THREE RIVERSPROJECT

Water Quality Monitoring & Management

Final ReportExecutive Summary

E u r o p e a n U n i o n C o h e s i o n Fu n d

Boyne Liffey Suir

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:33

M.C.O’SULLIVAN - Consulting EngineersCarnegie House, Library Road

Dun Laoghaire, IrelandPhone Number: +353 1 202 0870

Fax : +353 1 202 0707

Maps reproduced with the kind permission of the Ordnance Survey of IrelandLicence No: EN 0005002

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:33

Boyne

1

Introduction

This report marks the completion of theThree Rivers Project, a government initiativeto develop catchment based water qualitymonitoring and management systems for theBoyne, Liffey and Suir catchments. Thisthree-year project was sponsored by theDepartment of the Environment and LocalGovernment (DOELG) and by the cons-tituent Local Authorities with support fromthe European Union Cohesion Fund. TheProject was carried out on behalf of the gov-ernment by a group of consultants led byM.C.O’Sullivan and Co. Ltd. (MCOS) underthe guidance of a single Steering Group andan Operational Management Group for eachcatchment.

Prior to the start of the Project, water qualityin the rivers of these catchments deterioratedsince general monitoring of water qualityfirst began in the 1970s. The main cause ofdeterioration is excessive inputs of nutrients,mainly phosphorus, from a variety of humanactivities such as sewage disposal and agri-culture.

The Project has delivered a monitoringand management system which will be thebasis for halting this deterioration inwater quality and restoring good waterquality in the Boyne, Liffey and Suir riversystems.

The Three Rivers Project commenced inSeptember 1998. Field teams composed ofMCOS environmental staff (environmentaland agricultural scientists, and engineers)and Local Authority (L.A.) laboratory andsampling staff were deployed in each of thecatchments to implement the Project on theground. The field teams were responsible forgathering data, implementing water mo-nitoring programmes and the design andimplementation of special investigations/pilot studies into the impact of agricultural,urban drainage and forestry activities onwater quality and nutrient loads.

These teams were supported by a ProjectManager and Technical Support Team basedin MCOS Dublin. Two Project Co-ordinators(Boyne/Liffey and Suir) provided an inter-face between the Client and the ConsultantTeam.

The consultant field teams concluded theirwork in the catchments in November 2001.The monitoring programmes which com-menced in January 2000 continue to be ope-rated by the Project Laboratories under thedirection of the Project Co-ordinators.

In addition to MCOS, the consultant groupwas composed of J.G. Quigg and Company(GIS development), Conservation ServicesLtd. (biological monitoring) and HRWallingford Ltd. (initial design of monito-ring systems). National experts, includingTeagasc Research and Advisory Service,provided additional advice on specificaspects of environmental management.

Project OutputCatchment Management Systems havebeen developed for the 3 catchments consis-ting of 5 main elements:

Liffey Suir

The Project Management System will be the basis for restoring

good water quality.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:33

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

2

�An inventory of Risk Characteristics and Pressures - identifying landuse cha-racteristics and activities that have the potential to generate nutrients (pressures),physical characteristics that present a riskin terms of nutrient runoff and waters thatare sensitive to nutrient pollution due to their use and ecological importance.

�A Monitoring Programme - to determinecurrent water quality, quantity and nutri-ent loadings, identify likely pressures influencing water quality and to audit the success of management measures.

� A Programme of Management Measures - aimed at managing nutrient impact from all sectors of the community.

�A Plan for implementing managementmeasures.

�A dedicated Geographical Information System (GIS), "Catchment Envisage", to assist in the implementation, auditing andreview of the management system.

1. Inventory of Risk Characteristics andPressures

The main landuse activities in the threecatchments are agriculture (75 to 91%),urban development (1 to 7%) and forestry (3-11 % )."Activities" that pose potential risk of nutri-ent losses to the surface water environmentsinclude:

�Regulated point discharges such as Municipal/Urban Wastewater Treatment Plants (MWWTP) and licensed dis-charges from industry.

�Other point discharges from farmyards, septic tanks, urban drains and sewer overflows which are difficult to pin point.

�Diffuse discharges primarily associated with runoff from landuse activities such as agriculture and forestry mainly due to inappropriate/excessive application of mineral fertilisers, slurries or sludges.

Generally the potential risk of nutrient loss tosurface waters will increase as the density/intensity of these activities increase.

An inventory of all MWWTP and licenseddischarges to surface waters in each of thecatchments has been compiled and mapped.

"Risk Maps" have been produced, whichidentify areas that have higher potential togenerate nutrient loss than other areas due totheir physical characteristics (slope, soilcharacteristics, rainfall etc.) and the type andintensity of landuse activity.

