Dan ubeWatc h

1/ 9 9

The Magazine of the Environmental Programme for the Danube River Basin

Dan u b e De l t a : W at e r b r i n g s b ac kDi v e r s i t y

Ro m a n ia : Mo r e In f o r m at i o ns h o u l d h e l p t o s a -v e Dr i n k i n g Wa t e r

Da n u b e Ri v e r Ba -s i n : Po l lu t i o n d o e s n o ts t o p a t Na t io n a l Bo r d e s

Erscheinungsor t : Wien • Ver lagspost am t 1 1 1 0 Wien • Post gebühr bar bezahlt • env o i à t axe réduit e

2

W E L C O M E • N O . 1 / 1 9 9 9

I m p r i n t :O w n e r : Danube Programme Coordination Unit, Vienna International Center, A-1400 Vi e n n a ,P u b l i s h e r : Bohmann Druck und Verlag Gesellschaft m.b.H. & Co. KG, A-1110 Wien, Leber-strasse 122, Tel. +43/1/740 95-0, Telex: 132312, Fax +43/1/740 95-110, DVR: 0408689. Managing Dir e c t o r : Rudolf Bohmann, Heinz Keller. Publishing Management : Gabriele S. Ambros (E-Mail: ambros.zv@bohmann.co.at). E d i t o r : Renate Haiden, Tel. +43/1/740 95/476 (E-Mail: haiden.zv@bohmann.co.at), P ro d u c t i o n : U e b e rreuter Print und Digimedia GmbH, A-2100 Korn e u b u rg, C o v e r p h o t o s : B. Krobath, E. We i n g a rt n e rStatement on the fundamental orientation under § 25 Mediengesetz of June, 12 1981: The Danube Watch is inteded to be an instrument to support the flow of information on theDanube environment in general and on the EPDRB and the Danube River Protection Conven-tion activities in part i c u l a r.Any views expressed in Danube Watch do not necessarily re p resent those of the members ofthe Programme Management Task Force or the staff of the Programme Coordination Unit.

G E R M A N Y

More Money for Pollution Reduction3

R E P O R T

Danube Water Quality Model Simulations4

D A N U B E R I V E R B A S I N

Pollution does not stop at National Borders5

D A N U B E R I V E R B A S I N

Restoration of Danube Floodplains7

B O O K R E V I E W & S Y M P O S I U M

Religion, Science and the Environment 8

P R O J E C T S U P P O R T

Environmental Small Investments9

S L O V E N I A

Groundwater protection policy1 0

R O M A N I A

Information Campaign on Water Savings1 1

T I S Z A R I V E R B A S I N

International Cooperation1 2

C O N T E N T SE d i t o r i a lDANUBE WAT C H

New Start for Danube Watch

I n t e rested readers of the quart e r l yi n f o rmation magazine DanubeWatch – having appeared for fiveyears – will have noticed the de-layed publication of the new issue.The managers of the Enviro n m e n t a lP rogramme for the Danube RiverBasin invited tenders for the newp roduction of the magazine and itwas assigned to the BohmannG roup in Vi e n n a .The Austrian Federal Chancellery asc o o rdinator of the Austrian part i c i-pation in the Environmental Pro-gramme for the Danube River Basinwas pleased to grant the request ofthe Vienna International Centre -based Danube PCU (Danube Pro-gramme Coordination Unit) to fi-nance the first issue of the newDanube Watch. After that, ways and means will befound in the framework of the In-t e rnational Danube Protection Con-vention – supported by the DanubeE n v i ronmental Programme since itscoming into force in October 1998 -to continue to finance the publica-tion of Danube Watch. Its contribu-tion to the development of cro s s -b o rder cooperation of authorities,scientists, professional enterprisesand environmental organisations inthe field of water management, en-v i ronment and the protection ofn a t u re in the Danube River Basin isc e rtainly worth the eff o rt !

WOLFGANG HEIN

HEAD OF THE DEPA RTMENT

FOR THE COORDINATION OF ENERGY

AND ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS OF THE

AUSTRIAN FEDERAL CHANCELLERY

C O U N T RY PROGRAMME COORDINAT O R

A-1014 VIENNA

H O H E N S TAUFENG. 3

TEL. +43/1/531 15/29 00

FAX +43/1/531 15/29 35

E-MAIL: WOLFGANG.HEIN@BKA.GV. AT

This issue is supported by the Austrian Federal Chancellery.

DANUBE WATCH • 1/1999

A proposal prepared by theGerman “Kreditanstalt fürWiederaufbau” (KfW) was

the basis for discussions at theDanube Environmental FinancingFacility Workshop, held in Baden(Austria) on February 18 and 19,1999.

“The report approaches in par-ticular the terms of how to devel-op a fund or a facility that couldfacilitate the implementation ofpriority projects on pollution re-duction in the Danube RiverBasin,” explained JürgenLottmann, one of the authors ofthe proposal. The analysis of thereport is in part based on data

from the national reviews con-ducted in the participatingDanube countries and prepared bynational expert teams analyzing fi-nancial mechanisms, social andeconomic factors, water qualitydata and defining projects andmeasures on pollution reduction.

No precedent for such afund worldwide

“The task was to design a multi-lateral fund to finance environ-mental investments in the DanubeRiver Basin as there is no prece-dent for such a fund worldwide,”summarizes the financial expert of

the KfW. The idea to create such afund is the logical consequence ofthe donors´ financial efforts to as-sess the water environment of theDanube Basin and of the lists ofpriority investment objects. Such afund was conceived to promoteproject preparation to the status“bankable” and to furnish invest-ment funds for their realization.Background of such a concept isthe weakness of the transitioncountries of the Danube Basin ininvestment planning and fundraising.

The investment objects areplentiful since in all countries ofthe Basin many urgent environ-mental improvements are neces-sary, including those which aim toimprove the quality of the DanubeBasin water. The lion´s share of theinvestment cost has to be borneby the countries, their citizens asfee- and tax-payers and by theirenterprises. Since the transitioncountries are more or less all ineconomic difficulties and theircentral and local governmentshave to face severe budgetary re-straints, progress in environmentalinvestments will be slow. The in-vestment volumes will not be de-termined by offers of credit moneybut by the priorities the countriesset in water pollution control andby the funds they allocate for in-vestments and operations.

