Bernet Huvuddok 0 8.Indd
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Foreword............................. .................................................................... 3 Introduction .................................. ................................................................................................... 3 1 General characteristics ........................................................................ 5 1.1 Laholm Bay basin ....................................................................... 5 1.1.1 Laholm Bay .................................................................. 5 1.2 River Stensån basin ..................................................................... 5 1.2.1 Topography, landscape and soil types ............................................ 5 1.2.2 Land use, population and wastewater ............................................ 6 1.2.3 Agriculture and forestry ............................................................ 7 1.2.4 Climate, discharge and flow ........................................................ 8 1.2.5 Watercourses and lakes ............................................................. 8 1.2.6 Groundwater ........................................................................ 11 2. Pressures and environmental status ......................................................... 11 2.1 Pressures 11 2.1.1 Eutrophication .............................................................. 11 2.1.2 Acidification ............................................................... 14 2.1.3 Physical pressures ......................................................... 15 2.1.5 Hazardous substances ..................................................... 16 2.2 Assessment of the environmental status ........................................... 16 2.2.1 Laholm Bay ................................................................. 17 2.2.2 Watercourses and lakes .................................................. 18 2.2.3 Groundwater .............................................................. 18 3 Protected areas............. ........................................................................ 20 4 Provisional environmental objectives ......................................................... 22 4.1 Objectives to counteract eutrophication ........................................... 22 4.2 Objectives to counteract acidification .............................................. 23 4.3 Objectives for groundwater .......................................................... 23 5 Program of measures ........................................................................ 24 5.1 Measures to counteract eutrophication ............................................. 24 5.1.2 Forestry ..................................................................... 28 5.1.3 Wastewater from sparsely built-up areas .............................. 28 5.1.4 Wastewater treatment plant ............................................. 29 5.1.5 Fulfillment of objective –a decrease in nutrient transport ......... 29 5.2 Measures to counteract acidification ................................................ 29 5.3 Measures to protect groundwater ................................................... 31 5.4 Measures to improve habitats ....................................................... 31 Bernet- River Stensån Pilot Basin 1 6 Monitoring program......... ....................................................................... 33 6.1 Watercourses......... .................................................................... 33 6.2 Lakes................. ...................................................................... 34 6.3 Coastal waters...... ..................................................................... 34 6.4 Groundwater.......... .................................................................... 34 7 Public participation........... ..................................................................... 34 7.1 Stakeholders......... .................................................................... 34 7.1.1 Opinion among stakeholders ............................................. 34 8 Economic analysis........... ....................................................................... 36 8.1 Aim of the economic analysis ......................................................... 36 8.2 Assessment of the economic significance of water use .......................... 36 8.2.1 Trend in water demand ................................................... 36 8.2.2 Economic significance .................................................... 36 8.2.3 Cost-effectivness .......................................................... 37 8.3 Trends in water use .................................................................... 38 8.4 Cost recovery ........................................................................ 38 8.5 Costs for suggested measures within the River Stensån Basin .................. 39 References............................ ................................................................... 40 Annex I ............................ ....................................................................... 41 Annex II.......... ................. ...................................................................... 44 Bernet- River Stensån Pilot Basin 2 Foreword This report is a part of the BERNET-Catch project where Authorities to be responsible for the planning in each every involved partner prepares a program of meas- district. The Environmental Protection Agency and the ures and a subsequent provisional Water Management Geological Survey of Sweden have been assigned to Plan (WMP) according to the EU Water Framework form statutes and official advice that will govern fur- Directive (WFD). This current plan constitutes the pro- ther work with water management in Sweden. The visional WMP for the River Stensån Basin located in statutes are to be official and possible to use during South Sweden. 2006. BERNET-Catch is a spin-off project from BERNET (Baltic Lukas Österling, Anna Hagerberg and Lars Ohlsson, Eutrophication Regional NETwork) that focuses on the Arne Joelsson, Lars Stibe, Börje Nilsson, Marie Eriks- integrated management of catchments and regional son, Jonas Svensson and Johan Hamringe have pre- implementation of the WFD. BERNET was originally pared the report. It should be noted that suggested established to reduce eutrophication of the Baltic Sea measures within this WMP for River Stensån basin do and to support the aim of the Helsinki Convention in not constitute measures that are firmly anchored or “assuring the ecological restoration of the Baltic Sea”. decided among authorities, municipalities and stake- holders in the area. The WFD, implemented in the Swedish Environmental View of the La- Code 2004, denotes the achievement of “good eco- holm Bay. Photo logical status” for rivers, lakes and costal waters by L. Ohlsson the year 2015. Use of water must be sustainable and the protection of groundwater ensured. Measures per- formed within the WFD are regulated by the order SFS 2002:660. The implementation of the WFD implies demands on a more formalized waterworks compared to what has been done in Sweden up until today. In 2004, five County Administrations were assigned to form Water Situation of the River Stensån Basin. Bernet- River Stensån Pilot Basin 3 Introduction A Water Management Plan (WMP) is, a holistic docu- • The report lacks risk-assessment analysis. The ment covering the water works within each water majority of the suggested measures aim to reduc- district and in which plan includes all moments ing the transportation of excess nitrogen to the incorporated in water management. It shall include a Laholm Bay. It is however not estimated what the description over the district, an analysis of pressures, reduction of the land-based transportation of an economic analysis, environmental objectives within nutrients is needed to reach the proposed quality the district, results from surveillances, measures taken factors for “good status” in the Laholm Bay. Such plus a summary of the Program of measures. The WMP estimations would have a high potential to support is not a fixed document but rather a cyclic policy docu- the future prioritizing of measures in the area. ment that is reconsidered and adjusted every 6th year. • Due to the historical and present abundance of Overall, the WMP according to the WFD outlines, high quality waters, Sweden has little knowledge include a summary of the authorities’ intentions and when it comes to “the value of waters”. The eco- has three central functions. First, it should act as a base nomic analysis is therefore incomplete due to the of knowledge for all stakeholders in work and decision uncertainty in the pricing of water services. making regarding water and what affects the water. Secondly, it should act as a source of information com- • The economic figures are also uncertain when it municating the public and users of water, and thirdly, comes to the pricing of measures. Rates of subsi- it should act as a report to the Swedish Environmental dies for specific measures in agriculture are fixed Protection Agency (SEPA) and furthermore to the com- per hectare but the net costs for the landowner in mission. potential crop-decline are more difficult to obtain. It is also uncertainties in how much each measure is In Sweden, the SEPA and the Geological Survey are still able to decrease the transportation. Regarding the working with the national statutes that states how the costs for the measures in forest areas, there are no Swedish Water Authorities shall report to the