Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T15:06:58.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Provincial soil-quality monitoring networks in the Netherlands as an instrument for environmental protection

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2016

S. Postma
Affiliation:
ARCADIS Heidemij Advies P.O. Box 264, 6800 AG ARNHEM, the Netherlands; e-mail: S.Postma@arcadis.nl
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Since 1991, several provinces in the Netherlands have put much effort in establishing soil-quality monitoring networks. The purpose of these networks is to provide insight in the trends in (geochemical) soil quality, on which new policies for environmental protection can be based, such as restrictions in certain landuse types and cleaner production processes. The soil quality networks are yet too young to serve this goal. Monitoring efforts are concentrated on micro- and macro-elements, particularly in the top layer of the soil (mainly heavy metals and PAH) as well as phreatic groundwater (mainly nitrates and phosphates) in the various regions of a province. The regional soil-quality monitoring networks focus explicitly on diffuse environmental pollution in the rural areas, which means that sample sites influenced by soil pollution caused by local sources are excluded. Regional differences in soil quality in the rural areas are primarily caused by chemical and physical differences in the natural soil composition and by differences in deposition loads (direct and indirect). Hydrological conditions can also exert a large influence, particularly for nitrate leaching. This leads to three major criteria which the network design is based upon: (1) soil type, (2) landuse (assumed to be representative for deposition), and (3) groundwater tables. Subregions are formed by combining these criteria. Subregions are considered to be more or less homogeneous at a regional scale with respect to the criteria named. Within each region, a pre-calculated number of sites, based on variability of present concentrations, have been sampled and the sample material has been analyzed. Descriptive statistical parameters could thus computed; they are the base for the geochemical soil mapping of the individual, homogeneous subregions.

A recent evaluation of all operational soil-quality monitoring networks shows that these networks are effective instruments to gain insight into the differences in quality of the soil and the phreatic groundwater between the various regions. The understanding of these differences and the processes that caused them provide the provincial authorities with valuable information for policy making and environmental management. The evaluation also reveals differences in network designs, mostly due to local differences in physical-chemical properties and political choices.

It can be concluded from the first results of the networks that the relative high loads of zinc and copper, caused by spreading manure on the farmlands in areas of intensive agricultural landuse, have led to notably higher concentrations of these elements in the top layer of the soil compared to more natural lands like forested areas. The fact that the intensive agricultural landuse is mainly situated on relatively highly permeable sandy soils results in high nitrate concentrations in the phreatic groundwater, up to concentrations far beyond EG drinking-water target levels. First monitoring results signalled several environmental problems of which most of the policy makers were already aware, but could not quantify. Delineation of the most vulnerable areas and/or areas with unacceptably high loads and quantification of concentrations of different elements enable regional governments to take appropriate measures.

The soil-quality monitoring networks will focus in the coming years on the effectiveness of the measures taken in the various areas. Efforts are being made to integrate the relatively new soil-quality monitoring networks and the longer existing groundwater-quality monitoring networks to achieve a better understanding of the (bio)geochemical cycling processes. Tuning the individual regional soil-quality monitoring networks of the various provinces will enable the provision of additional information about soil quality at a larger scale.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Stichting Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 2000

References

Brombacher, A.J.P. & Busink, E.R.V., 1996. Bodemkwaliteitsmeetnet Provincie Zuid-Holland: inrichting van het meetnet vermesting en resultaten van de eerste meetronde. Internal Report CSO Consultants (Bunnik) 96.125: 51 pp.Google Scholar
Busink, E.R.V., 1998. Bodemkwaliteitsmeetnet provincie Noord-Brabant: eerste trendmeetronde thema vermesting. Internal Report TNO, Department of Environment, Energy and Process Innovation (Apeldoorn) R98/216: 30 pp.Google Scholar
Busink, E.R.V. & Hoogerwerf, M.R., 1994. Bodemkwaliteitsmeetnet provincie Utrecht: resultaten van de eerste meetronde van het meetnet vermesting. Internal Report CSO Consultants (Bunnik) 94.022b: 48 pp.Google Scholar
Busink, E.R.V. & Postma, S., 1998. Afstemming provinciale bodemkwaliteitsmeetnetten. Internal Report TNO, Department of Environment, Energy and Process Innovation (Apeldoorn) R98/223: 75 pp.Google Scholar
Davis, J.C., 1986. Statistics and data analysis in geology (2nd ed.). John Wiley (New York): 646 pp.Google Scholar
De Kwaadsteniet, J.W., 1987. Strategies for soil sampling from a statistical point of view. In: Van Duijvenbooden, W. & Waegeningh, G.H. (eds.): Vulnerability of soil and groundwater to pollutants. CHO/TNO / RIVM (Den Haag) Proceedings and Information 38: 43 pp.Google Scholar
Edelman, Th., 1984. Achtergrondgehaltes van een aantal anorganische en organische stoffen in de bodem van Nederland. Publication Series ‘Bodembescherming’ (Ministry of Housing and Environmental Planning (Den Haag) 34: 74 pp.Google Scholar
Gertzen, J.W., Koch, C.F.M. & Markvoort, T. 1984. Cadmium, lood, zink rond Luijksgestel, Bergeijk en omgeving. Centraal Bodemkundig Bureau (Deventer): 43 pp.Google Scholar
Kleijn, C.E. & Leenaers, H.L., 1991. Provinciale bodemkwaliteitsmeetnetten. Internal Report CSO Consultants (Bunnik) L013.91: 203 pp.Google Scholar
Lexmond, Th.M. & Edelman, Th., 1992. Huidige achtergrondwaarden van het gehalte aan een aantal zware metalen en arseen in grond. In: Handboek Bodembescherming. Samson/H.D. TjeenkWillink (Alphen a/d Rijn): D41101 - D4410-35.Google Scholar
LISEC, 1985. Inventariserend onderzoek inzake de verontreiniging met zware metalen in de Kempen. Werkgroep zware metalen in de Kempen, Studiecentrum voor ecologie en Bosbouw (Bokrijk-Genk) : 83 pp.Google Scholar
Postma, S. & Busink, E.R.V. 1997. Uitvoering nulmetingen provinciaal meetnet bodemkwaliteit Noord-Brabant. Internal Report CSO Consultants (Bunnik) 96.431 A/B: 86 pp.Google Scholar
Stichting voor Bodemkartering, 1981. Bodemkundige landschappen van Nederland: toelichting bij de Bodemkaart van Nederland, schaal 1:200,000. Pudoc (Wageningen): 132 pp. + 5 appendices.Google Scholar
Van Drecht, G., Boumans, L.J.M., Fraters, B., Reijnders, H.F.R. & Van Duijvenbooden, W., 1996. Spatial distribution of heavy metal load of the soil from diffuse sources and heavy metal target value exceedance in top soil. Report RIVM (Bilthoven) 714801006: 90 pp.Google Scholar