“Such a big Danube Environ-mental Facility was conceived bythe consultants, but judged notfeasible,” explains JürgenLottmann. “It is impossible to cre-ate fresh and additional money.Futhermore, the need for a bigfund has been limited by the in-stallation of the Project Manage-ment Task Force (PMTF),” says theexpert. The reasons for not recom-mending a big fund can be sum-marised as follows:● A compensation mechanism bywhich the wealthier countries payin money and the less well-off be-come recipients does not corre-spond to the constellation of in-terest.● International taxes on pollutioncharges would not be acceptablein the wealthier and the poorcountries; besides pollutioncharges would prove inequitable.Finally most countries still lack

3

G E R M A N Y

More money for pollution reductionThe terms of how to develop a fund for high priority projects on pollution reduction have recently been discussed at a workshop in Austria

A multilateral fund should finance environmental investments in the Danube River Basin

4

the administrative structures forsuch systems.● Credit money from outsidedonors is available and cannot beaugmented or subsidised by afund. Since the major donors sup-port the countries also with adviceand technical assistance, the appli-cation for such a fund cannot beimproved.● Sizeable amounts of concession-al money have been given by theEU and this will continue with thenew priorities of accession supportand infrastructure investment.This money, however, is not avail-able for multilateral institutions.● The brokerage function and theassistance in project preparation,which such a fund might haveprovided, has already been givento the PMTF.

What poses a generally accept-ed, common problem are the nu-trient loads of the Danube whichcontribute decisively to the eu-trophication of the Black Sea. Theenvironmental efforts in severalcountries will be dominated by theneed to conform with Europeanstandards, less by domestic priori-ties and not by the agreementswithin the framework of the DR-PC. There are smaller and complexinvestments needed, for whichdonor support is not easily avail-able.At the DEFF workshop held inBaden, Austria in 17 and 18th,1999, it was agreeed that an alter-native to the DEFF concept shouldbe developed. The development ofa Project Implementation Facility(PIF) was recommended as a viablealternative. In addition the follow-ing recommendations were made:1. A new expert group for evalua-tion and appraisal of such projectswhich donors do not want to takeup. This Project Appraisal Groupshould be elected by the Interna-tional Commission (IC). Projectswith a positive approval could bepresented for financing, and 2. the creation of a new article ofthe Convention which would setthe basic rules for a joint imple-mentation mechanism.

C O N TA C T: J. LOTTMANN &

D. SCHULZE-VORHAGEN,

K R E D I TA N S TA LT FÜR WIEDERAUFBAU,

E - M A I L : J U E R G E N . L O T T M A N N @ K F W. D E ,

D I E T E R . S C H U L Z E - V O R H A G E N @ K F W. D E

G E R M A N Y

The Danube Water Quality Mod-el (DWQM) Report was pre-

pared in the frame of the DanubePollution Reduction Programme(PRP) and discussed at the Trans-boundary Analysis Workshop inHernstein (Austria) in January1999.

The simulations have been con-ducted to support the Transbound-ary Analysis as well as to support

the definition of priority measures(investment portfolio) of the Pol-lution Reduction Programme.

The report raises in particulartransboundary issues related to thetransport of nutrients – phospho-rus and nitrogen – from theDanube River Basin to the BlackSea. “The water quality data inputfrom the various Danubian coun-tries and from reports of the ICP-DR (International Commission forthe Protection of the Danube Riv-er) working groups need furtherverification,” is UNDP/GEF consul-tant Jos van Gils convinced.Equally, results taken from theMass Balance Model (MBM) fromthe Vienna University of Technol-ogy, are based on data collectedand processed in 1992. “Further,certain parameters of the DWQMwould need to be adjusted whenmore precise scientific indicators

become available,” explains theexpert. Considering these con-straints, the result of the DWQMcan only be seen as one of the pos-sible indicators to determine thetransport of nutrients from the dif-ferent Danubian countries to theBlack Sea.

The water balance model formsthe necessary basis for the waterquality model. Its purpose is to

compute the water balances for allcomputational segments. Then theset up of the water balance modelis done in three steps: 1. the map-ping of the catchment of theDanube; 2. the computation of theflows and 3. the computation ofthe remaining segment character-istics. The composition of the wa-ter balances is based on measuredflow data for a number of specificstations. In between those sta-tions, the diffuse inflows are back-computed. In this procedure, theunknown diffuse inflows are as-sumed proprotional to the in-crease of the catchment area alongthe river. For this purpose, a map-ping of the catchment to the rivernetwork is made.

C O N TA C T: JOS VAN GILS, DELFT HYDRAULICS

PHONE: +3115/285/8472,

FAX: +3115/285/8582,

E-MAIL: JOS.VA N G I L S @ W L D E L F T. N L

Danube Water QualityModel SimulationsPossbile indicators to determine the transportof nutrients can be pointed out by the model

Longitudinal profile of the catchment area (in 1.000 km2) along the Danube

The main objective of theTransboundary Analysis is toprovide the technical basis

for the development of a PollutionReduction Programme for the pro-tection of the Danube River Basin.Technical basis refers e.g. to the aspects of the detection, character-ization, comparison, and evalua-tion of pollution sources, waterquality and pollution loadsthroughout the basin; the discov-ery and characterization of areasand issues that are sensitive to pollutant concentrations or loads;the discovery and evaluation ofroot causes of water quality prob-lem situations or the preliminaryranking of possible interventions,and the determination of stake-holders and the evaluation of

constraints to interventions. 13countries had been defined to par-ticipate in the work for the Trans-boundary Analysis: Austria, Ger-many, the Czech Republic, the Slo-vak Republic, Hungary, Slovenia,Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina,the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria,Moldavia and the Ukraine. Fourcountries with very small areas inthe Danube River Basin did notparticipate.

The general pro j e c t - d e s i g n

Target oriented planning wasadopted as the methodology forconducting workshops. Pro-gramme activities and milestoneswere planned at an Inception

Workshop in November 1997.Groups of national experts, eachwith a national coordinator, wereengaged within each country toupdate National Review Reports.Four international consultantswith specialites in river basinmodelling, water quality data, so-cio-economics and engineeringwere engaged to assist in the de-velopment of National Review Re-ports, the development of theDWQM and the preparation of theTransboundary Analysis.

Focus on Hot Spots

Special attention was focusedon transboundary pollution prob-lems, including problems involv-ing the Black Sea. Pollutionsources that were emphasized werehigh priority hot spots and diffusesources that presumably weregood targets for future inventions.Priority was determined by eachcountry on the basis of multidisci-plinary evaluations and compar-isons that examined emissions,conditions of receiving waters,sensitive areas or issues down-stream or national and trans-boundary effects.