"Sensitivity Maps" have been developed,which identify river stretches or water bodiesconsidered particularly sensitive to nutrientpollution due to their "beneficial use" forwater abstraction, fisheries resources andamenity or because of their ecologicalimportance.

"Priority Catchments" have been identifiedbased on poor biological water quality, ele-vated MRP (Molybdate Reactive Phosphate,a form of nutrient most available to aquaticplants) concentrations, and MRP loads, i.e.the amount of phosphate produced perhectare per year from each sub-catchment.

The Sensitivity Map and Priority CatchmentMap for the Liffey catchment are shown inMap 1.

Project monitoring data and investigations inpilot study areas indicate that agriculturallanduse/activities export approximately two-thirds of the total phosphorus load to each ofthe catchments while "regulated" point dis-charges (MWWTPs and licensed discharges)contribute approximately one quarter of thetotal load. The remaining phosphorus load isgenerated by unsewered populations (3 to8%) (e.g. septic tank users), urbanised areas(1 to 10%) and forestry and peat land (3 to7%). The contribution of phosphorus from"background sources" such as rainfall andnatural processes of soil erosion etc. areincluded in these figures.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:33

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

3

Map 1 Sensitivity Map and Priority Catchments (Liffey)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

4

2. Monitoring SystemsThe Project has established comprehensivemonitoring systems comprising physico-chemical and biological (water quality) andhydrometric (water quantity) networks inthe three catchments.

These monitoring systems:

�Identify the areas and sectors generating high nutrient losses so that management strategies to minimise losses can be tar-geted effectively.

�Facilitate the calculation of nutrient lossesfrom catchment areas and,

�Enable continual review of water quality in the river systems.

Water quality monitoring networks includebiological monitoring based on the EPAmacro-invertebrate "Q Index" at between 52and 70 sites in each of the catchments on anannual basis. Physico-chemical monitoring(focusing on nutrients) is carried out on aweekly basis at 75 to 85 sites in each catch-ment. In addition, monitoring is carried outon a daily basis (using automatic-samplers)at key locations, for example at the bottom ofpilot sub-catchments and at the freshwaterlimit of each of the 3 main channels.

The Project has established two new, dedi-cated laboratories at Trim, Co. Meath tooperate the monitoring networks in the

Boyne and Liffey catchments and at Clonmelto operate the Suir network. Each Projectlaboratory has a resident staff of a chemist,laboratory technicians and dedicated sam-pling technicians. Over 25,000 water sam-ples have been analysed in the laboratories inthe past two years. The laboratories partici-pate in a number of laboratory inter calibra-tion schemes including the EPA Interlab,Aquacheck and CSL.

Significant improvements to the hydrometric(water quantity) monitoring infrastructurewere undertaken by Local Authorities ineach of the catchments on behalf of theProject. The number of hydrometric stationshas now increased by 120 to 140% in eachof the catchments. Water levels are recordedon a weekly basis at the majority of stationsand on a daily basis at key locations usingautomatic recorders. River flows are calcu-lated by the EPA on behalf of the Projectfrom these water level records, using verifiedrating curves. Accurate knowledge of waterlevels and flows allows the calculation ofpollution loads, the prediction of the effectsof new discharges to, or abstractions from,rivers, and can also facilitate flood forecast-ing by other Agencies.

Valuable databases of biological and physi-co-chemical water quality and water flowshave been compiled in easily accessible for-mats for each of the three catchments.Knowing the concentration of the nutrient inthe water and the flow of water at a certainpoint, the amounts of nutrient entering theriver upstream of that point can be calcula-ted. Effective management measures cannow be implemented to limit nutrient inputsbased on sound background data, collectedin a scientific manner.

The Project has delivered the structures andmechanisms to carry out this comprehensivemonitoring system into the future.

Water Quality in the Three Rivers Catchments

Baseline water quality data in the threecatchments was established at the start of theProject using data collected from existingmonitoring programmes.

Hydrometric Monitoring on the Kings River.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

5

The physico-chemical baseline quality wasestablished from Local Authority monitoringdata from 1995-97 while the biological base-line quality was established from EPA moni-toring data from 1996 (Suir catchment) to1998 (Liffey catchment). Using the compre-hensive datasets gathered from the Projectmonitoring networks, the Project team hasbeen able to track the changes in water qual-ity in each of the catchments over the inter-vening years particularly in relation to theamount of phosphorus (P) and nitrogen (N)in the river systems and the resultant biolo-gical quality (Q Index).

These nutrients (particularly phosphorus) areimportant because in elevated amounts theycan cause excessive algal and weed growth,which in turn will remove oxygen, vital forfish and other creatures, from the water dur-ing the hours of darkness. The Q Index,based on pollution sensitive and pollutiontolerant communities living on the bottom ofa watercourse, provides a longer-term pic-ture of the effects of water quality on theecosystem of the river. Based on this QIndex "Biological" water quality is split into4 classes, "unpolluted", "slightly polluted","moderately polluted" and "seriously polluted".

