How to assess hydromorphology? A comparison of Ukrainian and German approaches

Abstract

Recently, the Ukrainian Western Bug water authorities developed a national field survey to assess the quality of river habitats. The Ukrainian government already cooperates with EU member states along transboundary rivers and also orientates itself towards the European Water Framework Directive (WFD). As a future application for EU membership is feasible, the water authorities started to implement WFD criteria into their national survey schemes including the assessment of rivers’ hydromorphology. This article compares two different hydromorphological survey methods to identify similarities and differences of the classification approaches with regard to the conformity of obtained outputs with the WFD demands. The field surveys, the Ukrainian (UA-FS) and the German (LAWA-FS), were applied in parallel on 14 river sections along the Western Bug River and parts of its tributaries. Results show a wide range of conformity, but also several differences between and gaps within all methods. The UA-FS generally lacks the idea of reference condition in rivers’ hydromorphology and the definition of different stream types or near-natural land uses. The UA-FS and the LAWA-FS approaches are similar with respect to their incorporated compartments and most main parameters, but differ in definition and interpretation of specific functional units and single parameters. Greatest similarities down to single parameters exist in aspects of land use, bank vegetation, currents diversity, and within-stream variation of water depths. Differences include the assessment and interpretation of lateral erosion, sinuosity, type and depth of profile, substrate diversity, as well as special structures of bank and riverbed. Overall, the LAWA-FS is more conservative in its rating than the UA-FS. Still, UA-FS can be regarded as an important improvement for a systematic and reliable monitoring of river hydromorphology in the Ukraine that will help to successfully engage with both the integrated water resources management and the WFD harmonisation process in the future.