Each country prepared NationalReview Reports which have beenreviewed by the international con-

The Tr a n s b o u n d a ry Analysis Report is being finalised now. It includes substantial new i n f o rmation but shows also several re s e a rch gaps

Pollution does notstop at borders

The Tr a n s b o u n d a ry Analysis Workshop was held in Austria from January 25- 30, 1999

D A N U B E R I V ER B A S I N

DANUBE WATCH • 1/1999 5

sultants. The reports focused onsocio-economic conditions, waterquality, water environment engi-neering and financing mecha-nisms for proposed projects. A Na-tional Review Workshop was con-vened in each country to reviewthe findings of each national re-port in a public forum. A Trans-boundary Workshop then re-viewed the findings of the nation-al reports and provided a broad fo-rum of discussion for recommen-dations for the Transboundary Re-port, which is being finalised.

In response to initial findingsof the Transboundary Analysis, the13 participating countries weregrouped into three socio-econom-ic categories for the remaininganalysis: the Upper, Central andLower Danube River Basin areas.The Upper area includes Germanyand Austria whose market-orient-ed economies, the membership inthe EU and the high level of eco-nomic development set themapart from all of the other coun-tries. The Central area includes thecountries that are in economictransition but that are not directlyassociated with the Black Sea, andsome of these countries that aremoving fastest toward an EU-membership. These are the Czech

and the Slovak Republics, Hun-gary, Slovenia, Bosnia and Herze-govina, Croatia and the FederalRepublic of Yugoslavia. The LowerDanube area includes the coun-tries that are in economic transi-tion and that are directly associat-ed with the Black Sea (Bulgaria,Romania, Ukraine, Moldavia).

Within the context of the over-all Danube Pollution ReductionProgramme, the TransboundaryAnalysis is used:● as the main project activity for

basinwide identification and de-scription of worthwhile targetsfor further consideration in thepollution reduction porgramme;

● as the main project activity foridentification of immediatecauses of pollution and rootcause of transboundary pollu-tion problems;

● along with the pollution reduc-tion activity, as a project activityfor identification of possible in-terventions to reduce trans-boundary pollution, by re-sponding to the immediate androot causes of the problems, and

● along with other project ac-tivites in general to determinerequirements for monitoring toevaluate the effectiveness of theinterventions and the future

conditions of river water andsensitive items.

Wo rthwhile targets emerg ef rom the identification anddescription of the most seri-ous water pollution pro b l e m sin the basin, where serious-ness can be defined from sev-eral perspectives: e.g. basedon the types or quantities ofsubstances discharged, the ca-pacity of receiving waters todilute the discharges or thep roximity of users and sensi-tive uses downstream. In gen-eral, the seriousness of pro b-lems near the source is moreclosely linked with concen-tration, while the seriousnessof problems in remote are a s ,such as the Black Sea, is moreclosely linked with loads.

In the present Trans-boundary Analysis the mostserious pollution problems

have already been identified atthe national level as hot spotsthat have been evaluated and

ranked in three sectors (municipal,agricultural and industrial), and atthree levels of priority (high,medium and low). Possible inter-ventions have been identified andinitial estimates of their pollutionreduction potential have beenmade by each country.

Initial criteria for ranking ofpossible interventions have beenestablished by the participants ofthe Transboundary Workshop.What remains to be done is to ex-amine the relative size and impor-tance of the transboundary com-ponents that are consistent withthe criteria for GEF (Global En-virnonment Facility) intervention.

The use of the Tr a n s b o u n d a ryAnalysis includes the investigationand discovery of core pro b l e m s ,immediate and root cause of pollu-tant discharges and immediate andultimate effects of pollutant dis-c h a rges. In response to the discov-e ry of the causes and effects, theuse of the results of the re p o rt alsoincludes the identification of possi-bile strucutral (e.g. the constru c t i o nor upgrading of industrial or mu-nicipal treatment facilities) a n dn o n - s t ructural solutions (e.g. stan-d a rds for pre - t reatment of industri-al wastes, campaigns to raise publica w a reness) that target the causes.

6

D A N U B E R I V E R B A S I N

Workshop participants refined, reconciled and validated the list of hot spots with the list of EMISs o u rces and the lists of pro j e c t s

Hundreds of tiny sidearmsand branches of the mainchannel existed and flood-

waters spilled out in periods ofhigh water over extensive flood-plains. Straightening and channel-ization of the river and the build-ing of dikes along the banks toprevent flooding, however, result-ed in a dramatic loss of the naturalfloodplains and wetlands that arenaturally part of a river system. Ofthe 41,605 km2 of floodplains (in-cluding the river area) that histori-cally existed along the main chan-nel of the Danube (excluding Ger-many) and 5 main tributaries, on-ly 7,845 km2 of the floodplains

area still remain – a loss of over80%.

A recently completed study of apossible restoration of the Danubefloodplains carried out as a part ofthe Danube Pollution ReductionProgramme UNDP/GEF by theWorld Wide Fund for Nature(WWF) has analysed in detail thehistorical loss of floodplains andmore importantly the potential forrestoration. The reason for doingso are simple: the loss of the im-portant functions performed bynatural floodplains (cleansing ofwater, flood protection, and main-taining reproduction areas for fish,birds and other organisms) has led

to a decline of the Danube and theBlack Sea water quality and a lossof biodiversity. Restoring the wet-lands would return the valuablefunctions.

Data from old maps

In order to carry out an analysisof floodplains in the Danube, itwas essential to get an accuratepicture of the extent of the flood-plain area before regulation. Fortu-nately, there exists a series of mapsof the Danube as it was at the endof the last century. This legacy ofthe Austro-Hungarian Empire pro-vided a basis for comparing infor-mation from recent satellite pho-tos and the CORINE data on land-use provided by the EU PHAREprogramme.

Although it is important to un-derstand what has been lost, thepurpose of the project was to iden-tify those areas where restorationof the former floodplains is possi-ble. This measure required an ap-propriate evaluation technique. Amethodology to determine areasof greatest potential was devel-oped by experts from the WWFFloodplains Institute in Rastatt,

DANUBE WATCH • 1/1999

D A N U B E R I V E R B A S I N

Restoration ofDanube FloodplainsOne hundred years ago the Danube River and its tributaries were very much diff e rent in their s t ru c t u re and form from what they are like today

Over 450sections ofthe Danubeand its t r i b u t a r i e sw e re identi-fied and in-vestigated

7

Germany and applied to the dataavailable from the maps. Over 450sections of the Danube and its trib-utaries (Prut, Tisza, Sava, Drava,and Morava) were identified, in-vestigated and compared based onfactors such as the presence of set-tlements, the width of the flood-plain, and the potential to providenutrient reduction. At the conclu-sion of the evaluation two separate

maps were generated: a map iden-tifying the existing areas of intactand healthy floodplains which re-quire protection and a list of 17sites with a high or very high po-tential for wetland restoration.