Map 2 shows current (2001) biologicalwater quality at each of the Project monitor-ing sites. However, because the Project mon-itoring network is focused at the downstreamends of tributary catchments and in areas ofpoor water quality, the assessment of theoverall water quality in the catchments maybe "conservative".

Management measures recommended by theProject are only now being introduced andthe full effect of these measures are not yetapparent in water quality in the catchments.In many cases, particularly in relation todealing with diffuse sources of nutrient pol-lution, the benefits of management measureswill take some years to be reflected in waterquality.

River Boyne

In the Boyne catchment, biological qualityimproved over the lifetime of the Project.

Out of 54 comparable monitoring sites,(Baseline year and 2001), 29 improved, 24remained the same and only 1 site deteriora-ted. In terms of phosphorus concentrations(measured as MRP), 24 out of 29 compara-ble sites improved over the Project lifetime,however 67% of sites are still above theProject P concentration criteria of 0.03mg/lMRP. Nitrogen levels have also fallen at86% of sites during this time. Therefore theoverall picture on the Boyne is that waterquality is improving, but there is still muchwork to be done before it is returned to"good" quality. Figure 1 shows the % ofphosphorus (P) inputs to the river systemfrom various activities. Agriculture is thelargest producer of P accounting for 63% ofthe catchment total, with sewage and indus-trial discharge sources accounting for 25%and septic tanks for 8%.

River Liffey

Biological quality deteriorated over theProject period with an increase in monitoringsites classed as moderately and seriously pol-luted, particularly on the tributaries, thoughquality in the main channel improved signi-ficantly at a number of locations.

Figure 1 Sectoral TP Loads - Boyne

Figure 2 Sectoral TP Loads - Liffey

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

6

In terms of MRP, water quality improved(i.e. MRP concentrations decreased) over theProject lifetime, particularly on the mainchannel where 10 out of 11 comparable sitesimproved. These improvements are largelydue to the upgrading of Leixlip andOsberstown Wastewater Treatment Plants.Nitrogen levels have also fallen throughoutthe catchment over the Project period. Onbalance, the overall picture is that waterquality in the Liffey has remained relativelystable. Figure 2 shows that P inputs fromagriculture, accounting for 58% of the totalis the largest source, with sewage and otherdischarges contributing 22%. Urban drai-nage is also a significant factor producing10% of the total.

River Suir

Biological quality deteriorated slightly overthe Project period in this catchment with adecrease in monitoring sites classed as"unpolluted". Although the majority of mo-nitoring sites maintained their quality classi-fication, quality increased at 15% of sitesand decreased at a further 15% over theProject period.

There was no obvious pattern to thesechanges. MRP concentrations increased atthe majority of monitoring sites over theProject lifetime indicating worsening waterquality, though nitrogen levels fell at overthree-quarters of sites. Overall, water qualityin the Suir has declined. Figure 3 shows thesources of nutrients contributing to thisdecline. P from agriculture, at 57% is thelargest source, with sewage and other dis-charges contributing 29%. Septic tanks add afurther estimated 7% of P to the river system.

Compliance with Phosphorus Regulations

The Phosphorus Regulations (1998) requirewater quality to be of a certain standard by2007. A comparison of current water qualityat the Project monitoring sites with their2007 interim target, gives an indication ofthe intensity of management measuresrequired in order for the Regulation targets tobe met in the 3 catchments. The Regulationsrequire each monitoring site to pass its targetfor either MRP or Q-rating. The WaterFramework Directive (WFD) may requirethat both criteria be met at each monitoringsite. In 2001, 80% of Project monitoring sitesin the Suir and 79% of sites in the Boyneachieved P-Regulation target standard. Therewere no biological monitoring results for theLiffey catchment in 2001, but monitoringdata from 2000 shows only 60% of siteswould achieve the Regulations target.Compliance with indicative WFD criteriahowever, is much lower in all three catchments.

Figure 3 Sectoral TP Loads - Suir

% COMPARABLE WATER QUALITY SITES

Boyne

(48 sites)

Liffey

(50 sites)

Suir

(69 sites)

2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001

Pass Q criteria ONLY/Fail MRP 23 27 12 - 16 17

Pass MRP criteria ONLY/ Fail Q 25 6 20 - 14 29

Pass Both (WFD Compliant) 25 46 28 - 35 34

Pass P Regulation Objective

(Either/or)

73 79 60 - 65 80

Fail P Regulation Objective (both) 27 21 40 - 35 20

Table 1 Compliance with P-Regulation targets

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

7

Map 2 Three Rivers Water Quality (Biological)

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

8

Special Investigations

Special investigations were carried out in 8pilot study areas to examine the impact ofspecific activities on water quality and testthe effectiveness of management measures toreduce such impacts in a number of these.Intensive water quality and hydrometricmonitoring programmes were carried out inthese areas to generate information on therisk of nutrient loss from specific activitiesand where possible to quantify that loss.

