Purpose categories
Four categories have been identified according to the primary purpose of each monitoring initiative:
Engagement:
Education and raising awareness
Surveillance:
Ecosystem health screening
Investigation:
Helping to target further action
Evaluation:
Assessing the impact of actions
These categories were formed by looking at the ‘monitoring questions’ submitted by the CaSTCo Demo/+ catchments in the early phases of the project and also by referring to both the Chesapeake Monitoring Co-operative ‘Tiered Framework for Data Collection and Integration for Nontraditional Monitoring’ and the River Restoration Centre’s PRAGMO (Practical Guide to Monitoring) guidance.
Describing purpose in combination with tiers
The boundaries between the different categories of monitoring are often blurred – it is common for a monitoring programme to fulfil a range of the purposes outlined for each and also for programmes to shift emphasis over time (and location). Therefore the recommendations set out below are those considered the most likely for each type of monitoring – there are no doubt examples where higher or lower tiers of monitoring methods have been employed effectively.
The CaSTCo project Method Audit process is ongoing – so further information on which tiers specific methods will fall into, and the protocols required to achieve the tier classification will follow.
Engagement: Education and raising awareness
Likely Tiers: 0 – 1
Purpose
- Raise awareness of river/catchment issues with new target audiences
- Introduce basic concepts of river/catchment health monitoring
- Invites people to take part in more formal monitoring schemes
Characteristics
- Likely to be low-cost and easy-to-use techniques or visual assessment only
- Applied in an ad hoc / informal manner
- Training/support materials available at the point of need (i.e. little or no prior knowledge required)
- Resultant data is not always analysed when it is high-level summaries are typical
Examples
- Freshwater Watch WaterBlitz – unstructured, ‘one-off’ with Tier 1 methods (Kyoritsu PackTest for nitrate and phosphate)
- Big River Watch – unstructured visual assessment – Tier 0
Surveillance: Ecosystem health screening
Likely Tiers: 1 – 2
Purpose
- Provide a general baseline of river health
- Indicate potential pollution hotspots
- Identify opportunities for restoration or improvement
- Act as a ‘rallying cause’ for communities
- Act as an early warning of big changes to river health
- Target investigations and/or higher tiers of monitoring
Characteristics
- Standardised approach, widely applied over the long term
- Examining a wide range of ecosystem health indicators at entry-level likely to include large numbers of volunteers and relatively high spatial density of sampling/survey locations, therefore likely to be relatively low-cost / easy-to-use techniques
- Likely to include ‘light touch’ training (online and/or peer-to-peer)sampling points chosen to be representative of overall catchment conditions (i.e. not unduly influenced by point source pollution)
- Sampling effort should be distributed evenly over the year with regular sampling interval (e.g. weekly, fortnightly or monthly for water sampling)data suitable for reporting via standardised ‘report cards’ enabling easy comparison between locations and/or over time
Examples
- Westcountry CSI – a suite of Tier 1 methods + holistic visual assessment
- Water Rangers – structured, co-ordinated sampling using a standard suite of equipment (Tier 1)
Investigation: Helping to target further action
Likely tiers: Most likely 2 – perhaps 1 or 3 in some cases (dependent on the nature of pressure/intervention)
Purpose
- Examine particular or suspected pressures in greater detail and provide information for designing management actions/interventions
- Identify sources of pollution
Characteristics
- Monitoring programme tailored to specific circumstances
- Likely to be more targeted – spatially, temporally or thematically
- More exacting data quality requirements – need a high degree of confidence and/or to detect small changes
- Likely to employ higher cost / more accurate techniques
- More comprehensive training is required
- Greater level of commitment required from volunteers Quality Control / Quality Assurance given greater emphasis linked to some kind of action (e.g. remediation/mitigation/restoration projects)
- Likely to be for a limited duration, long enough to provide the required certainty but not indefinite
- Could form part of BACI design (Before – After – Control – Impact) and may be influenced by Ecosystem Health Screening monitoring programmes or pre-existing data or assessments (e.g. Water Framework Directive)
- Some degree of detailed data analysis and reporting required
Examples
- iWharfe Upper – identifying sources of faecal bacteria on the Upper River Wharfe. Citizen sampling with lab analysis (Tier 3)
- iWharfe Eco-Ashlands project – the impact of untreated and treated effluent from Ilkley STW on the ecology of the River Wharfe. Citizen sampling with lab analysis for water chemistry, diatom algae and aquatic macroinvertebrates.
- Wye Alliance Citizen Science – structured monitoring with a focus on identifying the source of nutrient pollution to River Wye
Evaluation: Assessing the impact of actions
Most likely 2 – perhaps 1 or 3 in some cases (dependent on resources/scope of intervention or project)
Purpose
- Provide evidence of the effectiveness of interventions and/or restoration projects
- Enable an adaptive management approach and identify the need for further interventions
- Help inform the design of future interventions and projects
Characteristics
- Likely to share many characteristics of investigative monitoring – targeted, high data quality, more comprehensive training, strong Quality Control / Quality Assurance focus, limited duration
- Consider BACI approach (Before – After – Control – Impact)
- Some degree of detailed data analysis and reporting required
Examples
Haltwhistle Burn community Natural Flood Management (NFM) project – fixed point photography and timelapse cameras