L a rge-scale eff o rts aren e c e s s a ry for re s t o r a t i o n

The areas identified as having ahigh or very high potential forrestoration are all areas with afloodplain width of more than 1km - many other small areas exist,however they were excluded fromthe list. It is hoped that through-out the Danube Basin large-scaleefforts at the local national and in-ternational level can restore wet-lands and the important functionsthey play. UNDP/GEF and nationalgovernments have committedthemselves to further detailed in-vestigation of some of the key ar-eas identified in this study – in or-der to make a contribution to theoverall efforts needed to achievethe recreation of a healthy DanubeRiver system.

AUTHOR: PHILIP WELLER,

WWF INTERNAT I O N A L

P H O N E : +43/1/488 17/253, FAX: 277

E-MAIL: PHILIP. W E L L E R @ W W F. AT

8

D A N U B E R I V E R B A S I N

Floodplains and wetlands are part of a natural river system

The Black Sea in Crisis is a re c o rdof the proceedings of a sympo-

sium held in September 1997.M o re than 400 scientists, enviro n-mentalists, religious leaders of allfaiths, journalists and policy-mak-ers from 35 countries voyageda round the Black Sea, visiting allsix shoreline countries and engag-ing in intensive debates with localleaders and activists about the de-cline of the Sea´s ecosystem andthe role of religions, science andpolitics in reversing it.

The symposium emphasised theinterconnectedness of the spiritualand natural worlds through ple-naries, workshops and the chanceto visit environmental sites andprojects where local initiativeswere addressing the problems. Theresponse led to a series of initia-tives including the establishmentof environmental education andtraining projects in the region.

The unique mixture of partici-pants is reflected in the book. Itschapters cover: The Challenge ofthe Black Sea; Searching for Com-mon Ground; Living Resources;

Degradation and Conflict; The Hu-man Perspective; The Beauty ofCoastal Landscapes; Industrial Im-pact; The Implications of theGlobal Economy.

The symposium is part of anongoing endeavour to raise collec-tive and individual environmentalawareness and initiate practicalprojects. With the unique ap-proach of taking the debate intothe field series of symposia takesplace on boats travelling throughthe study area bringing the realityof the situation to life. Each hasconcentrated on a different areausing these as case studies of aproblem and possible solutionsthat can be transfred elsewhere.The first symposium “Revelation& the Environment A.D. 95-1995”,took place on the Aegean Sea inSeptember 1995. The next sympo-sium “A River of Life” will focuson the environmental problems ofthe Danube.

C O N TA C T S :

W W F, E-MAIL: P H I L I P. W E L L E R @ W W F. AT &

RUTH PILCH, LONDON COORDINATION OFFICE

E-MAIL: SYMPOSIUM@COMPUSERV E . C O M

Book Review WWF: Black Sea in Crisis

Representatives from severalcentral and eastern European

nations will be gathering inBratislava on 9 June to launch awide-reaching project seeking tomonitor and enhance water quali-ty in the entire Danube River re-gion. The project – the DanubeWater Quality Transnational Mon-itoring Network (TNMN) – will beofficially launched by the presi-dent of the International Commis-sion for the Protection of theDanube River (ICPDR), WolfgangStalzer, at a ceremony hosted bythe Slovak government and at-tended by government officialsfrom the 12 ICPDR countries aswell as representatives of the Euro-pean Union.

Set up by the ICPDR, the moni-toring network is funded by theEuropean Union (EU) Phare andTacis Programmes as well as the

UNDP/GEF under the auspices ofthe Environmental Programme forthe Danube River Basin, and alsoby ICPDR member countries.

Based on work carried out overthe past six years by national mon-itoring and information expert s ,the network should greatly helpthe ICPRD and national authoritiesto manage and enhance waterq u a l i t y. Water will be sampled andm e a s u red at a total of 61 locationsin participating countries.

Countries taking part in theproject include Austria, Bosnia andHerzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, theCzech Republic, Germany, Hun-gary, Moldova, Romania, Slovakia,Slovenia and Ukraine.

FOR FURTHER INFORMAT I O N :

H T T P : / / W W W. R E C . O R G / D A N U B E P C U

PHONE: +43/1/26060/5738

E-MAIL: ICPDR@UNVIENNA.UN.OR.AT

European Nations Join Forces

9DANUBE WATCH • 1/1999

In 1994 a Strategic Action Plan1995-2000 for the Danube Riv-er Basin was produced under

the framework of the Environmen-tal Programme for the DanubeRiver Basin (EPDRB). As one of theelements of this Strategic ActionPlan a list of small environmentalinvestments was assembled, main-ly directed at solving water qualityproblems in the Danube countries.

It was proposed to facilitate aworkshop to bring together Euro-pean banks and funds and theproject owners of these small envi-ronmental projects. The maxi-

mum investment amount was esti-mated at approximately ECU 10million. The preparation for andthe implementation of a workshopon that topic was supported by thePhare Multi-Country EnvironmentProgramme. The activity was car-ried out under the so-called PhareEnvironmental Framework Con-tract implemented by the PhareEnvironmental Consortium (PEC).

Well-developed pro j e c t shad been identified

The initial preparation phaseincluded discussion of the aim,scope and content of the work-shop with the Country Pro-gramme Coordinators (CPC´s) andthe Danube Programme Coordina-tion Unit (PCU). Project informa-tion received from project ownershad been evaluated and around 65 European banks and other finan-cial institutions had been contact-ed on their interest to participatein the Workshop. The CPC´s hadto identify at least two “well-de-veloped” projects in their respec-tive country. A pre-workshop sup-ported in screening and improve-ment of existing feasibility studies.

With regard to the type of fi-nancial institution expressing in-terest in environmental invest-ments in Central and Eastern Eu-rope, it became apparent that anumber of large commercial banksshowed interest as well as a limit-ed number of idealistically orient-ed “green banks”. Green invest-ment funds, which have startedoperations in a number of Euro-pean countries in recent years, did

not express interest in participa-tion. These funds were found tomainly have a national orienta-tion or were targeting traditionaldeveloping countries.

P resentations focused ontechnical facilities

During the final preparationphase it became obvious that thequality of project documentationhad to be improved substantially.If economic data did arrive, theyusually only included a costoverview of the equipment to bepurchased. Even those projectswhich were among the mostpromising did not yet have seriousfeasibility studies ready to be pre-sented to financial institutions.

