment.fi/ Surface waters in North-Karelia, classification in 1994–1997 www.environment.fi/ Surface waters in North-Karelia, classification in the beginning 2000 www.environment.fi/default.asp?contentid=114674&lan=fi 17.2.2005 Uukuniemi, municipal of Uukuniemi

www.uukuniemi.fi/info.htm 8.2.2002 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 50 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Documentation page Publisher North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Date January 2005

Author(s) Minna Kukkonen, Jaana Kiiski, Hannu Luotonen and Riitta Niinioja

Title of publication The plan of water and water ecosystem protection for Karelian Pyhäjärvi

Parts of publication/ other project publications Abstract Karelian Pyhäjärvi is a valuable clear water lake located on the border between North Karelia (Finland) and the Republic of Karelia (Russia). It has been included in many national and international programs. It belongs also to the Finland’s nominations for the European Union nature protection network, Natura 2000, representing an oligotrophic habitat containing very few minerals characteristic of sandy plains. In 2002, a project was started and entitled “Assessment of the ecological state of an oligotrophic lake - as exemplified by the Transboundary Lake Pyhäjärvi on the Finnish-Russian Border”.

This water protection plan is the first report of the project. It concentrates on the Finnish side of the border summarizing the average load in to the lake, water quality and ecological state of the lake and also water protection directions. The same type of water protection plan is underway for the Russian side.

The annual nutrient load into Pyhäjärvi is about 12 000 kg phosphorus and 286 000 kg nitrogen. The main loading is caused by non-point sources. Anthropogenic impacts are mainly focused on the Finnish side of the lake. The load has decreased since the beginning of 1990s.

Lake Pyhäjärvi represents an oligotrophic and clear water lake. Monitoring of the lake started in the 1960s and has been ongoing to the present. In the 1980s and 1990s, the water quality declined, (visibility impairment, algal blooms, sliming of fishing nets, increase of roach (carp and minnows?) in fish population) but during the last ten years, nutrient concentrations have decreased and the water quality increased. The aim of this water protection plan is to reduce the nutrient load especially from non point out puts, keep the conservation of the lake ongoing and strength the fish populations, especially vendace.

Keywords Karelian Pyhäjärvi, water protection, ichtyofauna, point source loading, diffuse loading, construction of shore line, water quality, effects of agriculture and forest management on aquatic environment, monitoring, ecological status of a lake, oligotrophic lake, restoration of waters, fish habitat improvement Publication series Regional Environmental Publications 374 and number

Theme of publication Project name and Assessment of the ecological state of an oligotrophic lake - as exemplified by the Transboundary number, if any Lake Pyhäjärvi on the Finnish-Russian Border, GG 11042

Financier/ Interreg III A Karelia programme, The Finnish Ministry of the Environment, North Karelia commissioner Regional Environment Centre, University of Joensuu, Karelian Institute, Finnish Game and Fis- heries Research Institute, City of Kitee, Kesälahti municipality Project organization North Karelia Regional Environment Centre, Finnish Environment Institute, University of Joensuu, Karelian Institute, Finnish Game and Fisheries Research Institute, Karjalan Pyhäjärvi ry. (Water protection association for Lake Pyhäjärvi, Kesälahti municipality, City of Kitee, Northern Water Problems Institute of the Karelian Academy of Sciencies, Centre for Hydormeteorology and Enviromental Monitoring for the Republic of Karelia, State Enviroment Protection Committee for the Republic of Karelia ISSN ISBN 1238-8610 952-11-1932-2 952-11-1933-0 (PDF) No. of pages Language 53 English Restrictions Price For public use 10,00 EUR (incl.tax 8 %) For sale at/ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Edita PLC customer service distributor tel. +358 13 141 2702, telefax +358 13 123 622 tel. +358 20 450 05, telefax +358 20 450 2380

Financier North Karelia Regional Environment Centre of publication Printing place and year Kainuun Sanomat PLC, Kajaani 2005

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 51 Kuvailulehti Julkaisija Pohjois-Karjalan ympäristökeskus Julkaisuaika Tammikuu 2005

Tekijä(t) Minna Kukkonen, Jaana Kiiski, Hannu Luotonen ja Riitta Niinioja

Julkaisun nimi Karjalan Pyhäjärven vesien ja vesiluonnon suojelusuunnitelma

Julkaisun osat/ muut saman projektin tuottamat julkaisut Tiivistelmä Karjalan Pyhäjärvi on Pohjois-Karjalan sekä Venäjän Karjalan tasavallassa sijaitseva maakun- nallisesti ja valtakunnallisesti arvokas vesistö. Se kuuluu Pohjoismaiden ministerineuvoston suojeluvesiin sekä erityistä suojelua vaativiin arvokkaisiin vesistökohteisiin. Se on myös Euroo- pan yhteisön Natura 2000 -verkoston Suomen ehdotuksessa edustaen ohjelmassa niukkaravin- teisia, niukkamineraalisia kirkasvetisiä järviä. Vuosina 2002-2003 toteutetaan järven ekologista tilaa määrittävä hanke “Rajavesien ekologisen tilan arviointi” Interreg III A Karjala-ohjelman rahoittamana.

