Navigation
Post a comment on the text below
reservoir - Conditional.(YesNoUnclearReservoir_Enum)
For heavily modified river or lake water bodies, indicate whether the water body is a reservoir that has been created by damming a river (‘Yes, it is a reservoir and the water body was originally a river’) or an existing lake (‘No, it is a reservoir but the water body was originally a lake’).
You cannot post comments to this consultation because you are not authenticated. Please log in.
Previous comments
The value of the codelist: 'No, it is a reservoir but the waterbody was originally a lake' has led to a lot of confusions in Spain.
We propose to change it by 'Yes, it is a reservoir but the waterbody was originally a lake'
HU: We suggest deleting the first part of the sentences of the enumeration list, there is no need for ‘Yes’ / ‘No’ / ’Unclear’.
We support the HU comment
The definition of the reservoir is unclear. Reservoirs are typically man-made, so they often are artificial. In which case heavily modified river, lake or coastal waters should be considered as reservoir?
"However, Member States may choose to report reservoirs formed by damming rivers as lake water bodies if they wish."
We propose to change it by “Member States may choose to designate and report reservoirs formed by damming rivers as lake water bodies if they wish.”
EL supports the HU suggestion
"Yes, it is a reservoir and the water body was originally a river’ = Select only if the whole surface water body represents a reservoir (or part of a reservoir) created by damming a river. (surfaceWaterBodyCategory must be reported as ‘RW’ and naturalAWBHMWB as ‘Heavily Modified’)."
This part of the text we propose to correct: “Yes, it is a reservoir and the water body was originally a river’ = Select only if the whole surface water body represents a reservoir (or part of a reservoir) created by damming a river. (naturalAWBHMWB must be reported as ‘Heavily Modified’).” --> We recommend deleting the contradictory part about ‘RW’ water body category as Member States may choose to report reservoirs formed by damming rivers as lake water bodies if they wish.
The option "No, it is a reservoir but the water body was originally a lake" might lead to confusion and we would also suggest to change the text as following "Yes, it is a reservoir but the water body was originally a lake".
It is not clear for us why this information has to be reported and in what contexte it will be used afterwards.
The approach represented in the schema element: reservoir is not totally clear.
1. When the water body consist of a river and one or more reservoirs should it be treated as "reservoir".
In Poland for example ther is a special subcategory of riverine water bodies for reservoirs but only big reservoirs and then whole waterbody is a resevoir.
2. One can argue whether a modified lake could be called reservoir
3. "Unclear, it is a reservoir but originally included chained rivers and lakes" - the situation is rather clear just should be mentioned that reservoir has been created from more than one river or lake which were chained.