By mid September 1998 fivefeasibilty studies were ready forpresentation at the workshop, twofrom the Czech Republic, twofrom Croatia and one from Slove-nia. The Workshop started on No-vember 11, 1998 and was hostedby the Slovenian Ministry of theEnvironment and Physical Plan-ning, on the premises of the Na-ture Protection Authority in Ljub-jana. Three project owners pre-sented their suggestions:● a Czech waste water treatment

plant to be located in Breclav;● a slurry treatment facility for

the hog-farm Gigant Dubnany,also located in Czech Republic;

● a water cooling and heat ex-change installation for the yeastproduction of the Croatianpharmaceutical multinationalcompany Pliva.

The presentations by the pro-ject owners were still largely fo-cused on the technical facilitiesneeded. Therefore, a lot of ques-tions were raised on required fi-nance, on financial and economicfeasibility, on availability of guar-antees and on project risks. Duringthe workshop it became obviousthat project owners only had avague notion of the need for fi-nance of their investments. Thespecifics of maturity, interest andrepayment conditions of the re-quired loan were not clear tothem.

In many CEE Danube countriesmunicipal finances and payment

S L O V E N I A

Banks want their moneyback whatever happens

This is one of the main lessons learnt at a workshopon small investments. A lot of training in the p reparation of feasibility studies is still needed

Solid economic feasibility studies are import a n t

capacity of the local population limited the amount of financewhich could be raised for watertreatment investments. Environ-mental investments were implicit-ly not of top priority at the local level.

Conclusions and re c o m m e n d a t i o n s

The workshop was very usefulin presenting the various issuesand techniques important in dis-cussions with commercial banks.Important lessons were learnedabout the limitations of private fi-nance for environmental projectsin the CEE Danube states. Com-mercial bank finance from abroadwas not really an option, nor wasfinancing via idealistically orientedgreen banks. The possibilities forthese projects would have to befound on the domestic capitalmarket.

Many of these environmentalprojects were economically viablein the more developed Danubecountries and did not really re-quire grant money. The problemwas the underdevelopment of localcapital markets. This made govern-ment involvement or that of inter-national financing institutions anddonores, such as Phare, inevitable.However, in many cases guaranteeschemes would suffice to enablecommercial banks to provide loansto these projects. In the poorerDanube countries susbsidies arestill needed due to the completelack of existing facilities and thehigh EU-standards pursued in wa-ter treatment. In principle, govern-ments should strive for a maxi-mum involvement of the domesticcapital markets.

Project owners have great diffi-culties to think of investment pro-jects in a way that is common inmarket economies. Feasibility stud-ies were not available or not up tocommon standards. A lot of train-ing and support in the preparationof feasibilty studies is still neededin the field of environmental in-vestment projects.

C O N TA C T: HENRIK TORNBLAD,

E - M A I L : H E T M A N @ C A R L B R O . D K

10

Amodel of advanced groundwa-ter protection policy is

presently being elaborated in agroundwater basin of the DravaRiver South of Maribor and imple-mented in the framework of EP-DRB (Environmental Programmefor the Danube River Basin). Thiscomponent is implemented by theVienna environment consultingcompany ALLPLAN, who works incooperation with the Irish compa-ny ESB International. The projectis financed by the Phare MultiCountry Environment Pro-gramme.

Together with experts fromSlovenia, who carry out the fieldstudies, a groundwater policy willbe elaborated within the study pe-riod of 18 months that aims at asustainable relief of the agricultur-al regions along the Drava.

Focal points of the study are theanalysis of available data, the ex-amination of possible groundwatermodelling and the development ofprocedural guidelines and recom-mendations both for farmers andthe administration. Another im-portant issue, especially for Slove-nia as a candidate for the EUmembership, is the harmonisationof national legislation with EU-rules and regulations.

Another detail will be the issueof reducing the present contami-nation of groundwater by agricul-ture. The establishment of sustain-

able agriculture in a model regionshall be set forth as a scenario.This could subsequently be a sup-port for other agricultural regionsof Slovenia. Results will also beavailable for other Central andEastern-European Regions. Amathematical model will be ap-plied to evaluate the effect of themeasures taken.

A further focal point will be theelaboration of tutorial materialand directives for agricultural ap-plication. Even more importantare the relative considerations, onhow the framework of environ-mental development for the agri-cultural development in the com-ing years shall be designed. Mea-sures to be taken are the strength-ening of the Slovenian administra-tion and education and accompa-nying monitoring that shall en-sure the success and effect of mea-sures taken and that will obviouslyhave to be adjusted to these mea-sures. Both national and interna-tional workshops, where resultswill be presented for discussion toprofessionals, members of the ad-ministration and scientists, areplanned to prevent that the activi-ties described shall remain seclud-ed in an ivory tower.

C O N TA C T: ALLPLAN GESMBH

PHONE: +43/1/505 37 07-61

FAX: +43/1/505 37 07-27

E - M A I L :W I K @ A L L P L A N . C O . AT

Development of a Policyto protect Groundwater P ro j e c t : I n t e rnational Cooperation inDanube River Basin Management

A sustainable agriculture in a model region shall be set forth as a scenario

00DANUBE WATCH • 1/1999

Commissioned by the WorldBank, the Austrian consult-ing companies Allplan

GesmbH and Göller & Leitner, arecarrying out an information cam-paign, which shall improve theconsumer awareness among thepeople of Bucharest.

Top-ranking in water consumption per person

Similar to many other CEE-cities, Bucharest, too, urg e n t l yneeds remediation of its water sup-ply and wastewater treatment sys-tems. However, according to ananalysis by the Polish companyPROEKO Ltd., not only the techni-cal infrastru c t u re has to be im-p roved, but also the org a n i s a t i o n a ls e c t o r. It also showed that publicconsumer behaviour, too, is re-sponsible for Bucharest having amaximum per capita consumption.

In the framework of a USD 50million project – half of theamount is financed by the WorldBank, the rest by the city ofBucharest – technical remediationmeasures in the water pipe systemof the city are currently beingplanned and carried out. The Pub-lic Awareness Project is a supple-ment to these measures. This con-tract, too, was awarded by theWorld Bank, but is financed by theAustrian Ministry of Finance. Thewide-ranging approach of the pro-ject is remarkable. In contrast tomany other purely theoreticalstudies the project encompassesboth plant design and a basic fi-nance plan for the most importantmeasures.

Among other factors responsi-ble for the excessive consumptionof water by the population ofBucharest is also the water price

which is government controlled.Water was a common propertyand therefore very cheap, and itwas available for everybody almostfor free. This has changed in thepast few years, however, the abovebasic attitude is still prevailing.

In addition, the nature of thedistribution network also plays animportant role in water consump-tion. The apartments in the largecondominiums in the city are notequipped with meters and there isonly one meter per house orblock. Therefore, nobody feels di-rectly responsible for water con-sumption.