Medium Intensity Agriculture

Five areas where medium intensity agricul-ture is the dominant landuse were investiga-ted; the Yellow (Blackwater) andAnnesbrook (Moynalty) Rivers in the Boynecatchment and the Clonmore, Ara and Dawn(including Ballyshonnock Lake, which is animportant water supply for Waterford City)Rivers in the Suir Catchment.

Detailed surveys of agricultural practices inthese areas highlighted a number of "riskfactors" in terms of protecting water quality.These included high animal stocking rates,poor management of farmyards and lack ofstorage for slurry and manures leading to thespreading of slurries at inappropriate timesand on unsuitable lands. Background levelsof phosphorus in the soils in these areas weregenerally within acceptable agronomic le-vels. The Project established that the directrunoff from poor fertiliser spreading prac-tices (either slurries or chemical fertilisers)and poor farmyard management are likely tobe the most significant contributors to poorwater quality in these areas.

Low Intensity Agriculture andRural Housing

A study of the Clonshanbo River in theLiffey catchment was carried out to pin-pointthe source of nutrient inputs in this catch-ment which is dominated by low intensityagriculture and rural housing development.This complex study indicated that the pri-mary sources of nutrients were agriculture(poor farmyard management and fertiliserusage) and phosphorus stored in river sedi-ments. Because the catchment is relativelyflat, water flow is slow and soil and sedi-ments washed off the land during wet weath-er stay on the bed of watercourses. Thisphosphorus is then released to the water fromthe sediments with rising temperature insummer months leading to eutrophic condi-tions. No elevated phosphorus levels werefound in the groundwaters which feed theriver system in summer months when rainfallis low. While contamination of groundwaterfrom septic tanks attached to rural housing inthe area was not detected, contaminationthrough direct discharges from septic tanksto watercourses can not be ruled out.

Urban Drainage

This study investigated the impact of urbandrainage on water quality in the Camac Riverin the Liffey Catchment. The middle andlower reaches of the river are heavilyurbanised and drainage from the M50 andN7 Naas Road also discharge to this river.The principle source of nutrient contamina-tion was found to be the MunicipalWastewater Treatment Plant at Saggart (cur-rently being decommissioned and diverted tothe city sewage system) which accounted forup to 50% of the phosphorus inputs to theriver. Mis-connections of foul sewage tosurface water drains is another major source.A quarter of the phosphorus input was attri-buted to general urban runoff which could beminimised to a large extent by the imple-mentation of Sustainable Urban DrainageSystems (SUDS) in these areas. This wouldinvolve source control systems (filter strips,ponds, swales etc.) to slow the rate of runoffand intercept pollutants.

Forestry operations can have negative impacts on water quality

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

9

Forestry Operations

A study was conducted of the Kings River inthe upper Liffey Catchment to determine theimpact of forestry operations on water quali-ty. Mature commercial forestry developmentdominates landuse in this catchment. Clearfelling, thinning and replanting operationswere carried out during the study period butno fertiliser was applied. Project investiga-tors found that in general the operators com-plied with the Code of Best Forest Practice.Monitoring results suggest that the forestryoperations did not have an overall detrimen-tal impact on nutrient concentrations inwatercourses. However, due to logistical dif-ficulties in deploying automatic water sam-plers (ASs) extensively throughout thiscatchment, investigations were based prima-rily on weekly grab samples. A further studyusing ASs is recommended before a directrelationship between forestry operations andnutrient losses can be ruled out. Absolutecontrol of nutrient inputs to this uplandcatchment is required as, due to the high rateof rainfall and runoff, even a small increasein nutrient concentrations could have a majorimpact on the Pollaphuca reservoir, whichthe Kings River enters. This reservoir is themajor source of drinking water for Dublincity.

Relationship between flow andnutrient concentrations

In general, monitoring results from theProject auto-samplers deployed in specialinvestigation areas indicated that the concen-tration of nutrients in watercourses increasesas flows increase, suggesting that diffuse dis-charges (e.g. runoff from the land) and un-regulated discharges (such as farmyards,urban drainage and sewer overflows) are amajor source of nutrients in most catch-ments. Reliance on regular one-off grabsamples for measuring nutrient loads, parti-cularly in "flashy catchments" (i.e. catch-ments where there is a rapid runoff of rain-fall), can lead to a serious under estimationof the load discharged, by missing out thepeak conditions.

3. A Programme ofManagement MeasuresWhile the onus for ensuring that water qua-lity in our rivers and lakes meets legislativerequirements rests with Local Authoritiesand statutory bodies, the responsibility forimplementing management strategies toreduce nutrient inputs lies with all sectors ofthe community.