Pyhäjärven vesien ja vesiluonnon suojelusuunnitelma on ensimmäinen raportti tästä hankkees- ta. Suunnitelmassa käsitellään Karjalan Pyhäjärven Suomen puoleisen alueen kuormittajia ja kuormitusta, järven ekologista tilaa ja vesiensuojelua. Suunnitelman tavoitteena on saada Pyhä- järven kuormitus, varsinkin hajakuormituksen osalta, vähenemään sekä varmistaa Pyhäjärven ekologisen tilan ja kalaston kohentuminen. Suunnitelmassa esitellään Pyhäjärven vesiensuojelun tavoitteet ja toimenpiteet painopistealueittain ja ehdotetaan toimenpiteiden toteuttamista yhteistyönä laadittavan toimintasuunnitelman perusteella.

Pyhäjärven kuormitus keskittyy Suomen puolelle. Vuosittain järveen tulee keskimäärin 12 000 kg fosforia ja 286 000 kg typpeä. Ravinteet ovat pääasiallisesti peräisin hajapäästöistä. Ravinnekuormitus on laskenut 1990-luvun alusta; suurin hajakuormittaja, laskeuma, on pie- nentynyt ja monet pistekuormittajat ovat vähentäneet kuormitustaan, osa on lopettanut toi- mintansa.

Pyhäjärven vedenlaatua on seurattu 1960-luvulta lähtien. Järvi on niukkaravinteinen ja kirkas- vetinen. Sen vedenlaatu huononi 1980- ja 1990-luvuilla. Tämä ilmeni näkösyvyyden pienenemi- senä, levien lisääntymisenä, verkkojen limoittumisena ja kalastossa särkikalojen lisääntymisenä. Viimeisen kymmenen vuoden aikana veden laatu ja käyttökelpoisuus ovat parantuneet useas- sa osassa järveä. Asiasanat Karjalan Pyhäjärvi, hajakuormitus, pistekuormitus, maatalouden vesistövaikutus, metsätalo- uden vesistövaikutus, vedenlaatu, vesistöseuranta, näkösyvyys, rantarakentaminen, vesiensuojelu, vesistökunnostus, kalaston hoito Julkaisusarjan nimi ja numero Alueelliset ympäristöjulkaisut 374

Julkaisun teema Projektihankkeen nimi Rajavesien ekologisen tilan arviointi, Karjalan Pyhäjärvi, GG11042 ja projektinumero

Rahoittaja/ Interreg III A Karjala -ohjelma, ympäristöministeriö, Pohjois-Karjalan ympäristökeskus, toimeksiantaja Joensuun yliopisto/KTL, RKTL, Kiteen kaupunki, Kesälahden kunta

Projektiryhmään Pohjois-Karjalan ympäristökeskus, Suomen ympäristökeskus, Joensuun yliopiston Karjalan tut- kuuluvat organisaatiot kimuslaitos, Riista- ja kalatalouden tutkimuslaitos, Pyhäjärvi ry., Kesälahden kunta, Kiteen kaupunki, Pohjoisten alueiden vesiongelmien instituutti, Karjalan tasavallan hydrometeorologian ja ympäristön tilan seurannan keskus, Karjalan tasavallan luonnonvarainkomitea

ISSN ISBN 1238-8610 952-11-1932-2 952-11-1933-0 (PDF) Sivuja Kieli 53 Englanti Luottamuksellisuus Hinta Julkinen 10,00 euroa (sisältää alv. 8 %) Julkaisun myynti/ Pohjois-Karjalan ympäristökeskus Edita Oyj, asiakaspalvelu jakaja Puh. (013) 141 2702, fax (013) 123 622 puh. 020 450 05, fax 020 450 2380

Julkaisun kustantaja Pohjois-Karjalan ympäristökeskus

Painopaikka ja -aika Kainuun Sanomat Oy, Kajaani 2005 ○○○○○○○○○○○○ 52 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Presentationsblad Utgivare Norra Karelens miljöcentral Datum Januari 2005

Författare Minna Kukkonen, Jaana Kiiski, Hannu Luotonen och Riitta Niinioja

Publikationens titel Planen för vattenskyddet och skyddet av vattenmiljön i Karelska Pyhäjärvi