Defective fittings without spareparts being available aggravate theproblem. Especially the upperfloors have occasional water short-age due to leaking pipes. To haveenough water during these periodspeople fill up their bathtubs.When the water comes back, thebathtub is emptied, which leads toa considerable waste of water. Dueto inappropriate sizes of pipelinesas well as inefficient hot water cir-

culation systems people are oftenforced to leave the tap open for 10to 20 minutes until warm water iscoming.

Mass media and schools a re included

The core of the project encom-passes a combination of ● direct advertising in the printed

media to transfer the necessaryknow-how,

● the creation of occasions andevents to attract the attention ofthe media,

● the involvement of sponsorsfrom the private and the publicsector and

● the setting up of a list of reasonsto ensure further work after theend of the project.

In a first step 10,000 house-holds are being interviewed as totheir consumer behaviour. To getas many answers as possible theinterview is combined with a quizwith attractive prizes for the par-ticipants. Furthermore, theBucharest Water Association willset up an information centre. Ac-tive public relations work withpress conferences and permanentpress information shall motivatethe media to cover the campaign.

A cooperation with 100 schoolsis planned to ensure a promotedparticipation in the framework ofa drawing contest. These activitieswill be accompanied by a pressand media campaign (includingradio and TV). Several sponsorsfrom the private and the publicsector and NGOs have announcedtheir cooperation. Planning andrealisation of the total project arecarried out in close cooperationwith the Bucharest Water Associa-tion and a local PR-partner. After apreparatory period of 6 monthsimplementation has started inApril 1999 and shall be completedby the end of the year. The projectis financed with funds of the Aus-trian Trust Fund of the WorldBank and amounts to a total ofUSD 160,000.

AUTHORS: KONRAD WILDENAUER,

E-MAIL: WIK@ALLPLAN.CO.AT

ERNST LEITNER,

E - M A I L :G O E L L N E R + L E I T N E R @ M A G N E T. AT

R O M A N I A

Leaking pipes and inappropriate utilisation are thereasons for Buchare s t ’s high water consumption

Information Campaignon Water Savings

Nobody feels directly responsible for water consumption

00 DANUBE WATCH • 1/1999

The EU P h a re and Tacis Pro-grammes currently assist indeveloping this cooperation.

The sub-catchment of the Tisza isthe largest of all the Danube tribu-taries and the river drains an are aof 157,220 km2 with a total popula-tion of 14.4 million. The length ofthe river is 1,365 km and the meand i s c h a rge at the confluence withthe Danube is 750 m3/sec, which isonly exceeded by that of the Sava.

Romania has 46.2 per cent ofthe catchment area, Hungary 29.4per cent, Slovakia 9.7 per cent, the

Ukraine 8.1 per cent and Yu-goslavia 6.5 per cent. The Tisza ris-es in the Zakarpathian Mountainsin the northwest of the Ukraineand is formed from the confluenceof the Belaya Tisza and the Chior-naya Tisza.

Several branches of the Tiszaheadwaters rise in the mountainsof eastern Slovakia, two of them inthe Nardony (National) Park. TheUng (Uh) and Latorca (Latorica)tributaries pass from the Ukraineinto Slovakia where they join theBodrog before it enters Hungary.

One tributary rises in the Ukraine,enters Romania where it joins alarger stream which then re-entersthe Ukraine before entering Hun-gary, where it joins the Tisza. TheSomes, the Cris/Körös and theMures all rise in the RomanianCarpathians and drain west intoHungary before they join theTisza. The river then enters Yu-goslavia where it joins theDanube.

In the Ukraine the river is usedfor hydropower, water supply, irri-gation, fisheries and recreation.The area also houses timber, engi-neering and metal industries aswell as agricultural developments.This part of the catchment in-cludes road and rail networks aswell as oil pipelines and powertransmission lines. The river re-ceives inadequately treated wastewater from Uzgorod. Deforestationof timber increases erosion andthus the sediment load of the riv-er. Towns, industry and agricul-ture all contribute to pollution.Accidental spills of oil frompipelines cause pollution incidentswhich affect Slovakia.

The Slovak part of the catch-ment includes a number of medi-um sized towns but only a limitedamount of industrial activity. Sev-en significant sub-tributaries risein Slovakia. Romania has thelargest part of the catchment, themajor part of it is mountainous,and many tributaries and sub-trib-utaries rise in the RomanianCarpathians, some of them, no-tably the Cris-Koros net, drainingindustrialised areas. Several majortowns in the Romanian sector re-lease polluting loads to the Tisza.

The Cris Negru and Cris AlbRivers receive mining waste, theCris Repede receives waste fromthe chemical industry and the Bar-cau waste from the oil extractionand refining industry. The Muresalso carries a significant pollutingload of organic matter, suspendedsolids and some heavy metals. TheHungarian part of the catchmentis, by contrast, relatively flat andlow-lying and includes the townsof Miskolc, Nyiregyháza, Debre-cen, Szolnok and Szeged. This re-gion is predominantly agriculturaland the Tisza represents an impor-tant resource. Transboundary

T I S Z A R R I V E R B A S I N

Romania has the largest part of the Tisza River catchment area, the major part of it is mountainous, and many tributaries and sub-tributaries rise in the Romanian Carpathians

Sweeping changes are not expectedT h e re is an urgent need for cooperation in the management of the Tisza River basin within the framework of the Danube River Protection Convention

problems are complicated by thecomplex hydrogeography of theupper basin. The issues includeflood protection and flood warn-ing systems, polluting loads, pollu-tion incidents from accidentalspills and resource allocation.

Local consultants pre p a re da list of candidate topics

There is an urgent need for co-operation between the ripariancountries if these problems are tobe addressed effectively. Three pro-posals relating to the managementof the River Tisza were submittedto the Danube Programme Coordi-nation Unit in 1996 as a part ofthe programme for the Implemen-tation of the Strategic Action Plan.It was decided that these proposalsshould be integrated into a singleproject for international coopera-tion in the management of theTisza River Basin in which theUkraine, Slovak Republic, Romaniaand Hungary would all participate.

A preliminary Phare contractwas therefore implemented for anidentification phase. The objectivewas to reconcile the three propos-als and to define and prepare theproject. Information collected bylocal consultants in the Ukraine,Slovakia, Romania and Hungarywas used to prepare a list of candi-date topics for their inclusion inthe project. All these identifiedtopics were discussed in 1997 at aworkshop in Szolnok, Hungary.The workshop discussions led tosome general recommendationsfor a possible conduct of the pro-ject and to a revised and modifiedlist of topics for inclusion. Theyaddress nearly all of the discussionpoints described in the articles ofthe proposed draft “Framework Di-rective for Community Action inthe Field of Water Policy”.