A suite of Management Measures (Table 3)has been proposed by the Project to minimisenutrient losses from all significant activitiescarried out in the three catchments andinclude:

�Capital Investment (upgrading of WWTPs, improvements in farmyard infrastructure and storage, Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems).

�Statutory Measures (licensing and regu-lations, planning control, Bye-laws, crosscompliance in grant aid/subsidies, "Polluter Pays Principle").

�Voluntary Agreements and Schemes (Codes of Good Practice, Rural Environmental Protection Scheme (REPS).

�Public Awareness/EnvironmentalEducation programmes aimed at all sectors of the community.

Balancing ponds, like this one, can prevent pollution, flooding,

and also provide habitats for animals and birds.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

10

A number of measures, (e.g. cross compli-ance and the implementation of "NitrateVulnerable Zones") will require strong polit-ical will at a national level to ensure imple-mentation. In addition, some existing regula-tions need to be reviewed in the light of morestringent environmental objectives requiredunder new legislation. Manpower and finan-cial resources must be made available toL.A. and other bodies to implement thesemeasures. Regular auditing and review of theimplementation and effectiveness of meas-ures is essential to continually improve waterquality.

As agriculture is the main landuse activity inthe three catchments particular emphasis hasbeen placed on developing/refining agricul-tural management practices to minimisedetrimental impacts on the freshwater envi-ronment. In conjunction with Teagasc, theProject has "refined" existing Best FarmManagement Practices and successfullyimplemented Best Farm Management Planson 157 farms in 4 pilot sub-catchments.Innovative practices developed by theProject include:

�"Hydrological risk assessment" of land forthe application of nutrients.

�Nutrient management planning on a field by field basis and,

�Linking of slurry storage capacity to hydrological risk and field by field nutri-ent requirements (subject to the provisionof a minimum capacity).

Good farmyard management is an essentialpart of "Best Practice" and on many of thefarms participating in the pilot programme asmall change in management practices orfarmyard infrastructure would result in sig-nificant improvements towards protectingthe environment.

The pilot studies in sub-catchments domina-ted by urban and forestry developments haveadded to our understanding of the potentialimpacts of such activities and have helped inthe development of management measuresand recommendations to minimise lossesfrom these sources.

A number of successful awareness initiativesaimed at encouraging public participationhave been delivered by the Project including"The Happy Fish Campaign" aimed at pri-mary school children, a Project website,information leaflets, seminars, field trips andpilot studies to publicise Best FarmManagement Practices, and an informationleaflet aimed at the owners of septic tanks.

4. Implementation PlanUnder the current government structures, theresponsibility for the implementation ofthese Catchment Management Systems willfall substantially on Local Authorities withinthe context of the wider River Basin District(RBD) to be formulated under the WaterFramework Directive. The Project has pro-posed a catchment/regional managementstructure to guide and oversee the implemen-tation of the various management strategies.This Management Structure includes:

�A Management Committee drawn from the L.A. responsible for water bodies in the catchment/region, with responsibility for prioritising strategies, securing fund-ing and auditing implementation:

�An Implementation Group drawn from the L.A., statutory bodies and "stakehold-er" groups (e.g. farm organisations, indus-try bodies) with responsibility/account-ability for implementing measures inclu-ding "Codes of Good Practice".

�An Expert Group of specialists to advisein specific disciplines.

�A Support Team composed of a GIS spe-cialist and an environmental and agricul-tural scientist to assist the ImplementationGroup and Management Committee.

The Project provides a blueprint for theimplementation of management measures atcatchment and sub-catchment level. Thereare a limited amounts of manpower andfinancial resources available to tackle pro-blems with water quality.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

11

The Project advocates a targeted stepwiseapproach to determining the appropriatemanagement measures to be implemented inany particular area to achieve the most effec-tive use of these limited resources. Theapproach is based on:

�Identifying major risk characteristics and pressures at catchment scale.

�Identifying Environmental Quality Objec-tives/Standards (EQO) for each waterbodybased on its use and ecological sensitivity.

�Monitoring water quality and quantity to identify areas/water bodies not achieving their EQO and to identify activities and land areas having a detrimental impact on water quality.

�Prioritising the implementation of mana-gement measures based on the following criteria:

1. Current Water Quality - (both physi-co-chemical and biological) with priority given to areas where poor water quality and/or high nutrient load is identified (aimed at achieving compliance with Phosphorus Regulations, Nitrates Directive and Water Framework Directive).

2. Sensitivity of Water Resource - prio-rity given to areas of "beneficial use" or ecological importance, with high sensiti-vity to pollution (aimed at protecting spe-cific water resources).

