Biomonitoring using birds of prey as sentinel species has been mooted as a way to evaluate the success of European Union directives that are designed to protect people and the environment across Europe from industrial contaminants and pesticides. No such pan-European evaluation currently exists. Coordination of such large scale monitoring would require harmonisation across multiple countries of the types of samples collected and analysed-matrices vary in the ease with which they can be collected and the information they provide. We report the first ever pan-European assessment of which raptor samples are collected across Europe and review their suitability for biomonitoring. Currently, some 182 monitoring programmes across 33 European countries collect a variety of raptor samples, and we discuss the relative merits of each for monitoring current priority and emerging compounds. Of the matrices collected, blood and liver are used most extensively for quantifying trends in recent and longer-term contaminant exposure, respectively. These matrices are potentially the most effective for pan-European biomonitoring but are not so widely and frequently collected as others. We found that failed eggs and feathers are the most widely collected samples. Because of this ubiquity, they may provide the best opportunities for widescale biomonitoring, although neither is suitable for all compounds. We advocate piloting pan-European monitoring of selected priority compounds using these matrices and developing read-across approaches to accommodate any effects that trophic pathway and species differences in accumulation may have on our ability to track environmental trends in contaminants.

Biomonitoring using raptors as sentinels can provide early warning of the potential impacts of contaminants on humans and the environment and also a means of tracking the success of associated mitigation measures. Examples include detection of heavy metal-induced immune system impairment, PCB-induced altered reproductive impacts, and toxicity associated with lead in shot game. Authorisation of such releases and implementation of mitigation is now increasingly delivered through EU-wide directives but there is little established pan-European monitoring to quantify outcomes. We investigated the potential for EU-wide coordinated contaminant monitoring using raptors as sentinels. We did this using a questionnaire to ascertain the current scale of national activity across 44 European countries. According to this survey, there have been 52 different contaminant monitoring schemes with raptors over the last 50years. There were active schemes in 15 (predominantly western European) countries and 23 schemes have been running for >20years; most monitoring was conducted for >5years. Legacy persistent organic compounds (specifically organochlorine insecticides and PCBs), and metals/metalloids were monitored in most of the 15 countries. Fungicides, flame retardants and anticoagulant rodenticides were also relatively frequently monitored (each in at least 6 countries). Common buzzard (Buteo buteo), common kestrel (Falco tinnunculus), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), white-tailed sea eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla), peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus), tawny owl (Strix aluco) and barn owl (Tyto alba) were most commonly monitored (each in 6-10 countries). Feathers and eggs were most widely analysed although many schemes also analysed body tissues. Our study reveals an existing capability across multiple European countries for contaminant monitoring using raptors. However, coordination between existing schemes and expansion of monitoring into Eastern Europe is needed. This would enable assessment of the appropriateness of the EU-regulation of substances that are hazardous to humans and the environment, the effectiveness of EU level mitigation policies, and identify pan-European spatial and temporal trends in current and emerging contaminants of concern.

Present technologies for wastewater treatment do not sufficiently address the increasing pollution situation of receiving water bodies, especially with the growing use of personal care products and pharmaceuticals (PPCP) in the private household and health sector. The relevance of addressing this problem of organic pollutants was taken into account by the Directive 2013/39/EU that introduced (i) the quality evaluation of aquatic compartments, (ii) the polluter pays principle, (iii) the need for innovative and affordable wastewater treatment technologies, and (iv) the identification of pollution causes including a list of principal compounds to be monitored. In addition, a watch list of 10 other substances was recently defined by Decision 2015/495 on March 20, 2015. This list contains, among several recalcitrant chemicals, the painkiller diclofenac and the hormones 17β-estradiol and 17α-ethinylestradiol. Although some modern approaches for their removal exist, such as advanced oxidation processes (AOPs), retrofitting most wastewater treatment plants with AOPs will not be acceptable as consistent investment at reasonable operational cost. Additionally, by-product and transformation product formation has to be considered. The same is true for membrane-based technologies (nanofiltration, reversed osmosis) despite of the incredible progress that has been made during recent years, because these systems lead to higher operation costs (mainly due to higher energy consumption) so that the majority of communities will not easily accept them. Advanced technologies in wastewater treatment like membrane bioreactors (MBR) that integrate biological degradation of organic matter with membrane filtration have proven a more complete elimination of emerging pollutants in a rather cost- and labor-intensive technology. Still, most of the presently applied methods are incapable of removing critical compounds completely. In this opinion paper, the state of the art of European WWTPs is reflected, and capacities of single methods are described. Furthermore, the need for analytical standards, risk assessment, and economic planning is stressed. The survey results in the conclusion that combinations of different conventional and advanced technologies including biological and plant-based strategies seem to be most promising to solve the burning problem of polluting our environment with hazardous emerging xenobiotics.