The purpose of the project is toobtain a consensus between thefour participating countries on thetechnical and scientific issues.These agreements will provide afoundation for a political accordbetween the participating coun-tries for the management of theTisza River by the riparian statesacting together in harmony. APhare contract for the new project“International Cooperation in

Danube River Basin Management”was given to an Irish company, ES-BI, in December 1998. One com-ponent of the project is “Interna-tional Cooperation for the Man-agement of the Tisza River Basin”,based on the conclusions of thepreparation project. A parallelTacis contract with the companyArcadis ensures the participationof Ukraine in this international co-operation project.

The topics are water quality re-lating to uses, including ecologicalrequirements, water resources andresource allocation, flood control,river engineering and navigation,river basin management, socio-economic factors and local plan-ning. The project will pay atten-tion to international cooperationnot only at a national level but also at regional and municipal levels.

The aim is to findcommon intere s t s

Local consultants in each coun-try will collect data, informationabout policy and opinions fromeach country. This informationwill be discussed at workshopswith a view to reaching agreementbetween the four countries oneach topic covered by the project.The project will have to take ac-count of existing formal and infor-mal agreements between riparianstates and its findings must beconsistent with the Danube RiverProtection Convention and alsowith the latest draft of the pro-posed EU Framework Directive.

Agreement on a harmonisedcommon approach concerning aparticular topic between ripariancountries is more likely to be suc-cessful if it does not require radicalchanges in national proceduresand standards. The aim is there-fore not to produce sweepingchanges in river basin manage-ment but to find common interestbetween the riparian countriesthat will provide a basis for coop-eration within existing nationaland international laws and withinthe framework of the newly rati-fied Danube River Protection Con-vention.

A U T H O R : STEPHEN WARREN, TEAM LEADER

E-MAIL: STEPHEN.WA R R E N @ C O M P U S E RV E . C O M

13

T I S Z A R R I V E R B A S I N

M e e t i n g sC A L E N D A R

J U N ESlovak RepublicJune 7-8, 1999M L I M Joint Expert Sub G roups MeetingContact: ICPDRSlovak RepublicJune 9, 1999Inauguration of TNMNContact: ICPDRA u s t r i aJune 10-11, 1999Steering Group Meeting of the ICPRDContact: ICPDRA u s t r i aJune 12, 19993 rd PMTF meetingContact: Danube PCUG e rm a n yJune 14-15, 1999E M I S E x p e rt Group MeetingC o n t a c t : I C P D R

J U LYG e rm a n yJuly 8-9, 1999M L I M E x p e rt Group MeetingC o n t a c t : I C P D R

S E P T E M B E RCzech RepublikSept. 6-10, 1999Integrated Global Water M a n a g e m e n tC o n t a c t : E P R ICzech RepublikSept. 20-21, 1999E M I S E x p e rt Gro u p M e e t i n gContact: ICPDR

O C T O B E RBosnia and Herz e g o v i n aOct. 4-5, 1999M L I M Joint Expert Sub G ro u p M e e t i n gC o n t a c t : I C P D R

C O N TACTS: I C P D R : P h o n e : +43/1/26060-5738, E - M a i l : i c p d r @ u n v i e n n a . u n . o r. a tDanube PCU : P h o n e :+ 4 3 / 1 / 2 6 0 6 0 - 5 6 1 6 ,E - M a i l : k a r i n . z a m b r a @ u n v i e n n a . u n . o r. a tE P R I : P h o n e : +001/970/870 82 19, E-Mail: awoodis@cmn.net

14

S H O R T C U T S

About 1000 litres of water arenecessary to produce 1 kilo-

gram of bread, the production of 1kilogram of meat even 5 to 10 times the amount. Many parts ofthe world do not have enough wa-ter to produce enough food fortheir inhabitants. In what wayshould food production be reor-ganised in correspondence with water reserves?

Human diet is largely depend-ing on the availability of fresh wa-t e r. Two thirds of available waterre s o u rces are used for food pro d u c-tion. However, many countries donot have enough water to be self-s u fficient, and, in these cases, wa-ter shortage is often compensatedby food imports. The number ofcountries afflicted by water short-

age will increase as the world pop-ulation grows in the 25 years tocome. The United States, Canada,Australia, France, Argentine andBrazil range among the most im-p o rtant food-producing countries.

About 45 per cent of nitro g e nused in agriculture per year is notutilised and ends up as pollutant inthe atmosphere, groundwater andlakes. The efficiency of fert i l i s e r smust there f o re be improved con-s i d e r a b l y. Human diet, too, has tochange in order to secure enoughfood for the world population andto reduce environmental stress. Itwould there f o re be advantageousto reduce meat consumption.

Agriculture is discharging nutri-ents into the environment, on theother hand, the daily waste waterof millions of people – containingnitrogen and phosphorus – is dis-charged via the sewer system intopurification plants where it has tobe treated in a very expensive way.It would be much more economi-cal to pre-separate the originallysterile and concentrated nutrienturine, to treat it and to use it as afertiliser.

SOURCE: EAWAG SWITZERLAND,

P H O N E : +41/1/823 55 11

W W W. EAWA G . C H

1000 Litres of Water for One Bread

Water shortage is going to bethe most serious threat to

food production and humanhealth in the 25 years to come.This was the result of a study fi-nanced by the USA and Japan andcarried out by the ConsultationGroup for Agricultural Research,which was presented by the vice-president of the Word Bank IsmailSerageldin in Washington. He de-clared that disputes between coun-tries about water are also to be ex-pected.

The study found that even if anaverage amount of rain fell in thefirst quarter of the 21st century, aquarter of the world population(1.3 billion) would suffer from se-vere water shortage. “We have tofind new ways of using this van-

ishing resource,” says Serageldin.The research group created a worldand climate atlas for the purposeof optimising water consumption.Data on expected stormwateramounts, the number of sunnyhours, temperature and soils canbe downloaded (www.iwmi.org).Government planners and farmersshall be able to use cultivated areasin a better way. “The map shallhelp to find surfaces which are notused for food production, butwhich could be without destroy-ing forests,” says Serageldin. Forexample, an area in Bangladeshhas already been discovered whichhas not been cultivated in the dryperiod, but where chick-peas couldbe cultivated as a second crop inthe year.