3. Risk Characteristics - priority given to"high risk" areas where intensification of existing activities or new activities may lead to deterioration in water quality in the future (forward planning aimed at avoiding problems in the future).

�Where the source of nutrient inputs canbe identified, implement the appropri-ate management measure from Table 3.

�Where the source cannot be identified,implement on the ground investigationsto determine the most likely cause.

�Assess planning applications in relationto Risk Map and target management measures in high risk areas when resources are available.

Priority sub-catchments have been selectedby the Project in the three catchments basedon current water quality and nutrient loadsfrom each sub-catchment. Table 2 shows thePriority Catchments selected by the Project.

CATCHMENT SUB-CATCHMENT MAIN MANAGEMENT ISSUES

Boyne main channel, Knightsbrook MWWTP, Agriculture

Mattock/Devlin's, Moynalty Agriculture

BOYNE

Skane, Clady MWWTP’s

Main Liffey channel d/s of Leixlip, Camac

MWWTP’s, Urbanisation

Griffeen MWWTP’s

Main Lyreen Agriculture, Urbanisation

LIFFEY

Upper Lyreen from source to Lyreen Br.

Agriculture

Ara, Suir d/s of Thurles, Outeragh, Suir d/s Cahir

Agriculture, MWWTP`s

Black Stream (Cashel) MWWTP

Clover Agriculture, Septic Tanks

Blackwater (Kilmacow), Clonmore, Clashawley

Agriculture

SUIR

St Johns (Provisional) Industrial, agricultural, urbanisation

Table 2

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

12

Local Authorities can further refine thisselection based on additional criteria detailedabove and any additional information. Theimplementation of management measuresshould be phased in terms of achieving short,medium and long term objectives and berelated to manpower resources and the capi-tal investment available.

The Project has compiled "ManagementSheets" for each sub-catchment of the riversystems that identify the specific mana-gement measures appropriate to addresspressures in the individual sub-catchments.

5. Catchment Management Tool -Catchment Envisage GIS

The Project has delivered a customisedGeographical Information System (GIS),based on MS Access and MapInfo, designedfor managing and presenting data at a catch-ment scale. The system is now operational in18 Local Authorities in the Three RiversProject area.

The system comprises of remote stand-alonemodules to capture and manage data relatingto water monitoring, "pressures", farm sur-veys etc, and a central system to manage andanalyse data collected from these sources.The central system allows a manager toreview the monitoring or survey results

against background layers of catchmentcharacteristics such as soils and topography,to easily produce pre-formatted maps forreports, and to exchange data with the rele-vant government agencies. CatchmentManagers can generate full NutrientManagement Plans (NMP's) and Best FarmManagement Plans using customised mod-ules. Data for initial and detailed farm sur-veys can be stored and analysed on the sys-tem facilitating annual auditing and updatingof farm plans and recommendations. A num-ber of pre-formatted maps and reports areprovided and there are also the facilities forCatchment Managers to define outputs, andsave these as part of the users default system.Development of this GIS was undertaken inconjunction with the Local GovernmentComputer Services Board (LGCSB).

KeyRecommendationsThe Project makes the following key recom-mendations in relation to facilitating effec-tive and efficient river catchment manage-ment in the future, based on the experiencegained over the course of the Project:

1. Responsibility for catchment manage-ment should be co-ordinated by a single management structure which is represen-tative of all significant stakeholders in the catchment. This structure must be adequately resourced, and authorised, to implement existing and new legislation aimed at protecting water resources. In addition, the presence of Field Operatives on the ground helps to raise public awareness and deters polluters.

2. A step-wise approach to identify pres-sures on water quality and appropriate management measures is recommended for the efficient use of available resources within the 3 catchments. Theremay also be merit in considering this approach on a national scale.

3. The Project Monitoring Programme should be integrated with L.A. and EPAmonitoring to provide an integrated Programme aimed at the protection of all water bodies.

Increasing water quality benefits everyone

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

13

4. The Project automatic samplers at key locations in the catchments should con-tinue as an essential part of this pro-gramme and additional automatic sam-plers should be installed on a temporary basis in flashy catchments and locations particularly sensitive to eutrophication.

5. The intensive monitoring programmes inthe agricultural pilot catchments should be continued to evaluate the effectivenessof the management measures implement-ed in those areas.

6. The recommended upgrade of the hydro-metric network should be completed andprimary responsibility for the hydrome-tric networks, transferred from the L.A. to the EPA, with the exception of OPW and ESB stations. Resources must be allocated to the EPA to allow this.

7. A National Dangerous Substance Monitoring Network should be esta-blished and supported by an accredited laboratory, capable of analysis to legisla-tive detection limits. In addition, National Dangerous Substances Protocolshould be established to deal with the taking, handling, analysis and reporting (of these samples).