Publikationens delar/ andra publikationer inom samma projekt Sammandrag Karelska Pyhäjärvi ligger på gränsen mellan Norra Karelen och Karelska republiken i Ryssland och är ett regionalt och nationellt värdefullt vattendrag. Sjön hör till de vattendrag som skyddats av Nordiska ministerrådet och utgör en sådan värdefull vattenmiljö som kräver särskilt skydd. Den ingår även i Finlands förslag till Europeiska gemenskapens nätverk Natura 2000 och repre- senterar i programmet näringsfattiga sjöar med låg mineralhalt och klart vatten. Under 2002– 2003 genomfördes ett projekt för att fastställa sjöns ekologiska tillstånd, “Rajavesien ekologisen tilan arviointi” (sv. “Utvärdering av gränsvattendragens ekologiska tillstånd”), som finansierades av Karelen-programmet inom Interreg III A. Planen för vattenskyddet och skyddet av vattenmiljön i Pyhäjärvi är den första rapporten om detta projekt. Planen behandlar miljöbelastningen och -belastarna i den finska delen av området kring karelska Pyhäjärvi, sjöns ekologiska tillstånd och vattenskydd. Målsättningen med vat- tenskyddsplanen är att sänka belastningen på Pyhäjärvi, särskilt när det gäller den diffusa belastningen, samt säkra sjöns ekologiska tillstånd och en förbättring av fiskbeståndet. Planen in- nehåller målsättningar och åtgärder för vattenskyddet i Pyhäjärvi efter olika prioriterade områ- den och ett förslag om att åtgärderna vidtas utgående från en åtgärdsplan som utarbetas i sa- marbete. Belastningen på Pyhäjärvi hänför sig till den finska sidan. De årliga utsläppen uppgår i gen- omsnitt till 12 000 kg fosfor och 286 000 kg kväve. Näringsämnena härstammar i huvudsak från de diffusa utsläppen. Utsläppen av näringsämnen har sjunkit sedan början av 1990-talet; det största diffusa utsläppet, nedfallet, har minskat och många miljöbelastare med punktutsläpp har minskat sin belastning och en del har upphört med sin verksamhet. Vattenkvaliteten i Pyhäjärvi har övervakats sedan 1960-talet. Sjön är näringsfattig och har klart vatten. Vattenkvaliteten försämrades under 1980- och 1990-talet. Detta avspeglade sig i att siktd- jupet blev mindre, algerna tilltog, fisknäten blev slemmiga och karpfiskarnas andel av fiskbes- tåndet ökade. Under de senaste 20 åren har vattenkvaliteten förbättrats och vattnets tjänlighet har förbättrats i många delar av sjön. Nyckelord Pyhäjärvi i Karelen, vattenvård, fiskbestånd, punktutsläpp, diffusa utsläpp, strandbebyggelse, jord- och skogsbrukets belastning av vattendrag, övervakning av vattendrag, ekologiskt tillstånd i vattendrag, oligotrofa vattensystem, restaurering av vattendrag, vård av fiskbestånd Publikationsserie och nummer Regionala miljöpublikationer 374

Publikationens tema Projektets namn Utvärdering av gränsvattendragens ekologiska tillstånd, GG11042 och nummer

Finansiär/ Karelen-programmet inom Interreg III A, miljöministeriet, Norra Karelens miljöcentral, Joensuu uppdragsgivare universitet, Karelens forskningsinstitut, Vilt- och fiskeriforskningsinstitutet, staden Kitee, Kesälahti kommun Organisationer i projektgruppen Norra Karelens miljöcentral, Finlands miljöcentral, Joensuu universitet, Karelens forskningsinstitut, Vilt- och fiskeriforskningsinstitutet, Karjalan Pyhäjärvi rf., Kesälahti kommun, staden Kitee, Karelens vetenskapsakademis institut för vattenfrågor i nordliga områden, Karelska republikens central för hydrometeorologi och miljöuppföljning, Karelska republikens miljöskyddskommitte ISSN ISBN 1238-8610 952-11-1932-2 952-11-1933-0 (PDF) Sidantal Språk 53 Engelska Offentlighet Pris Offentlig 10,00 EUR (inkl.moms. 8 %) Beställningar/ districution Norra Karelens miljöcentral Edita Abp, kundservice tfn +358 13 141 2702, fax +358 13 123 622 tfn +358 20 450 05, fax +358 20 450 2380

Förläggare Norra Karelens miljöcentral Tryckeri/ Kainuun Sanomat Ab, Kajaani 2005 tryckningsort och -år

Regional Environmental Publications 374 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ 53 Regional Environmental Regional Environmental Publications Publications

374 374

INTERREG III A KARJALA

Julkaisu on saatavissa myös Internetissä: http://wwwymparistofi/julkaisut

ISBN 952-11-1932-2 ISBN 952-11-1933-0 (PDF) ISSN 1238-8610

For sale at:

North Karelia Regional Environment Centre Torikatu 36 A, 80100 JOENSUU telephone: +358 13 141 2702