World Atlas for the Use of Water

C o m m e n tNEWS & VIEWS

R e c o v e ry planfor BalkansThe conservation org a n i z a t i o nWWF warns in a press release thatan environmental crisis is loomingin war- t o rn Yugoslavia and sur-rounding areas, particularly in thelower Danube River and the BlackSea region, and immediate intern a-tional action is needed.WWF called for an international e n v i ronmental re c o v e ry plan to beimplemented by the countries inthe region under the framework ofthe Danube River Protection Con-vention and the Danube Enviro n-ment Programme. The plan wouldalso need to support existing civildefence preparations for spill de-tection and clean-up capacities inBulgaria and Romania. Equipmentto capture oil slicks and more moni-toring equipment is needed imme-d i a t e l y.“The scale of the human tragedy inYugoslavia is already enorm o u s , ”stated WWF´s Danube-CarpathianP rogramme Director Philip We l l e r.“WWF is concerned that long-termdamage to the environment in bothYugoslavia and surrounding Balkancountries will only increase pro b-lems in the re g i o n . ”A range of unidentified pollutantshas been discharged into theDanube River as a result of the war,and as yet the spread and damageto downstream areas is unclear.N e v e rtheless, the release of anytoxic materials could have signifi-cant consequences for people and avariety of sensitive aquatic org a n-i s m s .“The humanitarian issues are firstand foremost in our minds, as theya re for everyone else,” Philip We l l e radded. “However, only immediatem e a s u res to stop the downstre a mflow of pollution will prevent anecological catastrophe from follow-ing the humanitarian one.”

C O N TA C T:

WWF AUSTRIA, A-1160 VIENNA

PHONE: +43/1/488 17-0

Enough food for the world population has to be secure d

15DANUBE WATCH • 1/1999

S H O R T C U T S

June 5 was Wo r l d - E n v i ro n m e n tD a y. It has been celebrated since

1972 on the initiative of the Envi-ronmental Programme of the Unit-ed Nations, UNEP. In Austria, theWo r l d - E n v i ronment Day is alive.For six years now it has been sup-p o rted by the imagination of theAustrians in hundreds of actionst h roughout the country. Thus, June5 has become a day of celebration,in the true sense of the word.

The subject of this year’s World-Environment Day in Austria is”Sustainable Consumption”. Thecentral issue is the question of the

quality of life and mass consump-tion. Initiator is the 17&4 Organi-sationsberatung G.m.b.H. and ”dieumweltberatung”. SPAR ”Naturpur” is also supporting the World-Environment Day 1999.

Every year, the World-Environ-ment Day has a different motto inAustria. Designed as a ”participa-tion day”, the event has led to anactive participation of 300.000Austrians annually.

Supported by the EuropeanUnion, the Austrian design of theWorld-Environment Day has beencarried to the Central and East Eu-ropean countries.● Information on the World-Envi-ronment Day is available from the Environment Day Hotline+43/660/8313.

W o r l d - E n v i r o n m e n tD a y : June 5, 1999 M a n a g e m e n t

NEWS & VIEWS

Can the Black SeaStill Be Saved?“It is jellyfish, and not coastalc rude oil, that is a clear indicatorfor the ecological imbalance of theBlack Sea. Conventional ideas ofc o rrect management are re s p o n s i-ble for this problem. Agricultureand water management are calledupon to look for joint solutions,”stated a recent press release fro mthe Technical Universtiy of Vi e n n a .Destabilisation of the ecologicalbalance of the Black Sea already setin during the sixties, and at the be-ginning of the nineties the cata-s t rophe was perfect. 1 billion (!)tons of jellyfish populated theBlack Sea and caused fish life tocollapse. The main reason for jelly-fish proliferation are excessive nu-trient concentrations of nitro g e nand phosphoru s .The enormously increasing amountsof fertilisers used in agriculture inthe past few years (due to the in-c reasing pre s s u re on food pro d u c-tion, international competition andthe policy of subsidies), the urbani-sation of settlement areas with ris-ing sanitary needs, and constantlyi n c reasing traffic leading to higherair emission, are the main re a s o n sfor the collapse. Both agricultureand water management could findways to save what there is left tos a v e .H o w e v e r, the Black Sea can only besaved if all the riparian states ofthe catchment pull together. Austria has already passed laws forthe elimination of nitrogen andphosphates in wastewater tre a t-ment for the benefit of the BlackSea. By implementing these lawsAustria has succeeded in re d u c i n gthe emission of phosphor by 40 percent since 1985. This positive tre n dis going to continue in the years toc o m e .

C O N TA C T:

TECHNICAL UNIVERSTIY OF VIENNA

P H O N E : +43/1/588 01-22600

E - M A I L : H K R O I S S @ I WA G . T U W I E N . A C . AT

Since 1990, the WWF-LowlandInstitute has been active in sup-

porting the Danube Delta, the sec-ond largest wetland area in Eu-rope. Its main target is to recon-nect lowlands to the river and thusto renaturalise them. Meanwhile,results are obvious: About 20species of fish have been observedin renaturalised areas, where therewas only one left and WWF mem-bers have especially observed anastonishing diversity in small ani-mals.

The estuary of the Danube intothe Black Sea is known for its greatdiversity. Tourists enjoy observingherons, pelicans, and eagles. A to-tal of 300 bird species have beenregistered there. On the Bulgarianside, almost 40,000 ha of theseunique lowlands were diked for

agricultural purposes in the 60ies.Drainage transformed them intosteppe, numerous aquatic plantsand animals disappeared. Especial-ly fish were affected dramatically.At the beginning of the renatural-ising measures the former abun-dance of fish had shrunk to a sin-gle species.

For six years now, the WWF hashad these areas flooded by purpo-sive opening of dikes. Biologists ofthe WWF and the RumanianDanube Delta Institute regularlycontrol the results of the measurestaken. This examination has nowconfirmed the high ecological val-ue of the renaturalised areas. “Ani-mals formerly deprived of theirhabitat have come back amazinglyfast,” says the zoologist of theWWF Lowland Institute, Dr. Eck-bert Schneider, and confirms thatmore than 20 species of fish arefound there again.

The diversity of small animalsin the Danube Delta, however, isespecially conspicuous. Expertsregistered almost 3,400 species ofinsects, more than 200 kinds ofspiders, among them very rareones. These figures reflect the ex-traordinary diversity of habitats inthe delta.

C O N TA C T:

DANUBE DELTA INSTITUTE

PHONE: +40/40/531 520

FA X : +40/40/533 547

Water Brings Back Diversity

The desire dd e v e l o p-ment hasset in andre n a t u r a l i-sation hasreached itsa i m

w w w. e u r o p a . e u . i n t / co m m / d g 1 a / p h a r e

News about Phare

w w w. r e c . o r g /D a n u b e P C U

On our own behal f

w w w. g e f w e b . c o mWelcome to the Global Envi ronment

Faci l i ty

w w w . e c n c . n lA t h in k t a n kan d i n n o v a t o r

f o r n a t u r e

Wa t e rWe b s