8. The Urban Wastewater Treatment Regulations should be reviewed in rela-tion to achieving Environmental QualityObjectives/Standards required under the Water Framework Directive and the Phosphorus Regulations.

9. Monitoring requirements for all MWWTP and licensed discharges should be adequate to allow the calcula-tion of the nutrient load discharged by thefacility (Technical Summary Part 4,Table 43). Existing discharge licences should also be reviewed, and new appli-cations assessed, with respect to achie-ving Environmental Quality Objec-tives/Standards in receiving waters. Thisshould also include the review of Section16 discharges to foul sewer in areas of poor water quality.

10. Local Authorities should adopt and im-plement the "Polluter Pays Principle", with respect to applications for dischargelicenses.

11. Best Farm Management Plans (BFMP) as implemented by the Three Rivers Project should be adopted as a standard for farming throughout the catchments, and should be audited on anannual basis by an accredited planner.

12. The implementation of "Cross Compliance" principles in relation to payment of subsidies, grant aid etc. would be an appropriate method for ensuring adoption of BFMP on a catchment basis.

13. Participation in REPS (Rural Environ-mental Protection Scheme) should be encouraged throughout the catchments.The criteria for participation should be revised to include a wider range of farm-ing enterprises or a similar scheme deve-loped to attract large or high intensity enterprises. REPS plans should be assessed yearly by independant, accredi-ted planners, who in turn, should also beaudited and re-accredited on regular basis.

14. Public Awareness programmes should beadequately resourced and implemented on an ongoing basis to engender owner-ship among all sectors of the communityof both the problems and solutions in relation to protecting water resources.

15. Gaps were identified in a significant number of data sets required for deter-mining Risk Characteristics, Pressures and Sensitive Waters (see TechnicalSummary). It is recommended that data gathering programmes be funded and executed at a national level to fill these gaps.

Table 3 summarises specific managementstrategies appropriate to the defined pres-sures in order to maintain and improve waterquality and environmental management ofwater resources.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

14

ConclusionThe Three Rivers Project provides a blue-print for the implementation of catchment orriver basin monitoring and management sys-tems. The project has delivered dedicatedphysico-chemical, biological and hydrome-tric monitoring systems in the three catch-ments with the infrastructure to support thesesystems. Key pressures in each of the catch-ments have been identified and a suite ofmanagement measures formulated to addresseach of these issues. Priority catchmentshave been identified for immediate imple-mentation of management measures and astepwise approach developed for continuallyupdating management priorities in thesecatchments, and there may be merit inextending this approach to other catchmentsin the River Basin Districts (RBDs). A cus-tomised catchment management GIS hasbeen delivered and deployed to manage andanalyse catchment data and to facilitateauditing, revision and updating of manage-ment plans.

The success of the management programmeis totally dependant on the implementation ofthe measures proposed. This requires thecommitment of the Government and LocalAuthorities to achieving the degree of phos-phorus reduction required in each of thecatchments. This commitment needs to bebacked up by the allocation of adequate man-power and financial resources at catchmentand regional level.

With this commitment, the recommendationsof the Three Rivers Project will be a key fac-tor in delivering Ireland's commitmentsunder the Water Framework Directive inrelation to the reduction of phosphorusinputs.

What next?The EU Water Framework Directive (WFD)was adopted in 2000 and advocates an inte-grated approach to managing all water bo-dies including surface waters, groundwatersand transitional and coastal waters. ThisDirective will act as an umbrella for all le-gislation aimed at protecting water resourcesin the future. Waters will be managed atRiver Basin District (RBD) level (a collec-tion of river catchments). River BasinManagement Plans must be prepared by2009 and "good status" achieved for allwater bodies by 2015. The River BasinManagement Projects currently being com-missioned by the DOELG are a key steptowards the implementation of the WFD inIreland. The Liffey and Boyne catchmentswill be incorporated into the Eastern RiverBasin District while the Suir catchment isincluded in the South-Eastern River BasinDistrict.

The Three Rivers Project wishes the RiverBasin Management Projects every successover the coming 4 years.

Management Systems developed by

the Three Rivers Project will hope-

fully be continued by the RBD’s.

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

15

Table 3 Key Management Measures

POLLUTIONSOURCE KEY MANAGEMENT MEASURES

Regulated Point Discharges

MUNICIPALWASTEWATERDISCHARGES

• Review Urban Wastewater Treatment Regulations (UWTRs) in the light of Phosphorus Regulations and Nitrates Directive requirements

• Increase frequency and extent of Discharge Monitoring and determine nutrient load discharged

• Revise Discharge Limits to achieve environmental quality objectives in receiving waters

• Upgrade, maintain and audit the performance of All plants

TRADE & INDUSTRIALDISCHARGES

• Increase frequency and extent of Discharge Monitoring and determine nutrient load discharged

• Revise Discharge Limits to achieve water quality objectives in receiving waters

• Implement waste prevention strategies by applying Best Available Technology to reduce nutrient load at source

• Implement “Polluter Pays Principle” to encourage reduction at source

Unregulated Point Discharges

URBAN DRAINAGE • Planning Control - Zoning, Building Regulations, licensing of discharges

• Source Control - of contaminated runoff eg. bunding, correct miss-connections

• Implement Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) in new developments and retrofit in existing developments

• Emergency Response to manage accidental spills

SEPTIC TANKS • Planning Control – appropriate siting, level of treatment, quality of construction

• Education of owners in proper use and maintenance

Diffuse Discharges (including farmyards)

AGRICULTURE • Implement Best Farm Management Plans (BFMP) on All farms

• Encourage participation in Rural Environmental Protection Scheme (REPS)

• Implementation by the Government of “cross compliance” between direct payment schemes and environmental farming practices

• Implementation of Legislative Control – Water Pollution Act (Section 12s, Agricultural Bye-laws) and Waste Management Act (spread lands)

• Environmental Awareness programmes promoting the uptake of “Codes of Good Practice” in farming.

MUNICIPAL &

INDUSTRIALSLUDGES

• Develop and implement sludge management plans under the Waste Management Act at a catchment level

• Implement Nutrient Management Plans (NMP) for all lands on which the spreading of sludge is authorised

• Auditing of waste licenses and NMP with respect to spreadlands

• Development of a “spreadland” module for a catchment Geographical InformationSystem to enable efficient tracking and auditing of sludge spreading.

FORESTRY • Implement, monitor and audit Code of Best Forestry Practice

• Monitor the impact of forestry activities on water quality using automatic samplers

• Implement Water Pollution Act where impact is shown

PEAT EXTRACTION • Implement engineering solutions to minimise the release of sediments from drainage and extraction activities

• Develop and implement a Code of Best Practice for extraction activities in consultation with L.A., EPA and Fisheries Boards

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

Three Rivers Project / Executive Summary

16

Notes

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

THREE RIVERS PROJECT PARTNERSTHE THREE RIVERS PROJECTPARTNERS

The Three Rivers Project is sponsored by theDepartment of the Environment and Local Government, with 85% financial sup-port from the European Union CohesionFund.The project is jointly administered by Meath County Council, Kildare CountyCouncil and Tipperary (S.R.) CountyCouncil.

The overall project is managed by a SteeringGroup, which consists of representatives ofthe following organisations:

Environmental Protection Agency

Department of the Environment and Local Government

Central Fisheries Board

Kildare County Council

Meath County Council

Tipperary (S.R.) County Council

The project is being carried out in partnershipwith the following constituent Local Authorities in the catchment :

Cavan County Council

Cork County Council

Drogheda Borough Council

Dublin City Council

Fingal County Council

Kildare County Council

Kilkenny County Council

Limerick County Council

Louth County Council

Meath County Council

Offaly County Council

South Dublin County Council

Tipperary (NR) County Council

Tipperary (SR) County Council

Waterford City Council

Waterford County Council

Westmeath County Council

Wicklow County Council

Other participating agencies are :

Bord na Móna

Coillte

Department of Agriculture andRural Development

Dúchas

Eastern Regional Fisheries Board

Electricity Supply Board

Forest Service

Geological Survey of Ireland

Irish Cattle Traders and Stockowners Association (ICSA)

Irish Creamery Milk SuppliersAssociation (ICMSA)

Irish Farmers Association (IFA)

Local Government Computer Services Board

Office of Public Works

Southern Regional Fisheries Board

Teagasc

The Three Rivers Project is 85% funded by the European Union Cohesion Fund

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34

BOYNE CATCHMENT

Meath County Council

(Environment Section)

County Hall

Railway Street

Navan Co. Meath

Telephone Number: 046-9021581Fax Number: 046-9021463E-mail: info@meathcoco.ie

SUIR CATCHMENT

South Tipperary County Council

(Environment Section)

Emmet Street

Clonmel Co. Tipperary

Telephone Number: 052-34456Fax Number: 052-24355

E-mail: secretary@southtippcoco.ie

Water Quality Monitoring & Management

THREE RIVERSPROJECT

M . C . O ’ S U L L I V A N - C o n s u l t i n g E n g i n e e r s

This report was printed on fully recycled paper

LIFFEY CATCHMENT

Kildare County Council

(Environment Section)

St Mary’s

Naas Co. Kildare

Telephone Number: 045-873838Fax Number: 045-873848

E-mail: secretar@kildarecoco.ie

www.threeriversproject.ie

For

insp

ectio

n pur

pose

s only

.

Conse

nt of

copy

right

owne

r req

uired

for a

ny ot

her u

se.

EPA Export 26-07-2013:01:28:34